 |
 |
No-one can tell you it's not widespread because virtually all the list readers will only know what goes on in between 1 & about 4 authorities & may not be able to speak for all of them because their role didn't include this area. I for instance can say categorically that it doesn't go on in Leeds & I'm fairly certain it didn't go on in Hackney in the 1970's but cannot speak for other authorities. Several of the wheezes you mention are specifically excluded in the CIPFA guidelines (notably the leaflets ploy & the active borrowers one) while the member of staff variations are unlikely to have a significant effect at the authority level unless there is a widespread ethos of dishonesty within the library system. This is certainly not my experience of libraries (back in Browne issue days we had suspicions about a couple of branches figures but they were never proven). If a member of staff created 20 spurious loans each working day this would only be 5,000 in a year (bank & annual holidays + weekends reduce the number of days worked to about 250). This is only going to a very minor effect on annual issues of over 3 million for the authority but could have a significant effect on the distribution of funds/new books within the authority & therefore possibly make the effort worthwhile to the individual. I do expect a very few authorities have regularly massaged their figures & this is more likely to happen when under extreme financial pressure, but the way these wheezes have been shared with you makes me think the sharers were appalled like yourself at the practice. I'd also expect a few to be hoist on their own petard like the university you worked for & be too embarassed to correct their own error. But this does not make me think the practice is widespread - my experience of librarians both locally & nationally suggests that in general librarians are honest & are generally honest about their statistics. In fact I believe this list endorses this view in the way the fines debate took place with honest exchanges of both opinion & practice. Lionel Aldridge Performance Manager Leeds Library and Information Services 0113 395 2350 National Year of Reading: I'm curently reading the late George MacDonald Fraser's last work "The Reavers". This is very much in the style of his "The Pyrates" & again proves that he was what he aimed to be - simply a good story teller. Frances Hendrix <[log in to unmask]> Sent by: "lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries" <[log in to unmask]> 18/08/2008 11:49 Please respond to Frances Hendrix <[log in to unmask]> To [log in to unmask] cc Subject You cannot be serious? Oh Dear please some one tell me all this isn't as wide spread as it would appear? I have been told over the years that numbers of current borrowers of a specific library has been a matter of fiction (for instance not removing very lapsed users etc), to an extent (so nothing like as many people are users than we would be led to believe), but some of the stories I am getting, like the one below fills me with despair:- At meetings I attend in (XXX), libraries discussed how to inflate and massage usage statistics One practice to attract lapsed borrowers back to the library, was to print leaflets which were posted off to the lapsed borrowers. The the leaflets had barcodes and were added to the library management system. Prior to posting each one out, the leaflet (which didn't have a due date) was checked out to each of the lapsed borrowers. The result? The library no longer had any lapsed borrowers and several hundred more active borrowers, and the leaflets were counted in the borrowing stats! At a local University , they implemented pre-overdue email notices some time ago. Fine income decreased around 5%, but the feedback from students and staff has been 100% positive. However, One can only hope that the pay off for the lapsed borrow leaflet was a huge and genuine return of lapsed borrowers., would be good to know? The tactics may have worked, and if the inflation of usage stats was legit then that would be fine., i.e. strategies to increase usage. f Frances Hendrix Martin House Farm, Hilltop Lane, Whittle le Woods, Chorley, Lancs PR6 7QR, UK tel: 01257 274 833. fax: 01257 266 488 email: [log in to unmask] ________________________________________________________________________ The information in this email (and any attachment) may be for the intended recipient only. If you know you are not the intended recipient, please do not use or disclose the information in any way and please delete this email (and any attachment) from your system. The Council does not accept service of legal documents by e-mail. ________________________________________________________________________