ACQNET v7n003 (January 19, 1997) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acqnet-v7n003.txt ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 3, January 19, 1997 ========================================= (1) FROM: Jack Montgomery SUBJECT: Comment on Hawaii Contract with Baker & Taylor (31 lines) (2) FROM: Joyce Ogburn SUBJECT: Comment on Baker & Taylor Contract in Hawaii (50 lines) (3) FROM: Heather Miller SUBJECT: Thoughts on the Hawaii Situation (69 lines) (4) FROM: Peter Graham SUBJECT: ALA and Outsourcing in Hawaii (42 lines) (5) FROM: Karen Muller SUBJECT: ALA and Outsourcing in Hawaii - Reply to P. Graham (33 lines) (1)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 08:22:19 -0600 From: Jack Montgomery (Univ. of Missouri Law Library) Subject: Comment on Hawaii Contract with Baker & Taylor ACQNET 7:2 is an excellent digest of the issues. It will fly on its own. You have presented both sides adequately. Classically, library organizations like ALA and AALL display an impotence with regard to advocacy on behalf of the members they propose to protect. One gets the classic request for "more information" which is tantamount to a stalling for time so decisions do not have to be made. Why? Because to do real advocacy for the Hawaiians will involve risk and a lot of effort. Real action might include a nationwide boycott of Baker and Taylor, with refusal to sign future contracts with such corporations that, in effect, have bull-dozed and cajoled their way into an area they are not equipped to manage and in trying to do so, have destroyed the careers of our colleagues. Truly, if we stall for time, or represent a weak response to this issue, our fate as a profession may be in question. Without a strong response, other vendors will surely follow in B&T's footsteps. My question is, what role is ACQNET going to play? There comes a time when we must take sides. Actually, I am not advocating that ACQNET become the firebrand in this issue alone, I just wonder if we as a profession won't hide our heads in the sand again, fussing and complaining to each other, while this very real threat to our professional lives moves forward. Jack Montgomery University of Missouri Law Library (2)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 13:57:36 -0500 (EST) From: Joyce L. Ogburn (Old Dominion U.) Subject: Comment on Baker & Taylor Contract in Hawaii I have finally had the chance to read through all the messages regarding the Hawaii contract and controversy. My first reaction is that what is on e-mail is not the whole story. We don't have access to the contract, the full data, and the point of view of the administration. It is a story, and it is pertinent to cover it on ACQNET and quickly, as Eleanor hopes. Getting other points of view is extremely important. So this should only be the first message from ACQNET and there should be follow up from other sources. I hope that the responses from our readers will also be enlightening. I can suggest that the editorial board compose some thoughtful questions and a request for clarification on a number of issues. For example, who is administering the contract? Who is responsible for monitoring B&T's performance and compliance? What are the ramifications of non-compliance or grounds for resolving disagreement? How long does B&T have to refine their service? How does the quality of the start-up compare with starting a new approval plan or outsourcing some cataloging? What does cataloging include? Authority control? If the cost of $20.94 includes the cataloging costs, why isn't that being discussed? How does this compare with previous costs to purchase and process items? Other issues I haven't read about are whether every location is getting the same materials or whether they are tailored to each location. Was there a profile developed like an approval plan? Or what other information was provided? Being an administrator I can see the dilemma of bringing in such a contract. No one will be happy in the system, no matter how it is introduced or administered. But were there any open hearings? Who developed the RFP? Who had input on the choice of vendor? What happens in 5 1/2 years? This incident is very threatening to all of us. How can we get past the emotion and on to rational exploration? As an aside, I also noticed that the Hawaii Working Group does not include an acquisitions librarian. Should we suggest one be appointed? [We suggest Barbara Winters as a consultant, but do not know if this suggestion will be taken] Joyce L. Ogburn AUL for Information Resources and Systems University Library Old Dominion University Norfolk VA 23529 Phone 804-683-4189 Fax 804-683-5767 (3)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:00:49 -0500 (EST) From: Heather Miller (SUNY-Albany) Subject: Thoughts on the Hawaii Situation There are many disturbing aspects to the Hawaii/Baker & Taylor contract, one of the most fundamental being the gross misunderstanding and devaluation by administrators of many behind the scenes library functions, particularly those commonly termed technical services. In this case not only technical services, but also collection development appears to have been sidestepped by the contract. The art of collection development, the entire complex acquisitions and cataloging process and OPAC management tend to be seen as simple, automatic and expendable when in fact they form the basis of what the library is. Without them, there is no library for the public services staff to help patrons use! The addition of electronic resources has not obviated any of this, but has added to what the behind the scenes staff can, should and must do if the library is to remain viable. The situation in Hawaii illustrates the extremes to which ignorant people in places of power can go in misguided attempts to save money. The basic professional responsibility of librarians is to connect people with information. This is not exclusive to those who work in public service positions. We all work toward the same goals. It is ludicrous to think that the library patrons of an entire state could be well served by materials supplied by only one vendor. Those of us who work in this business know that the vast variety of sources and formats that constitute a library's collection must be obtained in a variety of ways. A book dealer that is able to provide current English language or North American imprints is unlikely to be a good source for microforms or for out- of-print titles or foreign language publications or the self-published monograph from Quebec. Aside from where the books come from, there is the question of what the suddenly superfluous library staff used to do. The answer is: add value. They do this by carefully selecting items pertinent to their clientele, by doggedly pursuing obscure and hard to obtain materials, faxing, telephoning, hand carrying, picking up at local bookstores all those must-have-by-next-Monday items, making sure that the item received is exactly what was ordered, is complete and undamaged, scrutinizing invoices for error, cataloging materials in such a way that they fit into the local collection and can be found by local patrons, managing the OPAC so it is a comprehensive, consistent, friendly database. There is much, much more and many variations among libraries. Technical services and collection development work grow more complex and more critically needed daily. The staff in these areas and their unique skills are needed to build and manage collections that will for some time to come include many formats, and to create and manage OPACs that will integrate access to various formats, locally held and remote, as seamlessly as possible. The role of catalogers should be expanding to take advantage of technological developments that permit increased access to older materials as well as to Internet-based electronic resources and everything in between. The potential for enhanced access to all kinds of materials is enormous, but it cannot be done by machines alone. The most automatic, simplistic approaches to technical services functions can indeed result in some books on the shelves and records in the system, but the end result will be superficial to say the least, and it seems to me that professional responsibility demands more than that. The Hawaii situation is a sad commentary on the willingness of some to accept such superficiality rather than aiming for the high quality libraries and library services that the public has a right to expect. Heather Miller SUNY Albany (4)-------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 09:53:50 -0500 (EST) From: Peter Graham (Rutgers U.) Subject: ALA and Outsourcing in Hawaii I write to ACQNET as an ALA Councilor responding to the query, "Where has ALA been in this issue?" I am not a member of your list (so won't see list postings) but have had forwarded to me the recent ACQNET 7:2 which fully covers the Hawaiian B&T outsourcing matter. It's clear to me that this is an important issue and it is quite proper for people to be concerned and to look into it carefully. Here, however, I only want to respond to the query raised once or twice in ACQNET, and directly to the ALA Council listserv, which is roughly "Why isn't ALA doing anything?" It's important to remember that ALA is us, not them. ALA headquarters can react only when given knowledge and direction, and I suspect we want to be sure that our good headquarters staff don't go off half-cocked but only enunciate clear positions of policy that our membership has clearly stated. On the ALA Council list the immediate questions were: What does the PLA have to say? What does the Hawaii state Library Association have to say? What about our representatives on Council and in the Divisions from the state and from the appropriate library bodies? There is an eagerness on Council to know the full story, and very probably to try to act in a way that will be helpful. The first signs of the issue we got, however, were from individuals who were clearly very concerned but were asking for ALA help when we didn't have much context. Keep the information flowing, make sure your representatives have good information (in all the relevant units--ALCTS, PLA, Chapter organizations, Council) -- and you, as ALA, will make ALA "do something." --pg Peter Graham psgraham@rci.rutgers.edu Rutgers University Libraries 169 College Ave., New Brunswick, NJ 08903 (908)445-5908; fax(908)445-5888 (5)--------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:33:41 -0600 From: Karen Muller (ALA/ALCTS) Subject: ALA and Outsourcing in Hawaii - Reply to P. Graham Peter, Thank you for your wise counsel to the ACQNET subscribers, etc. ALCTS had been monitoring this issue. Until the SRRT action was proposed, planning to discuss the issue at appropriate meetings, particularly those of the PVLR (Publisher/Vendor-Library Relations) and the Commercial Technical Services Costs Committees, was the extent of our actions. The latter committee had a very successful preconference on outsourcing issues last summer, along with a program that focused on evaluation of outsourcing contracts (and the Hawaii contract with B&T is one); PVLR, as you know, has proposed guidelines for remediation when there are problems in the various dealings libraries have with publishers and booksellers. We are now working on plans for a meeting of the Technical Services in Public Libraries Discussion Group which will have as its discussion topic something like "Managing the Outsourcing Project" or perhaps, a little more direct: "Outsourcing the Selection Process." This will be Saturday morning and should provide an appropriate forum to hear all viewpoints, tempered with some objective discussion of outsourcing in general. When we have a few more ducks in a row (like a confirmed presenter or two) we'll get a real announcement out--and will ask our Councilor to post to the list. Karen Muller Executive Director Association for Library Collections & Technical Services American Library Association ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol 7, No. 3 ****** END OF FILE ******