Well, as a counter-argument, some of these roles *could* be filled if
libraries worked better consortially.
No, a library that is so small as to only have 4 staff probably
doesn't need a full time techie, marketer, grant writer or fund
raiser.
However, if they invested *some* of their resources towards the
percentage of these roles (shared with other, similar libraries), the
ROI would more than likely pay off in the long run.
The grant-writer PTE alone could probably find money for the PTE Tech person.
-Ross.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Bigwood, David <bigwood_at_lpi.usra.edu> wrote:
> IT is certainly important to today's library. However, so is marketing
> and grant writing and fund-raising. Arguing that all libraries should
> have an IT person is like saying they should all have a marketing person
> and a grant writing person and a fund-raiser. That makes already 4
> full-timers and no core library functions are being done.
>
> Larger libraries have the ability to make decisions about allocating
> funds between IT, marketing, grant writing, fund-raising and all the
> other important functions. Smaller libraries don't. A large number of
> libraries don't even have 4 full time staff. A library with only a
> techie, marketer, grant writer, and fund-raiser would not be serving the
> community very well.
>
> Sincerely,
> David Bigwood
> dbigwood_at_gmail.com
> http://catalogablog.blogspot.com
> Twitter: LPI_Library
>
Received on Wed Sep 10 2008 - 11:07:19 EDT