There’s a buzz in the info pro twittersphere this morning about the KPMG appearance on R4’s Today programme (library discussion starts about 8 mins in). Alan Downey from KPMG was talking about how the public can effectively run services that are currently run by the council, and was challenged specifically on the point of libraries. This was based on a KPMG report that came out today.
I’ll come on to discuss his claim that libraries could be run by volunteers, but my first warning that I was going to disagree with this man came when he said that ‘libraries are hugely important in the national psyche’. Oh, just in the psyche then? Not maybe actually important? It appears not. According to Alan Downey, we just think they are important. This is echoed in the written report, where they claim that ‘The level of community resistance to closing a library is usually disproportionate to the level of local usage’. Nothing overtly wrong with this sentence, perhaps, but oh! those nasty weasel words. ‘Disproportionate resistance’ is what stands out, and you can feel the condescension in every syllable.
The overwhelming impression I got from the interview was that Alan Downey’s idea of libraries is that they are buildings full of books. If library services can be run by the same people who are queueing up to sell books in charity shops, that strongly implies that he equates the two skill-sets. In the written report, libraries are condemned for having ‘over-skilled staff’. Well, if all library staff did was check books in and out, then perhaps they could be considered to be overskilled. But librarians do so much more than that – most ‘library services’ are based on the expert skills and knowledge of librarians. KPMG clearly do not have a clue about this.
KPMG clearly do not have a clue about a lot of things. I wanted to see where their assertions had come from, two in particular: that ‘in North America libraries are often run by volunteers not paid council staff’; and ‘much of the public space in a library is badly used storing infrequently used books’. Has there been a recent report about borrowing levels/circulation stats I’d missed? Well, quite possibly, but there’s no way of finding out through KPMG, because they don’t have any references. I’ll say that again: a report from a top advisory firm, aimed at reforming UK public services, contains not a single reference. Not one. Nary a hint of a reference. The press release about the report contains what could – with a generous stretch – be seen as a reference, in their ‘note to editors’, but is really just another unsubstantiated assertion. It looks like KPMG could have done with the help of some information professionals in compiling their report.
But they don’t know what information professionals do. They don’t know what libraries do. They don’t even really seem to know what libraries are. It looks like we need to go back to basics. Forget educating people about the value that information professionals add. Forget telling them how we can help them to find better, more authoritative sources of information. Let’s go right back to the very beginning: librarians facilitate information finding. Nope, too vague. Ok then: without librarians, there would be no books on your library shelves. If there were books on the shelves (‘study local needs for our acquisition policy? Nah, let’s just order the Amazon bestsellers list’), you wouldn’t be able to find the one you wanted. Oh yes, volunteers in charity shops do manage to organise the 50-200 books they have. Sometimes they even organise them by colour! That looks pretty, right? And we all have time to stand there and read every single spine in case the book we want might be there. No librarians? No catalogues. The reference desk? Will actually become just for lending pencils and directing people to the toilet. The computers? Well, you can try and use them – all depends on how IT-savvy your volunteer of the day is.
Yes, volunteers can be trained to do everything librarians do! Of course they can. This can be done in a number of ways – the most common is a post-graduate course at a CILIP-accredited library school. If you work in a library, and you’re trained to help users find information, then you’re a librarian. Maybe not a professional librarian, but a librarian nonetheless. But volunteers without specialist library training? I can think of no quicker way to reduce a library to a building full of books.
35 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 8, 2010 at 11:26 am
Jennie
I’m thinking of reorganising my library by colour, and in descending order of size. Wouldn’t be able to find a damn thing, but it’d look real purty.
*Goes off to find a date stamp to use for gleeful book stamping, as it’s all she’s needed for. Honest.*
June 8, 2010 at 11:28 am
Michael Hopwood
“They don’t even really seem to know what libraries are. It looks like we need to go back to basics.”
This holds very often for those in public office, for those contracted by the former, and too often for the public too. And sometimes CILIP acts like it holds for us too.
June 8, 2010 at 11:30 am
Helen
Really great post! I completely agree. That quote about ‘much of the public space in a library is badly used storing infrequently used books’ enraged me so much though. Do they not know about our stock management policies? Do they really think libraries keep books that haven’t been used for months? And what about the other things libraries are used for: community centres, adult learning class space, IT suites, cafes! Nothing annoys me more than someone talking about libraries without even taking the consideration to visit a modern one and see what they’re really about.
The report says that customers have new book and information sources (online), but they obviously haven’t considered the clientele who use public libraries. People still come to the public library to ask for telephone directories, for directions to places, and other things that complacent people could think ‘oh we can find that all online’. So many people don’t even know how to log onto the internet and libraries need to provide services for this sector of the community. You can’t just close a library and say that either volunteers can run it or people can find what they want online!!
Also: what happens when the volunteers get fed up of being harassed by the public? Working in public libraries, I have met some very unsavoury characters and I would NOT take that if I was not getting paid.
This is a very long rant and could probably go on for longer. We really need to educate people on the services that public libraries give to the community though, it’s so much more than a building full of books.
June 8, 2010 at 1:49 pm
bethan
Agree that we need to educate people! It’s hard to know what research KPMG did (although my impression is none), but as a profession we really should be making sure that there is an accurate refllecteion of what we do available – and that you don’t have to know that CILIP exists to get to it!
June 14, 2010 at 3:00 pm
martin
I agree with this. My authority is now considering having volunteers alongside paid staff in smaller libraries and this will cause all sorts of problems as far as I am concerned . We have had great problems with reliability of attendance with childrens’ storytime volunteers for example as well as the need for CRB checks putting many off. Staff and volunteer motivation when working alongside each other will cause great problems too.
June 15, 2010 at 9:00 pm
bethan
CRB checks are a great point! you certainly don’t need them to work in charity shops… I doubt most people understand the work that so many librarians do with the vulnerable.
June 8, 2010 at 11:31 am
Sara Batts
Bethan, you have saved me the bother of having this rant for myself. Thanks… I recall seeing a discussion on libraries having volunteers from somewhere, and that the claims being made were vastly over-stating the case. Was that a CILIP thing or a Tim Harford thing or something entirely other? Afraid I can’t remember. (But already my referencing is better than KPMG’s, no?)
June 8, 2010 at 1:57 pm
bethan
Seems that there is a CILIP task & finish group on volunteers in public libraries (https://twitter.com/CILIPinfo/status/15700244700), but can’t find any more info than that. Guess they are updating this: http://www.cilip.org.uk/jobs-careers/careers-gateway/life-at-work/flexible-working/Pages/volunteers.aspx (full text CILIP members only; LA report available here http://www.libraryassociation.org.uk/directory/ivpl.html)
You remembered enough to get a proper ref! 😉
June 8, 2010 at 11:44 am
Tweets that mention Could we all be replaced by volunteers? « Bethan's information professional blog -- Topsy.com
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Claire, kate smyth, Sian Blake, Helen , Damyanti Patel and others. Damyanti Patel said: RT @calire: RT @bethanar: Blogged: could we all be replaced by volunteers? http://bit.ly/9x5IJh (a rant about the KPMG report) Good rant. […]
June 8, 2010 at 12:07 pm
Fiona Leslie
Hi Beth,
I too was concerned by the interview this morning. I was particularly concerned by the correlation the KPMG consultant made between value and support for libraries.
In 2008, OCLC undertook in the US a major piece of research “From Awareness to Funding” (funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation), its findings highlighted that “Most U.S. residents are aware of the traditional ‘informational’ library services, such as books, newspapers, magazines and internet access. Far fewer know about the many value-added and ‘transformational’ services provided by their libraries, such as teen programs, computer training and ‘English as a second language’ classes. This lack of awareness of the transformational value of libraries was and still is a huge concern in the U.S. where citizens actually have to place their votes for which local services get their local tax dollars.
The report highlighted a need for libraries to awaken and reinforce within their communities their transformational value, to ensure that community support is migrated into ongoing funding support. In other words, the report highlighted the need for library services to do a much better job at marketing!! Does that sentiment sound familiar?
I recommend the report to all, particularly those who now face the challenge of saving libraries from the public axe. You can read it at: http://www.oclc.org/uk/en/reports/funding/default.htm
June 8, 2010 at 2:02 pm
bethan
Thanks for this link Fiona! I’ll have to read that report 🙂 I do like the term ‘transformational’ – but we’d need to make sure it isn’t just a jargony buzzword that confuses users even more! 🙂
June 8, 2010 at 12:07 pm
Jimmy
Bethan, excellent post. I’ve seen but not read the report fully yet. The sad thing is my local council/authority doesn’t employ librarians in our local libraries, they’re “Customer Service Assistants” they do an excellent job it has to be said but not a librarian in sight, at least not locally.
June 8, 2010 at 2:06 pm
bethan
I think this is one of the issues – if I may use the tired old comparison of libraries being like icebergs – what you see when you walk into your public library is the result of the hard work of trained librarians. But because those librarians might not be on the counter, because people just see books being stamped and computers being used, they don’t appreciate what needs to go on to make this all possible.
I’m not sure what the answer is! Maybe put all ‘back-room’ librarians in a big glass enclosure in the middle of the library? 😉
June 8, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Phil Bradley
Great stuff Bethan. As previously commented this saves me having to do the rant myself. Confidently looking forward to CILIPs response to the original on their website as well.
June 8, 2010 at 1:06 pm
Matthew Mezey
Library & Information Update’s Editor, Elspeth Hyams, has just now blogged about the KPMG report here: http://bit.ly/cD6Lcx
It’s titled ‘KPMG’s is the voice of elitism – but librarians have failed to champion the underprivileged loudly enough’.
Matthew Mezey
(News Editor, Library & Information Update magazine)
June 8, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Jimmy the Geek
This post demonstrates the collective knowledge of most all political bodies in the world. IF WE AS LIBRARIANS DO NOTHING TO EDUCATE THE POLITICIANS, LIBRARIES WILL GO AWAY. It’s as simple as that, and it’s happening all over the U.S. right now.
Politicians, at least here in America, will listen to whoever may be lucky enough to schedule an appointment with them. However, you’d better have some solid facts to give them, backed up by solid research, if you want to get them to be at the least sympathetic to your cause. Otherwise, you’re just another voice rambling on about nothing, and they’ll rather listen to a group like KPMG, just because they’re a “trusted” organization!
June 8, 2010 at 3:14 pm
bethan
So if we need solid facts and solid research, how exactly did KPMG become trusted without them? 😉
But yes, we do need to make a much bigger noise about our profession. CILIP produced a manifesto (http://www.cilip.org.uk/get-involved/advocacy/manifesto/Documents/ManifestoA4%28web%29.pdf) which was sent to all the major UK political parties in the run-up to the recent election – but I have no idea what impact it had, or if it’s been followed-up on.
June 8, 2010 at 5:17 pm
Future of libraries: KPMG report « Librarian of tomorrow
[…] Bethan’s information professional blog is an excellent representation of the library industry response so far; namely, that KPMG have little understanding of the real and vital role played by libraries in the local community, and have made little attempt to find out (Bethan points out that the report gives no references!). […]
June 8, 2010 at 10:00 pm
Payment for success | Optimus Librarian
[…] report itself materialised later in the morning (props to @bethanar for finding it and writing an excellent blog post about it). Part of my remit at work is to keep an eye on any important reports, policies or ideas […]
June 9, 2010 at 11:52 am
Christina Pikas
Obviously, KPMG knows nothing of North American libraries either. Libraries at all levels require ALA-accredited graduate degrees. Many states/provinces have additional certifications on top of that. Some reference work is handled by library assistants without the MLS, but they are still salaried. Sigh.
June 9, 2010 at 4:05 pm
bethan
I would really love to know where they got their data from! Shame they’re not telling us, eh? Thanks for the info 🙂
June 9, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Edith
Great post Bethan.
I remember being surprised when I read an article on this topic in the Guardian a couple of months ago ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/mar/17/libraries-closures-volunteers-public-services ) – firstly because they’d actually got a quote from CILIP (!), secondly because that quote was pretty lacklustre imo. Perhaps the journalist was selectively quoting, but I was very surprised that no mention was made by our professional body of the skillset qualified/chartered librarians possess and why that was essential for the effective running of library services.
I think you’re absolutely right about people having this old-fashioned, reductionist attitude about libraries being buildings containing books and librarians being people who stamp books; sadly the policy makers seem to be the people least likely to have actually used a public library in the last ten (or 20!) years…
June 10, 2010 at 12:06 pm
bethan
Thanks Edith – I hadn’t seen that article, and it’s well-worth a read! I really like the Alan Gibbons quote – just wish it had come from someone at CILIP!
It’s a real challenge: to find the right vocabulary to effectively communicate the value of what we do, without retreating into vague platitudes or industry jargon.
June 10, 2010 at 9:48 am
Richard Palmer
Bit late to this one, but excellent post.
I had a quick look at the KPMG report (and specifically the part on public libraries) and what strikes me about it is that it’s entirely based upon prejudice and the need to give an academic air to a political objective.
The evidence that they use is flimsy at best. It seems to be based on assertion, rather than fact. For example “where some councils have handed the library back to the community, they have often turned it into a much more vibrant community and space,” or “whilst charity shops in the UK often have waiting lists of volunteers wanting to help them with book sales.”
Oh really? Nice use of the word “often” there. I would, however, really like to see some evidence of this.
Now this part here is purely speculation, and I flag it up as such (be nice if KPMG would do the same; but that wouldn’t serve would it?), but I do rather suspect that these volunteers waiting patiently to flog books in charity shops (assuming that they exist!) would perhaps be less keen to take their services to the areas of deprivation that really *need* these kinds of services. I could be completely wrong, of course, but until KPMG carry out a proper study, they should perhaps be less keen to publish this kind of useless report and consider that they may be wrong.
June 10, 2010 at 12:16 pm
bethan
Absolutely agree! And it’s not just the libraries part of the post that’s filled with unsubstantiated speculation – Michael’s blog post http://michaelstead.org/2010/06/08/payment-for-success/ points out some of the other less-than-rigorous uses of “statistics”.
I shudder to think about any reliance being placed on this report without a thorough further investigation of its claims and sources…
June 10, 2010 at 7:24 pm
thewikiman
Wow, only just got to this – awesome post!
I was quite scared by your last bit: “I can think of no quicker way to reduce a library to a building full of books.” Potential for vicious circle there – that’s what ‘they’ think we are, so in self-fulfilling-misaprehension type way we actually become exactly that, how depressing.
June 11, 2010 at 12:28 pm
CILIP (not) on Newsnight « Aurlog
[…] to the now infamous KPMG report (see p. 19) seems to have consisted of unofficial bloggers (e.g.) and bloggers from CILIP Update (e.g.), all largely preaching to the choir. I hope they were also […]
June 13, 2010 at 8:26 pm
Loulrc
This is so ironic but only earlier today I had been forwarded a similar post on another blog. Focussing on the customer care and pastoral side of the work of library professionals, I wonder the following –
I hope that untrained volunteers have thick skins and an unpenetrable mental focus to keep them motivated…It’s not the sort of working environment to be in if you can’t cope with the day to day challenges when you come face to face with disgruntled clients. I’ve worked in public libraries when I graduated from Library school. No day is the same, which is ultimately what I like about my work. I have also worked in the education environment and still have a genuine “natural curiosity” which gives me the motivation to seek and find info. Listening to what user actually wants, careful questioning and filtering so you can find what ehy want. Can an untrained volunteer do that? As already touched on here, books may look pretty in colour coded areas, but can you find what you want? The Internet may have answers to questions but you’ve still got to have the basic skills and persistent to try different ways of accessing info to find what you want.
If people who feel libraries don’t need librarians in them actually visited these havens of knowledge, and were put behind the counter, who knows there might be a change of opinion.
Sorry for the rant.
June 15, 2010 at 8:57 pm
bethan
don’t apologise! this is a place for rants 🙂
It’s an interesting point – we need to reinforce the fact that not only is librarianship a profession, it’s a vocation. There’s a power in that, and if we can show our passion and our commitmne to our vocation, hopefully people will stop trying to take it away from us 🙂
June 17, 2010 at 2:44 pm
morgan
A great response to this sad situation. For me, the key thing is: “But they don’t know what information professionals do.” Most external library reviews are run by people who only have a vague and superficial understanding of what libraries are about, and who know even less about the work of librarians. It is so frustrating but this is sort of thing (maybe on a different scale) is happening again and again, all over the world. They don’t understand what we do, that’s why they question our value. I think that our ineptitude at self-marketing and promotion is no longer cute, it is our Achilles’ heel.
July 1, 2010 at 5:53 pm
bethan
Hi Morgan,
I agree completely that we need to entirely re-think our attitude to marketing the library and the library and information profession. I’d never thought of it as being seen as ‘cute’ before, but I think you’re spot-on: it’s part of a very damaging stereotype.
There’s quite a bit of discussion going on about this at the moment – the wikiman (http://thewikiman.org/blog/) in particular has been posting some great ideas recently. I’d love to see the basics of marketing made part of eachh info prf’s training – and for positive self- and service- marketing to become one of the responsibilities of a professional. It’s not an added extra – it’s vital to ensure the future of our profession.
June 25, 2010 at 6:35 pm
Defining our Professional Future – The Oxford Discussion « The Graduate Librarian
[…] people have discussed the issues very well including, Elspeth Hyams, thewikiman, Phil Bradley, and Bethan Ruddock. If you missed the KMPG Payment For Success report on public services including ideas on the […]
July 21, 2010 at 10:49 pm
Escaping the Echo Chamber – presentation | thewikiman
[…] Bethan Ruddock […]
February 22, 2011 at 5:34 pm
KPMG – The driving force behind library closures? | thoughts of a [wannabe] librarian…
[…] a report by the accountancy firm KPMG was published on public sector reform. That report caused uproar amongst librarians and library staff across the country as it claimed that: “…giving […]
June 23, 2012 at 10:28 pm
“Libraries Will Survive”: Mut und Humor in Krisenzeiten | Bibliothekarisch.de
[…] vor, die besonders Schulbibliotheken betreffen und bei öffentlichen Bibliotheken oftmals vorsieht “gelernte” BibliothekarInnen durch Ehrenamtliche zu ersetzen. Brigitte Döllgast titelte vor wenigen Tagen “Bibliotheken […]