When planning a funding request, librarians must understand the
societal forces affecting a library's parent institution and the forces
affecting the library as a social system as well as a technical system.
Before approaching a funding body, librarians must ask themselves
whether issues that are important to them are also important to the
funding body. When approaching the Council on Library Resources,
specifically, librarians should be aware of four research areas of interest
to the Council human resources, economics, infrastructure, and
processing/access.published or submitted for publicatio

Penniman, W. David

English

When planning a funding request, librarians must understand the
societal forces affecting a library's parent institution and the forces
affecting the library as a social system as well as a technical system.
Before approaching a funding body, librarians must ask themselves
whether issues that are important to them are also important to the
funding body. When approaching the Council on Library Resources,
specifically, librarians should be aware of four research areas of interest
to the Council human resources, economics, infrastructure, and
processing/access.Submitted by Sarah Shreeves (sshreeve@uiuc.edu) on 2007-04-15T23:43:57Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
Penniman_Funding.pdf: 889953 bytes, checksum: 3b12f9e2abc4a1d043af4be07ef1419a (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2007-04-15T23:43:57Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
Penniman_Funding.pdf: 889953 bytes, checksum: 3b12f9e2abc4a1d043af4be07ef1419a (MD5)
  Previous issue date: 1992published or submitted for publicatio

Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship Repository

W. DAVID PENNIMANPresidentCouncil on Library ResourcesWashington, DCFunding Priorities andFunding StrategiesABSTRACTWhen planning a funding request, librarians must understand thesocietal forces affecting a library's parent institution and the forcesaffecting the library as a social system as well as a technical system.Before approaching a funding body, librarians must ask themselveswhether issues that are important to them are also important to thefunding body. When approaching the Council on Library Resources,specifically, librarians should be aware of four research areas of interestto the Council human resources, economics, infrastructure, andprocessing/access.INTRODUCTIONSenator Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) said, in a Senate debate on cuttingthe proposed 1991 budget for the Library of Congress, "We in thiscountry have to recognize that the security of this nation, the defenseof this nation, rests on more than things that explode. A secure, strongnation also depends on people being able to have books to read, tobe able to gather and retain information" (Hall, 1991, p. 19).Despite such insightful and appealing statements, we continue tosee library budgets cut and operational costs increasing. Therefore, itis not surprising that library professionals interested in research lookto foundations as an additional source of funds.158Funding Priorities 159It is important to understand that libraries are a major financialinvestment in this country, despite severe budget constraints. TheNational Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS)estimated just a few years ago that over $6 billion was spent annuallyon libraries. The Foundation Center, headquartered in New York, hascompiled statistics that appeared in a recent American LibraryAssociation publication on the role that private foundation fundinghas played in augmenting library activities (Smith 8c Borland, 1991).They reported the following:Total library funding from private foundations for 1989 (the latestyear for which data were available) was approximately $72 million,about the same as in 1988. The total number of grants wasapproximately 500 (they reported only grants over $5,000).Libraries in general receive a very small percentage of total privatefoundation funding dollars between 1 and 3 percent. Furthermore,grant funding is a small percentage of total library funding(approximately 1 percent).So, the money available for libraries in general and research in particularis limited.SOCIETAL FORCES AND PARENT INSTITUTIONSThe forces affecting the institutions in which libraries reside arealso important to understand. In a recent issue of the Bulletin of theAmerican Society for Information Science, Carla Stoffle (1991), reportingon a session at the annual meeting of ASIS, summarized the societalfactors affecting the parent institutions of libraries as follows:First is the switch from a manufacturing-based to an information-based society. I would modify that to say that we are seeing a switchto a service-based society where companies are focusing on customerservice even though they may still manufacture goods often in othercountries. Universities, too, are beginning to view themselves in thisservice-based environment from a business viewpoint.Second, she points out an increased emphasis on "accountability."Institutions are being challenged to their very core. Their worth isno longer accepted on the basis of anecdotal evidence. That wascertainly true at Bell Labs, where I spent the past seven years.Characteristic of this trend, I see a new level of accountabilityemerging. Institutions are being asked to measure their performanceand to have their leaders accept responsibility for this performance.If they do not achieve their goals, new leaders are brought in.160 Applying Research to PracticeInstitutions that were previously funded routinely are being askedto demonstrate their worth. My recent visits to a variety of institutionstell me that this trend is increasing, and it is not limited to educationalinstitutions or industry; it is pervasive.The final factor identified in Stoffle's article is the changingdemographic makeup of the United States. This move towards morecultural diversity is more adequately described in a report titledWorkforce 2000 (Johnston & Packer, 1987) that was issued a few yearsago. It carries implications for all institutions and organizationsprofit and not-for-profit in terms of the emerging labor force andcustomer base.I would add two other factors to Stoffle's three:First is the increasing globalization of our industries and institutions.We can no longer operate in isolation for both competitive and moralreasons. Companies and countries are no longer isolated. East andWest are meeting in the marketplace as well as in political forums.And institutions such as libraries must learn how to open globalboundaries as well.Second, a trend we can no longer deny: a shrinking economy in theUnited States in which even some of our most vital institutions arehaving to rethink their levels of spending. At the same time globaleconomics is playing an increasing role, we see a fragmentation ofEastern Europe, the unification of Western Europe, and thecontinuing emergence of the Pacific Rim as a major economic force.SOCIETAL FORCES AND LIBRARIESIf these are the forces acting upon parent institutions, what aboutlibraries themselves? Certainly technology has played a major role inthe evolution of libraries and will continue to do so even in (or especiallyin) tight economic times. But let me make my position clear regardingtechnology and its impact on our future in the library community.We must look at our libraries as social systems, not merely technicalsystems, and we must act in social terms when we look to the changesahead. Some people believe the future (especially the technologicalaspect of it) "unfolds" like a giant preprinted road map. Such peoplestrive to peek beyond the folds and guess ahead about the next majorevent. This approach assumes a predestination that I find difficult toswallow. I believe we must shape the future, not let it shape us.And we must realize that we are confronted with a paradox. Wemust introduce change and, I believe, radical change if we are tocontinue to play the vital role that libraries have played in the past.Funding Priorities 161To state the paradox simply: to remain what we are, we must change;if we do not change, we won't remain what we are.The issues that must be addressed by all of you can be stated inconcise terms:How to manage constant or declining funding while the costs ofmaterials continue to rise; andstill respond to increasing and complex demands from library usersand respond we must to maintain libraries as the vital socialinstitution they have been.FOUNDATIONSYou undoubtedly see parts of these issues that you want to address,and the part you want to address is important to you. But is it importantto a foundation that might provide financial resources for your study?Again, the Foundation Center provides some excellent guidance. A newlyissued National Guide to Funding for Libraries and Information Services(Olson, Kovacs, & Haile, 1991) provides detailed information on almost400 foundations and corporate sources. It also provides a "filter" ofimportant questions you should ask yourself before approaching thefoundation:Does the foundation's interest include the specific type of serviceor program you are proposing?Is the foundation interested in your geographic area?Is the amount you request consistent with the foundation's fundingpractices?Is there any policy of the foundation that could be a barrier to yourrequest?Does the foundation prefer shared funding, or does it like to be thesole source?What types of organizations does the foundation support?Are there specific deadlines or other procedures that must be followed?Do not rely entirely on this new publication as good as it maybe, you should look at material available from the foundation itself,such as its annual report.COUNCIL ON LIBRARY RESOURCESFocusing specifically on the Council on Library Resources (CLR)now, I want to describe how we would suggest you go about preparinga funding request. Before you send in a full-blown proposal, give usa preproposal letter (or phone call).162 Applying Research to PracticeDiscuss the general problem you want to address.Why is it important to you?Why should it be important to CLR?Why should it be important to other groups i.e., are the resultslikely to be extensible?What are the general ballpark costs?If we move on to the proposal stage, then more detail will berequired, especially in the areas of assessment and dissemination i.e.,how can we measure the results to know if what was done was effective,and how can we communicate those results?CLR spent just over $1 million last year, and I expect our newand expanded set of programs to increase the annual funding level,but let me caution you. The areas of interest to CLR in the futurewill be based on the strong belief on my part that we cannot continueas we are. We must be prepared to be held accountable for the benefitsas well as the costs of what we do. That is true for libraries, libraryresearchers, and yes, even CLR.Furthermore, CLR's future work will reflect my belief that librariesmust be viewed, first and foremost, as information delivery systems,not as warehouses. The dilemma is that libraries have many roles: thatof warehouse, gateway, intermediary, communication channel in thescholarly process, and preserver of what we know. The major challengemust come in what we see as the driving force or motivation for libraries.For what will their leaders be held accountable? When these leadershave their backs to the wall (as many now do), what will be the essentialvision and force that motivates their decisions? Will it be risk averseor bold? How will the success of the institutions they lead be measured?I believe CRL can help bring about necessary changes in this community,and I believe we can help bring about those changes with a sense ofurgency that is essential.The same questions hold true for library education and research.How will leaders be measured? I believe we must see a closer relationshipbetween library research and the major libraries located near libraryschools. I believe information science, rather than being a threat tolibrarianship, can be a powerful ally, and we need more interdisciplinaryresearch demonstrating this fact. I believe library educators need to placea greater focus on research and research that is externally funded. AndI believe that library researchers who are risk averse will not serve theirinstitutions well. There is a call for boldness and urgency there as well.Research focused on libraries can be a vital force for change. Butbeyond that, CLR is also concerned with the broader issues faced byrelated information service providers, including computer centersproviding database services; university bookstores that can work inFunding Priorities 163conjunction with libraries; bibliographic utilities that support libraryoperations; and university, commercial, and professional presses thatprovide input to library collections, because these are all part of theinterconnected world in which libraries now operate.And that leads me to identify four general areas that I believe needsignificant attention and that I intend to see CLR focus on over thenext few years in the form of research projects as well as other relatedefforts.First is the area of human resources. We need to look at the end-to-end issues of attracting, educating, maintaining, and advancingindividuals in the information services profession. We should not focusmajor emphasis on the question of what to do about failing libraryschools, but rather on the question of what to do to assure a steadystream of talented people into leadership roles in libraries and relatedinformation service organizations. Some specific questions I would posefor study in this area include the following:What can be done as far upstream as possible to attract bright youngpeople into the information profession?How and when should these people receive their basic educationand their first professional degree in the information services area?How can we assure that professionals in this arena will be able toserve the culturally diverse audiences that will make up their userpopulation?What mechanisms are needed to assure that continuing educationbecomes a normal part of the professional's life and that the peoplealready in the profession receive the training necessary to continueto serve their users well?How can mentors as well as other developmental mechanisms beused to assist in creating strong leaders?As leaders reach the end of their careers, what can be done to assurethat their skills and experience are used to "prime the pump" andcreate more leaders in the information profession?Second is the area of economics of information services. Over time,we need to address the full range of economic issues associated withlibraries and related information services, including both micro- andmacroeconomic issues. At the outset, however, I believe we should focuson microeconomic issues and, more specifically, on those questions thatwill lead to a deeper understanding of information service operationsin libraries. We need to be able to answer questions such as the following:How much do we really know about the specific functions that alibrary performs in terms of being able to measure these activities?What are the unit costs of these functions, and how/why do thesecosts vary across libraries?164 Applying Research to PracticeHow do these functions fit together to form information services (e.g.,document delivery), and what is the overall cost of these services?What are the ways in which we can measure benefits of these resultingservices in order to perform cost/benefit analyses from the user'sviewpoint as well as from the viewpoint of the institution in whichthe library or service provider resides?I am convinced that the cost and value of information services mustbe understood and that quantitative analyses are essential to theresponsible management of libraries now and in the future. In addition,I believe that many of the tools and techniques used in the "total qualitymanagement" programs currently receiving major attention in U.S.industry are appropriate for the redesign of our information services.We need to understand more fully how these tools can be applied inthe information service arena.Third is the broad concept of infrastructure. This umbrella termincludes the systems, services, and facilities that are drawn upon tohelp libraries and other information services operate more efficientlyand effectively. Included in infrastructure are communication networks,bibliographic utilities, software and hardware vendor communities, andpublishers. Also included as a major component of infrastructure isthe current array of physical structures that are viewed as essential toinformation service operation e.g., the buildings that house librariesas we now conceive of them. Questions that should be addressed inthis category include the following:How will emerging, as well as in-place, electronic networks modifythe balance of power as well as the allocation of resources amongdifferent information service segments (including the public librarysegment)?How can publishers and libraries work together via experiments thatdemonstrate processes of change that are beneficial to both segmentsas well as to the end-users?What alternative designs for library facilities can demonstrate a focuson service rather than structure and illustrate that form can followfunction when the function is clearly understood and articulated?(For example, storefront branch libraries are an illustration thatlibraries need not be edifices to be edifying.)How can system vendors and bibliographic utilities work togetherwhen large central operations and local systems seem to be on acompetitive collision course? Is there a long-term strategy that makessense for both and serves libraries and their users well?Although the concept of "infrastructure" is extremely broad, Ibelieve that a few well-chosen projects can begin to move us towardFunding Priorities 165a more rational environment in which both information producers andinformation consumers are served well by libraries.Fourth, and finally, is the dynamic duo processing and access.All processing undertaken by an information service should be for thepurpose of access. The two should not be separated (just as theCommission on Preservation and Access has made the point with regardto preservation). If we look carefully at today's libraries, we find thatmuch of the resource is consumed to support internal processes. It isoften unclear how these processes directly (or indirectly) benefit theuser. There are many research questions that can be addressed on boththe processing and access sides that could significantly influence thecost and/or benefit of library processes. Examples of questions I believeshould be addressed include the following:What steps are necessary to reduce the cost/time of catalogingsignificantly from where they are today, and how radically can theprocesses be revised?If the users were to design their ideal information access mechanism,what would it be and how would it vary across different user segments?How would it vary from what we now have (our imbedded base)?How would such a design change the current internal processes inlibraries necessary to sustain an access system?What actually occurs when users "browse" a physical collection, andhow could the processes be transferred to electronic access systems?What mechanisms help create the serendipity that occurs when auser accidently discovers information or develops new ideas in unusualways while in contact with information resources? How can thosemechanisms be enhanced especially where physical resources maybe curtailed?These four areas human resources, economics, infrastructure, andprocessing/access represent the broad umbrellas under which specificresearch projects and other efforts will be launched by CLR (and Ihope by other organizations as well that are interested in the evolutionof information services). As I said earlier, CLR stands ready to helpthose who are willing to undertake the necessary (and painful) effortof redesigning the information delivery systems we call libraries. Andwe look forward to continued interaction with people who provideus feedback on our efforts and directions.REFERENCESHall, L. (1991, April 17). Storehouses of wisdom. New Jersey Star-Ledger, p. 19.166 Applying Research to PracticeJohnston, W., & Packer, A. E. (1987). Workforce 2000: Work and workers for the 21stcentury. Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute.Olson, S.; Kovacs, R.; & Haile, S. (Eds.). (1991). National guide to funding for librariesand information services. New York: Foundation Center.Smith, O., & Borland, A. (1991). Foundation funding for libraries. In Libraries andinformation services today: The yearly chronicle (pp. 104-110). Chicago: AmericanLibrary Association.Stoffle, C. (1991). Libraries, funding and creativity, part 1: Funding. Bulletin of theAmerican Society for Information Science, 17(2), 16-18.

Funding priorities and funding strategies

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship Repository

IDEALS @ Illinois