Outsourcing: Layers of Bureaucracy

[Pat Wallace <DENWALL@AOL.COM>]

Forward from  Patricia D. Wallace,  Chair, Hawaii Working Group
(ALA Social Responsibility Round Table /Alternatives in Print Division)
SLIS graduate student, Texas Women's University
Denwall@aol.com

The following message has been cross-posted; please excuse any
duplication.

Here is an excellent, articulate commentary from a
"neighbor."  Pat
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
From: Robert Finch <rfinch@amon.pub-lib.ci.fort-worth.tx.us>
Fort Worth Public Library
To: Multiple recipients of list <publib@nysernet.org>
Subject: Outsourcing
Date: Jan 24, 1997

     I have seen some very logical and thoughtful rebuttals to the
polemics over outsourcing.  These arguments do point out that we should
not demonize B&T, Ingram, Brodart, etc. since they are only trying to
make money.  Cursing them for exploiting a willing market is like damning
a compass for pointing north.  These rebuttals still do not resolve these
problems.

     1. Outsourcing puts layers of bureaucracy between the customer and
the collection development selector.  From experience I can say that  fine
tuning only adds complication to the policy and procedures needed to
ensure the elimination of duplication.

     2. No one person can be expected to know enough to purchase
materials covering the sum total of man's knowledge.  There will be holes,
increasing the number of selectors decreases the number of holes.  THAT
IS WHY THERE IS NO UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE IN LIBRARIANSHIP.
We need people with a variety degrees in librarianship.  Consolidating
collection development into fewer people magnifies these holes and spreads
 them over a wider area.

    3. Spreading collection weaknesses over a wider area combined with
increased layers of bureaucracy means slower response to changing
conditions. (as if  we were speedy already)

     4. Outsourcing is for reducing budget expenditures.  This means
cutting subscriptions to ordering media.  This means librarians are
getting best seller information slower as limited resources are routed
throughout the system.  This reduces their effectiveness.

    5. Collection development is a part of learning the collection.
Knowledge of the collection is a part of the value added service we
provide.  Slow down our access to timely information and then reduce our
ability to know the collection and you reduce our value to our customers.
Reading the reviews, selecting the materials, prioritizing the order, and
examining the materials when they arrive is an important part of
learning the collection.

     6. Each community is different and constantly changing.  Outsourcing
cannot tailor each library or branch to each community and respond to
changes within that community.  The librarians who work with the
collection by answering questions, weeding, and talking to the customers
are the ones who know what is needed.  Community profiles cannot
communicate detailed knowledge to remote selectors bound by complex
policy and procedure manuals.

     So far I have no rebuttal to these concerns which
leads me to believe that outsourcing is anything but bad librarianship.
Peter Drucker wrote an article on leadership called "Not enough generals
were killed!".  My article should be called "Not enough directors were
embarrassed by customers finding gaping holes in the collection!"

-Robert Finch
 **********************************************************
 *  Views represented are strictly personal and *DO NOT*
 *  represent those of the Fort Worth Public Library. *
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]
[P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P][P]