ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 5 4 0 / C&RL News The Scarlet Letter = A(utomation) By Richard J. Kuhta University Librarian St. Lawrence University What does Nathaniel Hawthorne have to do with library automation? M any o f us are currently involved of some phase of im plem enting an Integrated Library System. Most librarians recogni career opportunity and are pleased to be working in a library that has sufficient administrative and fi­ nancial backing to introduce autom ated systems to th e academic community. An online catalog with supporting subsystems changes the landscape of the library irrevocably, empowers the user, and alters the daily routines of library staff. W e know these things because we see the changes that occur, and feel a genuine excitem ent because we believe th at technology can support study and research in ways which utterly transform a p atro n ’s experience. It is little w onder if we becom e somewhat singlem- inded in our resolve; the project is dem anding, takes collective concentration to be done well, and involves an extended com m itm ent of tim e and energy. Introducing an Integrated Library System into an academic environm ent is, in fact, a consuming experience. W e query vendors, stage on-site dem ­ onstrations, build a level of com petence and confi­ dence among staff, test and evaluate systems, write requests for proposals, badger colleagues with questions and visitations, design evaluation tools, discuss strategies for im plem entation in endless m eetings, participate in contract negotiations, advertise and prom ote a system o f choice, worry about user acceptance, and finally, somehow, o r­ chestrate a phased im plem entation. The experi­ ence is one of the greatest challenges a staff faces, ze and in our careers we may only have one shot at it. As a result w e’re careful, cautious, and we work loitn ags hao urs to bring if off successfully. It is an exhilarating and dem anding experience, requiring our utm ost effort and attention. The m atter at hand is all, and it is easy to becom e singleminded. The problem is that our concentrated effort can be m isinterpreted within an academic community. D espite our devotion and good intentions, it’s easy to send the wrong signal. I sensed this problem about a year ago after a few random conversations with individuals around campus. As our project began drawing attention certain questions came to the surface (and not only from those staunchly unsympathetic to systems development). W ere we, in fact, now making a choice betw een books and bytes? W ould we be com m itting ourselves to an electronic age at the expense o f collection developm ent? W ere we somehow forging a new value system w here books no longer fit into the picture? In short, what about p ap er and print? O ur concentration on technology suggested a new direction which was interpreted on occasion as alien to traditional values. The li­ brary was going high-tech. It occurred to me to make sure Automation didn’t becom e a scarlet letter. These casual remarks set me thinking about system acceptance from another point of view. How would ten u red faculty in the hum anities or social sciences philosophically view the migration from catalog cards to an online catalog? How would June 1990 / 541 Editions o f T h e Scarlet L etter fr o m the St. Lawrence University collection. trustees, em eriti faculty, and Friends of the Library (traditionally com m itted to supporting acquisitions in special collections) feel about the transition to an online environm ent? W ould staff interpret our concentration as excessive and worry about library priorities? Was it possible to anticipate some of the more typical reservations and be prepared with a sign or signal that the library wasn’t losing its bal­ ance? A large-scale autom ation project nudges the library into the spotlight on campus, especially if the appearance o f an online catalog is coordinated with the introduction of an expensive com m unica­ tions network. A project of this scale and cost naturally becomes a topic of conversation. Indeed part of our job is to play a role in these discussions to prepare the academic community for changes to come. We becom e advocates in the political arena as we urge, explain, and convince those who doubt this investment in technology. W e try to make others see the benefits we know lie ahead. In our zeal the library, or a library administrator, can get a quick label. Everything else we do runs the risk of appearing second to autom ation, especially as dedication day for the system approaches and the spotlight gets brighter. I would suggest that the spotlight created by automation is an opportune tim e to present a con­ trasting view of library priorities. It is the ideal m om ent to present ourselves as the keepers of unique collections, preservers of paper and print, advocates of book arts, com m itted to the dissemi­ nation of knowledge and information through the w ritten word. Automation should not obscure the fact that we are, fundamentally, an environm ent of print. At St. Lawrence we w anted to create a sign that automation is only a part of what we do, one path w e’ve chosen to take, but not our only avenue of interest or sphere of dedication. F o r us, the appear­ ance of a handsomely produced bibliography, on the eve of system dedication, celebrated the 40th anniversary of the gift of a lifetime collection on Nathaniel H aw thorne1 (one of the gems among our special collections), but it also signaled a dual alle­ giance. The point was to dem onstrate balance and perspective in our priorities, while dispelling the notion that a concentrated effort to introduce new 1The Ulysses S u m n er M ilburn Collection o f H awthorniana (Owen D. Young Library, St. Law­ rence University, Canton, New York, 1989) is a selected bibliography describing a collection which includes all the English and American first editions of Nathaniel Hawthorne, various association cop­ ies, letters, m anuscript pages, including the com ­ plete ms version of “Lemington Spa,” photographs, all of the early stories published in 19th century periodicals, and memorabilia. Copies available upon request. 5 4 2 / C&RL News The House o f Seven Gables. technology excludes a concern for paper and print. T here are those in our academic communities who fear that a value system will be tossed out with the card catalog when, in fact, nothing is further from the tru th in libraries that support study and research in a scholarly community. But the atten ­ tion received by an autom ation project (media coverage, dedications, receptions, prom otional lit­ eratu re through D evelopm ent and Admissions offices) casts the library in a particular light which leaves us in half-shadow. Only part o f th e operation shows. One has to sense how an autom ation project is being perceived by others. It is useful to send a signal which dem onstrates a balanced approach to a p atron’s education and experience, especially within the small liberal arts environm ent. The student should learn how to handle, use, and appreciate prim ary research m a­ terials as well as becom e com fortable with the techniques o f information retrieval in this age of automation. It is our job to maintain a balance, to introduce technology without abandoning more traditional forms of scholarly experience. Today’s undergraduate should be equipped with skills in online bibliographic searching, becom e facile in exploring resources in CD -ROM databases and Online Public Access Catalogs, as well as gain some experience handling prim ary research literature, rare or fragile docum ents, books, prints, maps, or archival material. Automation does not lessen our responsibility in these matters. T here is a great deal a library can do to balance p e r c e p tio n s , allay c o n c e rn s , a n d g e n e ra lly strengthen its image during the tim e o f im plem en­ tation. A well-tim ed publication, prom oting a spe­ cial collection or rare materials, is only one way. There are many examples or approaches to take if one senses the need to rem ind faculty and students o f continuing priorities. One might accelerate spe­ cial exhibits which feature book arts, host guest speakers, stage dem onstrations in binding or repair techniques, distribute keepsake printings, or an­ nounce tours of archival or rare book facilities at the tim e a system is dedicated. These are a few the ways to suggest a balanced perspective. A u to m a tio n p la n n in g an d im p le m e n ta tio n places an considerable strain on library staff, both professional and support staff. Not only will the project impose additional work, but ultimately in­ troduce new tasks which require some adjustm ent in daily routines. It is understandable if some staff m em bers view a coming automation project with reservation. Not everyone on board will be wild with enthusiasm. F o r these reasons it is good to have o th er projects going on within the library, with participation on a voluntary basis. F or some this may provide opportunity for a break from autom a­ tion planning, and perhaps even present a learning experience. F o r others just knowing a collections- related project is going on, apart from automation, June 1 9 9 0 / 543 is a good sign. The H aw thorne bibliography was produced in this way at St. Lawrence— almost as an antidote to the rigors of automation, providing a benefit I h ad n ’t foreseen. The bibliography was an in-house effort, com piled and produced in tandem with the autom ation project, and served to rem ind us of other things. In some sense the H aw thorne bibliography proves we w eren’t swallowed whole by the project. The point, o f course, is that an extended concen­ tration on autom ation can cause us to be perceived as single-m inded when, in fact, we continue to pursue various objectives, have ongoing responsi­ bilities, and carry out m ultiple functions. Autom a­ tion planning and im plem entation is som ething else w e’ve elected to do. No b e tte r tim e to dem on­ strate the multiplicity o f our concerns, and particu­ larly our values and intentions with regard to prin ted materials, than at the very m om ent an autom ated system is dedicated. Everyone’s watching. ■ ■ Global librarianship: The role of American academic librarianship and ACRL B y JoA n S. Segal Executive Director, A C R L Active participation in IFLA is encouraged. W hat are American academic librarians doing w andering around the globe a t­ tending meetings and m eddling in library affairs in oth er countries? W hy should ACRL, a division of th e American Library Association, be involved in IFLA and other international organizations? History Interest in librarianship beyond the borders of th e U.S. has been growing. ALA has had as one of its tenets since earliest days, a responsibility to provide leadership in world library matters. In fact, ALA was am ong th e founders o f the International F ederation o f Library Associations in 1929 and its m em bers have participated actively in the form a­ tion and developm ent o f international associations of many kinds. Academic librarians have played an active role in such organizations as well. The contributions o f academic librarians T he nature of th e contributions m ade by aca­ dem ic librarians from institutions in th e U.S. fall into twelve major areas: leadership, publications, meetings, educational activities, resource provi­