ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 3 The experience of academic librarians in the public sector with respect to unit determination is not under the jurisdiction of the N LR B , but is rather governed by state law and/or boards. As such it is appropriately the subject of anoth­ er review and is beyond the intended scope of the essay. Readers are reminded that the scope of bargaining units can also be set by consent such that it is possible that librarians may not be in the unit with faculty by agreement be­ tween bargaining agent and employer. R e f e r e n c e s 1. C. W . Post Center of Long Island Univer­ sity 189 N L R B 9 06 ( 1 9 7 1 ) . 2. Fordham University 193 N L R B 139 ( 1 9 7 1 ) . 3. Ibid, 140, note 23. 4. For a review of the arguments see Ralph E . Kennedy, “The Educator’s Role in E du­ cating the N L R B ,” Journal o f C ollege and University Law (Sum mer 1 9 7 4 ), p .308-11. 5. Florida Southern College 196 N L R B 889 ( 1 9 7 2 ) . 6. Tusculum College 199 N L R B 31 ( 1 9 7 2 ) . 7. Catholic University 201 N LR B 145 ( 1 9 7 3 ) ; New York University 2 0 5 N L R B 16 ( 1 9 7 3 ) ; University of San Francisco 207 N L R B 15 ( 1 9 7 3 ) ; Point Park College 2 0 9 N L R B 152 ( 1 9 7 4 ) ; Fordham Univer­ sity 2 14 N L R B 37 ( 1 9 7 4 ) ; Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 21 8 N L R B 220 ( 1 9 7 5 ) . 8. Adelphi University 195 N L R B 639 ( 1 9 7 2 ) . 9. 2 05 N L R B 16 ( 1 9 7 3 ) . 10. Ibid. 11. University of Chicago Library 2 05 N LR B 44 ( 1 9 7 3 ) . 12. University of Chicago vs. N L R B (unpub­ lished order # 7 3 -1 7 8 8 , Case 13-CA- 1 1 4 4 7 ). 13. 198 N LR B 121 ( 1 9 7 2 ) . ■ ■ NELINET - ACRL/NEC Joint Meeting and Conference R eported by Jacqu elin e Seuss Acquisitions Librarian Boston C ollege Because of a common interest in developing simple cost measures for use in libraries, the membership of N E L IN E T and the membership of the ACRL-New England Chapter met to­ gether in a joint meeting and conference chaired by Gai Carpenter, N E L IN E T Execu­ tive Committee and director of the Harold F. Johnson Library Center, Hampshire College, at the New England Center for Continuing E d ­ ucation in Durham, New Hampshire, on F ri­ day, November 14, 1975. In the morning separate business meetings were held by each group. The business meet­ ing of the ACRL-New England Chapter will be reported separately in the February issue of C&R L News under “News from the Chapters.” Reporting to the N E L IN E T membership, Rob­ ert F . Miller, the director of N E L IN E T , high­ lighted recent activities in which N E L IN E T has been engaged, namely, further democratiz­ ing the governance system and accessing the impact of the recent O C L C rate increase. F u ­ ture activities to be given high priority, he stated, were (1) to resolve the future of the Northeast Academic Science Information Cen­ ter (N A S IC ), ( 2 ) to complete by December the National Agricultural Library project, and ( 3 ) to conclude negotiations with O CLC. Also reporting at the N E L IN E T business meeting was Frederick G. Kilgour, director of the Ohio College Library Center. Mr. Kilgour stated that the biggest problem facing O C LC was that of capitalization, explaining that funds for capital expenditure must now be provided by the users rather than the vendors. Using the Ohio experience by way of illustration, he esti­ mated that the recent rate increase amounted to only 13 percent while at the same time usage had increased 18 percent. After briefly summarizing the accomplishments of the O C LC system, he outlined expansion of service in 1976 into the areas of automated check-in, ac­ quisitions, interlibrary loan, and subject re­ trieval. Upon completion of the business meetings, the joint conference was opened by an address entitled “Library Cost Analysis: W hat W e Need to Know and W hy” by Sherrie S. B erg­ man, librarian, Wheaton College. Budget justi­ fication, Ms. Bergman pointed out, is one of the primary reasons for employing more sophisticat­ ed analyses, the traditional approach of circu­ lation figures, for example, often being inade­ quate and misleading. Almost any library op­ eration can be measured, she said, and the rela­ tionship between cost and production can be established. Ms. Bergman suggested that after the librarian has selected the specific areas of study, several basic principles o f cost analysis should be remembered: measurement almost always contains error and only a level of preci­ sion that is acceptable need be applied; the 4 study should be as simple as possible and the results presented by ratios and in graphic form. Finally, the study should meet the test of rea­ sonableness: Can it be compared to similar categories of measurement with institutions of similar size and purpose? An address by Dr. Donald Vincent, univer­ sity librarian, University of New Hampshire, concluded the morning’s proceedings. Mr. Vin­ cent presented the methods and results of analyzing cataloging costs conducted with and without computer assistance at his library be­ tween the years 1971/72 and 1974/75. The study revealed the necessity for constant revi­ sion of the number of operations defined, mea­ sured, and analyzed. It further revealed that the employment of the N E L IN E T system re­ duced the ratio between total dollars spent and volumes added, despite substantial increases in salaries. The study, he explained, was only one approach to technical processing cost analysis and that like any set of statistics, it reflected “facts, estimates and opinions.” Three case studies applying analytical tech­ niques to technical services, collection develop­ ment, and on-line reference searching, held concomitantly, opened the afternoon session of the conference. C a s e S t u d y — T e c h n i c a l S e r v i c e s Conducting this discussion, Don Vincent fur­ ther elaborated upon his morning presentation concerning the cost analysis project undertaken by his library. After a brief description of the problems they encountered with the computer programming aspects of the study, Mr. Vincent went on to point out a number of items that must be given careful consideration when set­ ting up a cost analysis study. One item was fringe benefits and how they should be counted in the study. Another, and probably the most important, was staff cooperation. He stressed the need for an effective orientation of the staff to the study. In a final comment Mr. Vin­ cent was careful to note that the cost analysis they conducted was not a cost-benefit analysis as it did not measure the quality of the work performed nor did it allow for special projects, i.e., an unusually large number of Russian ma­ terials being cataloged during the course of the analysis. The discussion was rounded out by a short presentation given by Vaughn Simon, head of cataloging at Dartmouth College. Mr. Simon described the cost analysis study he designed and conducted at Dartmouth, noting its sim­ ilarities and differences with the study done at the University of New Hampshire. C a s e S t u d y — C o l l e c t i o n D e v e l o p m e n t Peter Oliver, director, Andover-Harvard T he­ ological Library and Linda B. Lewkowicz, co­ ordinator of library services, Boston Theological Institute, presented a case study illustrating the methods and results of a computer-assisted analysis of the collection of 1973 imprints by members in the consortium of the Boston Theo­ logical Institute. T he breakdown into separate categories of the B L to B X classification sched­ ule revealed, among other things, a “biblio­ graphic uniqueness” index for each subdivision of the classification range for each library. These figures indicated the number and per­ centage of titles held by only one library in the consortium. In addition, the study was also constructed to reveal the number and percent­ age of titles held by one or more other libraries in the consortium. In such a way, it was point­ ed out, the strengths and weaknesses of the member libraries might be assessed and future collection development policy might be estab­ lished for both the member libraries individual­ ly and the consortium as a whole. C a s e S t u d y — O n - L i n e R e f e r e n c e S e a r c h i n g During the past two years, NASIC (the Northeast Academic Science Information Cen­ ter) has assisted thirty-two academic and re­ search institutions in establishing on-line bibli­ ographic searching within their libraries. In preparing for the operation of a search service, N ASIC works with the participating institution in four ways: training, administrative consulta­ tion, user education, and interface with the ser­ vice vendors. Since the end user usually pays for the out-of-pocket costs (com puter connect time, communications charges and fees for off­ line printing) at most institutions, the major costs for the library are staff time, terminal ac­ quisition and publicity. On-line searching is an add-on responsibility for the professional aca­ demic librarian where time must be allocated for a number of functions: user consultation, strategy development, on-line searching, record keeping and promotional activities. The impact of heavy on-line searching will probably affect interlibrary loan. F or the library, the positive aspects have been an improved public relations image, the capability to offer broader and deep­ er subject bibliographies, and greater knowl­ edge of the printed counterparts. For the medi­ um-sized or smaller academic library, comput­ erized searching has meant increased access to literature sources. E ditor’s note: This case study was conducted by Patricia Vaughan, Information Services L i­ brarian, Northeast Academic Science Informa­ tion Center (N A S IC ), Wellesley, Mass. The conference was concluded with an ad­ dress “Does the New Librarianship Affect T ra­ ditional Approaches to Cost Analysis in L i- C ontinued on page 6 6 Report on the Conference on Retrenchment in Higher Education: Implications for Libraries Subm itted by Lynn B arber Acquisitions Librarian Skidm ore C ollege On November 14, amid rumors of budgetary freezes, fiscal default and the first snow o f the season, the Eastern New York Chapter of A C R L held its first conference and official busi­ ness meeting. T he topic for the day’s discus­ sions was “Retrenchm ent in Higher Education: Implications for Libraries,” and nearly seventy- five librarians came to the SUNY Albany cam­ pus to compare problems and suggestions for solutions. The meeting commenced with a welcome from the new president of SUN Y Albany, E m ­ mett B. Fields. In addressing the group, Presi­ dent Fields emphasized the need for resolving the problems of retrenchment without inhibit­ ing the progress of higher education. He stated that universities must move forward or risk dying. Following Fields, G. Richard Wynn, vice-president and treasurer of Cedar Crest Col­ lege, Allentown, Pennsylvania, and M illicent D. Abell, associate director of libraries, SUNY Buffalo, addressed the issues of retrenchment as they have affected their respective institu­ tions. NELINET Continued from p ag e 4 braries” by Frederick G. Kilgour. Mr. Kilgour defined the “new librarianship” as that which employs new technology to new objectives. He went on to define the new technology to be a system such as O C L C and the new objective as making more resources available at reduced costs. H e predicted that the new librarianship will require librarians to view things from an economic point of view, using techniques of cost analysis, rather than from a budget point of view, requiring an expenditure analysis. He further predicted that librarians will soon be required to reduce costs in overhead and costs to users, cost to users meaning that the user fails— a good 5 0 percent of the time— to obtain the information or material he needs from the library. In conclusion, he stated that the em­ ployment of the technology offered by the O C L C system will enable libraries to reduce both overhead costs and costs to users because of both its economy of scale and its economy of time and labor. ■ ■ G. Richard W ynn spoke as an administrator making budgetary decisions at a small, private college. He cited a number of areas which he saw as primary considerations in dealing with tight financial situations. Among them were the necessity for viewing higher education much like any contractor that must attract users of its services. W ynn saw this as particularly impor­ tant due to the fa ct that statistical projections indicate the number of high school seniors go­ ing on to college is declining. T he pricing fac­ tor, particularly the significant differences in the financial bases and requirements of public and private institutions must b e dealt with, and par­ ticularly in the context of financial aid to stu­ dents. Productivity as it affects faculty and stu­ dents must also be considered as institutions attempt to find ways to deal with diminishing working capital. The effects of inflation on li­ braries must be recognized by administrators with all its implications to library services and purchasing power. In concluding, W ynn em­ phasized the importance of measuring “quality distress” as libraries find their budgets being cut and the need for developing meaningful quantitative measures for library services. Millicent “Penny” Abell followed Wynn, speaking as a librarian who must deal with the budgetary decisions of institutional administra­ tors. Abell spoke out strongly on the over­ whelming pressure placed on libraries in meet­ ing their broad objectives with diminishing funds. She suggested that librarians must devel­ op a “toughness” to deal with retrenchm ent and learn to b e innovative in finding ways to modi­ fy expectations while at the same time fully utilizing all their resources. Abell, emphasized that libraries should not hope to only “wait out” the current economic problems, for the situation demands realistic confrontation. “Growth” can­ not be used as an excuse for poor management in personnel or service decisions. Abell was optimistic, however, in feeling that the reassess­ ment that libraries must face up to may ulti­ mately lead to better definitions of objectives, new measures of performance, and a rearrange­ ment of priorities to better reflect available re­ sources and talents. In summary, Abell chal­ lenged participants to find ways of doing more with existing budgets through a process of re- evaluation to identify new areas of both inter­ nal and external cooperation. She warned that libraries must not squander the resources they do have, but rather, they must establish a b al­ ance of operation incorporating courage, hu­ maneness, and strength.