4     Nor th Carolina Libraries Spring / Summer 2008

Thank you for the honor of joining you today.  I have deep ties to this lovely state….memories, friends and family. I am thrilled to be here with all of you.
I deeply appreciate my colleagues, Mary Boone and Kevin Cherry’s 
confidence in me and hope to share thoughts and observations 
with you - possibly with a variety of results.  Some of you may be 
interested or bemused, or even appalled, all of which is fine - just 
as long as I do not put you to sleep.

However you may respond to my thoughts today, I ask you only to 
listen because I must have gotten some things right.  My experience 
has stretched across three continents, through five cultures and I 
have presented internationally several times.

Libraries, the Stories and Resource Allocators

Part of telling a story is knowing your audience.  Many of the 
resource allocators, policy makers, and public decision makers 
who will, hopefully, be listening to your story may have had 
experiences with libraries during a particular time period; so I will 
review how I summarize the last 40 years quickly.  Be aware that 
your concept of a library may have evolved faster or differently 
than your audiences. 

In the early 70s when I became a librarian, we were following what 
I call the “just in case” model.  We carefully built collections and 
services for the times that they were needed.  We tried to be ready 
“just in case” someone needed some information.  Remember, this 
was well before the Internet and even before online data bases.  
Computers were big clunky things with tons of punch cards.  
We had books, journals, newspapers and loose-leaf services.  
Nonetheless, we tried to be ready for anything.  Even the smallest 
public library sought to have a reference collection.

Then technology developed and the budget cuts started.  We no 
longer had the resources to build general collections in case they 
were needed.  So we learned to use the new technology and lease 
access to material.  I call this the “just in time” model.  We gave our 
clients a wide variety of new tools to use in the library...we were 
early adapters.  I remember closing our major research library’s 
card catalog and traveling to New York City to be trained on the 
New York Times database.  It was an exciting time.  However, our 
“just in time” model changed when we realized that what we did 
not own we could neither preserve nor assure continued access to.

The next time period gave birth to needs assessments, and focus 
groups, and advisory councils.  I call this the “just for you” model.  
We accepted the brutal fact that we could not be all things to 
all people.  But we had realized the down side of only renting 
information.  Thus we came to believe that if we understood our 
communities, we could build collections tailored to the needs of 
our communities...we would be successful, save money and serve 
our users.

Unfortunately as this model developed, we realized that our clients, 
our communities, did not always know what they might need...
even in the moment, let alone for the future.

That led to the next step in our evolving approach to collections, 
which, I call the “just because” model.  We came to understand that 
we must blend the strong points from all the earlier attempts to cope 
with the enormity of our clients’ expectations.  But we also needed 
to bring our training and our expertise to bear on the challenge.  So 
we built collections that combined some leased materials, but we 
also purchased materials we believed might be really important to 
our communities...despite the lack of identification through needs 
assessments.  Because we believed we knew how to tailor our 
collections and services to our clients, we had the courage to try to 
prepare our libraries to meet expectations not yet articulated.

Meanwhile the world was changing....very quickly...the Internet 
and the “amazoogle” revolutionized expectations and assumptions.  
I believe the model the world has now given us can be called “just 
why.”  Communities and policy makers are asking “just why” 
do we need libraries?  This has led to different types of studies 
such as Libraries for the Future’s “Worth their Weight”, The Bill 
and Melinda Gates Foundation advocacy funding, the ALA’s 
“ilovelibraries.org” website, and so forth.  Because our continued 
employment is not a good reason to keep libraries open, I suggest 
we need to take this question very seriously.  Somehow we need to 
be a helpful part of the virtual universes all around us – and yet earn 
a respected physical “place at the table” in our communities.  We 
especially need to listen to the stories other people tell or do not tell 
about libraries – so we know their perspective. Think about your 
university President’s last public address, did he/she mention the 
value of the library on campus?  Did your Mayor thank the library 
for the content in a recent presentation?  Some of the comments/
stories you hear may be positive, some may not.  How many of 
you read the Garrison Keillor interview in September’s American 
Libraries? In a mixed review, he said “Libraries are struggling for 
a rationale”.  He went on to suggest  “…you are grateful for people 
who can save you time and that’s what librarians do – they save 
you enormous amounts of time.”

2007 Ogilvie lecture given by GladysAnn Wells at the NCLA 57th Biennial Conference

Telling Our Story To Resource Allocators



         Spring / Summer 2008     5  Nor th Carolina Libraries

In Information Outlook, July 2007, as an SLA conference 
keynote, former Vice President Gore noted to his audience of 
special librarians…“And of course, it’s no secret that in this day 
and time you face a challenge not only in keeping up with the 
incredible explosion of information on every topic relevant to the 
organizations that you serve – but also a challenge in describing to 
some people who ought to know better who you are and what you 
do and why it’s increasingly important to everyone.”

What about the comments from cartoonist Scott Adams in the May 
31, 2007 Dilbert Blog? “Recently a friend joked about going to the 
library to help with his son’s school project.  He said it felt like 
going back in time to pre-Internet days.  I wonder if libraries have 
an expiration date on them.  I’m guessing yes.”

This is a sampling of the here and now of libraries and library 
stories from a few other perspectives.  Telling our real story is 
important – how we try to do that is critically significant.

The rest of this paper addresses story telling, advocacy, and the 
practicality of explaining our beloved institutions to the unconvinced 
and to the policy makers who make the final decisions.

In her article “What’s a Library Worth? Piecing Together the 
Structure of Value” (Information Outlook, September 2007, p.59) 
Eleanor Jo Rodger, Joey to most of us, talks about four truths that 
are essential to understand as you frame your story.

Libraries exist as parts of larger systems.  Public libraries 
are part of cities, towns, and counties; school media centers 
are part of a school system: academic libraries are part 
of colleges and universities: special libraries are part of 
organizations, institutions, or corporation.

Libraries need host systems more than host systems need 
libraries.  Our shared passion and sense of purpose and 
importance often lead us to ignore this fundamental fact.  
Our host systems determine the rationale for libraries being 
a part of them, the legitimacy of our claims of belonging 
to them, and the constituencies we serve on their behalf.  
Perhaps most critically, they bestow (and therefore can 
recall) the resources we need to stay in business.

Libraries receive resources and continuing legitimacy 
from host systems in return for creating value for them.  
“Value” does not exist abstractly in the host systems.  It 
exists in the desires and perceptions of individuals in the 
systems, be they suppliers of resources or consumers of 
services.  

Value is not about the library but about its host system.  
At conferences and meetings, we gather about the campfire 
of librarianship and sing our songs and tell our stories about 
how wonderful we are and how unappreciated, but that’s 
not the world we live in.  

Joey goes on to explain the real world we live in is that of our host 
system. We must constantly evaluate the context within which we 
define our role, do our work or tell our story.

Librarians care.  We care about our institutions, our services, our 
patrons, about our society.  It frustrates us that those feelings are 
not always returned.  In Joey Rodgers’ terms, we often forget 
that we do not and cannot assign our value.  We are so certain 
that what we do matters, we assume that “they” - our host system 
stakeholders - do not know or do not understand; therefore, we 
turn to advocacy or telling our story as the answer.  We charge off 
to rectify the situation - knowing that we understand and we can 
explain...and all will be well.  Wrong.

The following are some principles I have learned the hard way.  
The first rule of advocacy or story telling is that you cannot do it 
for yourself or for your own institution. As Robert Martin, former 
director of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), 
explained in a WHCLIST Pre-conference presentation in April 
2003, if we trace the word advocacy to its source, it means ‘one 
who pleads the cause of another.’  We often forget that we have 
a vested interest in our own success, and in the success of our 
institutions.  We may forget that, or discuss it as irrelevant, but the 
policy makers, decision makers and resource allocators will not.  
We can explain, describe, answer questions artfully, but we cannot 
advocate.  It is always best to find someone who understands the 
importance of what we do to speak for us, to speak about us and 
our work....it will carry much more weight.

To again quote Joey Rodger, “A college president whose doctoral 
research was abundantly and cheerfully supported by a university 
library years ago is more likely to support the college library now.  
A city councilman whose constituents are vocal about how much 
the public library contributes to the pre-reading skills of their 
children is likely to look favorably on the library’s request for an 
early-childhood specialist.”

If you are not blessed with advocates – it is your job to find, coach 
and support the ones who will be needed.  For example, if you are 
a teacher librarian you might have a principal who believes that 
science is the answer to all of society’s problems. Start by talking 
with him/her and supplying new, super, phenomenal information 
about the role of science in building society.  Later, when you need 
that principal’s support, he/she might remember you were caring 
and conscientious about his/her interest...and be willing to listen 
and perhaps help.

Next, know your history.  Whatever your issue, whatever story needs 
to be understood and embraced by current resource allocators, it 
probably has a past in your community. (I use the word community 
to refer to a town, a school, a legislature, whatever the context, we 
all serve a community.)  Know what that past is all about.  Know 
where the past efforts failed and, if possible, know why.  Research 
the details, rehearse the plausible scenarios, and think about the 
opinions that stopped your issue from being successful in the 
past.  Never dismiss past obstacles.  The past has a way of tripping 
up the present.

Another over arching consideration is the study of your context.  In 
Joey Rodgers’ terms, “your host system”.  Know the environment 
that surrounds your work.  For example, it will be fruitless, and 
perhaps harmful, to ask for more funding in a time of serious 
retrenchment.  As a part of knowing your context, study the 
decision and policy makers - the resource allocators as Robert 
Martin terms them.  Basically, know as much as you can about the 



6     Nor th Carolina Libraries Spring / Summer 2008

people who make the critical decisions about your work. Above 
all be aware that in our society, those individuals define the social 
good.  Again as Robert Martin stated, “Politics serves as the final 
arbiter of public value.”  However we might struggle to educate 
or explain to those elected or appointed to public service or to 
other positions of authority, they, not we, are the final decision 
makers.  What they care about, what reality they see, and how 
they perceive our work is critical to their support - and thus to 
the determination of resources.  Resources you may need for your 
institution.  Remember the fourth point from Joey Rodger:  value 
relates to the host system.

An example from Joey, “The Chicago Public Library is about 
the success of Chicago, the Fairbanks Elementary School Media 
Center is about the success of the Fairbanks Elementary School, 
the University of California at Los Angeles Library is about the 
success of UCLA students and faculty, and so on.  It’s always 
about them, not about us.  We are honored to contribute to their 
success.”

Next, build connections BEFORE you need them.  Think of your 
contacts as a savings account.  Determine well in advance of your 
need:

who might be willing to help you, • 
who can stop you and • 
what each of them might want that you could supply.• 

Find partners to share the load and to give your issue broader appeal.  
Partners are more defined and more interactive than contacts.  
Connections start with contacts and build toward partnerships.  
BUT always try to understand why someone partners with you in 
any cause--try to know what is in it for them.  Few partnerships are 
simply altruistic...most find a common cause and work for goals 
that somehow benefit both.  That is not a bad thing, it is what is.  
Be aware of the reality and work within that frame of reference.

Understand the weak spots of your issue.  Even if you cannot 
fix them (for example, you need tons of money and very little is 
available), know those weak spots, and plan ahead how you will 
address the questions that will come.  It is not enough to care 
about important things - important things are ignored unless they 
are presented in a compelling manner, with realistic goals, with 
committed partners and in terms the resource allocators or the host 
system can understand and with which they identify.
In summary, we all have three choices in life: 
1.    put up or shut up,
2.    go somewhere else, or
3.     seek to change the situation within the context and by the rules 

we are given.

No one should be able to do the latter better than librarians.

Finally, be flexible, sometimes all that can be accomplished is a 
discussion on the public record.

No matter what happens, remember you

may outlast your non-partners - quietly, with elegance and •	
accurate information;  
believe and trust that there is always another day;•	
be smart enough not to win battles and lose wars;•	
can be secure that retreat with dignity is almost always an •	
option.

Learn from your experience…especially the future.  If you don’t 
succeed, take heart and try again. Best of luck!!

GladysAnn Wells is the Director and State Librarian of the Ari-
zona State Library, Archives and Public Records.