current practices and trends in 20 top business school libraries

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 08 October 2014, At: 06:46Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Business & FinanceLibrarianshipPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wbfl20

Current Practices and Trendsin 20 Top Business SchoolLibrariesEileen G. Abels a & Trina J. Magi ba College of Library and Information Services,University of Maryland, College Park , USAb Bailey/Howe Library, University of Vermont , USAPublished online: 11 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Eileen G. Abels & Trina J. Magi (2001) Current Practicesand Trends in 20 Top Business School Libraries, Journal of Business & FinanceLibrarianship, 6:3, 3-19, DOI: 10.1300/J109v06n03_02

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J109v06n03_02

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wbfl20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J109v06n03_02

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J109v06n03_02

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

ARTICLE

Current Practices and Trendsin 20 Top Business School Libraries

Eileen G. AbelsTrina J. Magi

ABSTRACT. Faced with a time of change, academic business librariansand library administrators can benefit from learning about current practicesand trends in resources and services provided by their peers at otherlibraries. Using Web site analysis, a mail survey, and analysis of Collegeand University Business Library (CUBL) data collected by Cornell Uni-versity, this study examined libraries associated with 20 top-rated businessschools in the United States. The study identifies current practices andtrends in the following areas: relative expenditures on resources, commer-cial databases provided, content of library Web sites, user education orlibrary instruction, and reference services. Despite extensive variation inorganizational structure and sources of funds, the libraries provide servicesand resources that are similar in many ways. [Article copies available for afee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mailaddress: <[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com>E 2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

Eileen G. Abels is Associate Professor, College of Library and Information Ser-vices, University of Maryland, College Park. She has a Master of Library Scienceand a PhD.

Trina J. Magi is Library Instructor and Coordinator of Electronic Resources,Bailey/Howe Library, University of Vermont. She has a Master of General Adminis-tration/Marketing and a Master of Library Science.

The authors gratefully acknowledge the business librarians who responded to oursurvey. We also appreciate the assistance provided by Donald Schnedeker in review-ing the survey as well as the editorial advice provided by Dr. Elaine Svenonius.

Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, Vol. 6(3) 2001E 2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS & FINANCE LIBRARIANSHIP4

KEYWORDS. Academic business libraries, business schools, trends,information services, survey

Academic business libraries, like libraries in other settings anddisciplines, are facing a time of change. Business librarians and ad-ministrators must grapple with shifts in the library profession, theinformation industry and the business world (Ternberg, 1999). Thepurpose of the study reported in this article is to identify trends ininformation resources and services in business school libraries. Theresults will be of interest to librarians in subject specific businesslibraries, business librarians in general academic libraries, and busi-ness school faculty and administrators responsible for shaping theirlibrary and information services for the future.For this study, the libraries of 20 top business schools were selected

for examination. Focusing on collections and services and the impactof technology on these areas, the study addressed the following broadquestions:

S How is the collection budget allocated to different collections?S What resources are common to these libraries?S Are changes being made in the manner in which reference ser-vices are offered?

S How is user education currently delivered, and what changes, ifany, are planned?

An examination of collections and services would be incompletewithout considering the organizational structures of the libraries offer-ing them. If other libraries are to consider implementing servicesdescribed in this article, an understanding of the organizational under-pinnings of the libraries is essential, particularly if typical organiza-tional structures can be identified.

METHODOLOGY

Sample

Twenty business school libraries were selected on the basis of meet-ing two criteria: (a) The schools with which they are associated ap-peared in lists of top business schools published in either Business

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Eileen G. Abels and Trina J. Magi 5

Week or U.S. News and World Report (Reingold, 1998; Schools ofBusiness, The Top Schools, 1999), and (b) they participated in the1997/98 College and University Business Library (CUBL) survey. Allschools in the sample offer the M.B.A. degree, and all maintain busi-ness libraries in spite of the fact that enrollments vary widely, from252 to 1,927 in 1998 (Reingold, 1998). A list of these schools isincluded in Appendix A.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data were collected in three ways. First, the College and UniversityBusiness Library (CUBL) statistics gathered by Cornell University forthe 1997/98 academic year were reviewed, analyzed, and reconfi-gured. The data, which are available at http://cubl.johnson.cornell.edu/, have been reported in the literature (Schnedeker, 1997; Schnedeker,1998). The CUBL data were used to calculate means and medians oflibrary expenditures on materials and wages, as well as ratios thatreveal the relative nature of these expenditures (e.g., ratio of serialsbudget to total materials budget). The data were analyzed in the sum-mer of 1999.Second, the business library Web sites were analyzed, and the de-

gree of similarity in their content was assessed. Furthermore, the linksfrom the business school Web sites to the libraries were identified. TheWeb site analysis was conducted during the latter part of the springsemester 1999.Third, a written survey was mailed to the directors of the 20 li-

braries in September 1999. The survey focused on library funding andoversight, user education, and reference service. Each survey wascustomized for the specific library and included statistics from theCUBL study. The survey results were intended to augment, not dupli-cate the CUBL data. Prior to administering the survey, a small pre-testwas conducted. Donald Schnedeker, director of the Cornell JohnsonSchool of Management Library, sent an e-mail message to the partici-pating library directors to express his support for the study and toemphasize that the data requested were not duplicative of the CUBLdata. The survey was administered via electronic mail and included ane-mail cover letter describing the survey with the questionnaire in-cluded as an attachment. The respondents were invited to respond byelectronic mail, fax, or mail. Sixteen surveys were returned for a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


response rate of 80%; nine questionnaires were received by e-mail, sixby fax, and one by regular mail.All results from the three phases of research are presented in aggre-

gate to maintain confidentiality. The small sample precludes the use ofstatistical tests. A larger sample was not considered necessary giventhe purpose of the study.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Resources

Expenditures on Resources

As might be expected, the budgets at the business school librariesvary greatly. The total library budgets reported in the CUBL data (n =20) range from $339,140 to $6,073,595. Ten of the libraries spendmore of the total budget on materials, and nine of the libraries spendmore on staff. Even so, both the mean and median expenditures onwages exceed the mean and median expenditures on materials. Thefaculty per capita expenditure, calculated on the basis of total ex-penses and total number of instructional faculty, ranged from$4,069.00 to $55,721.00, with a mean faculty per capita expenditureof $16,871.00. Table 1 summarizes the reconfigured CUBL budgetdata discussed in this section. As can be seen in the table, there is awide variance between the mean and the median in most categories.The minimum and maximum expenditures reported for each categoryhelp explain the variance.Despite the wide range in budgets, there are similarities in the way

budgets are allocated to different expense categories. All but onelibrary spent more of the materials budget on serials than on mono-graphs. The median amount spent on serials ($234,879) was five timesgreater than the median amount spent on monographs ($44,325).In four libraries, reported expenditures on electronic resources ex-

ceeded the budget for serials. The budget data regarding electronicresources must be considered with caution. An examination of theCUBL data seems to indicate that some libraries do not differentiatebetween print and electronic data since four of the libraries in thesample did not report numbers for the category of electronic resources.Due to the lack of complete data in this category, it is difficult to drawconclusions. However, it is interesting to note that four of the 16

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


TABLE 1. Total Expenditures and Expenditures on Wages and Materials

Total Total Total Monographs Serials Electronic1Budget Wages Material (n = 20) (n = 20) (n = 16)(n = 19) (n = 19) (n = 20)

Expenditure 754,307 379,281 421,389 44,325 234,879 126,500Median

% of Total 50.3% 57.4.3% % of Total 10.5% 55.7% 36.6%Budget2 Materials2

Expenditure 1,336,279 881,162 617,197 73,752 265,650 168,101Mean

% of Total 65.9% 47.3% % of Total 11.9% 43.0% 33.7%Budget2 Materials2

Maximum Expenditure 6,073,595 5,800,953 2,456,742 366,849 544,200 714,748Value


Minimum Expenditure 339,140 199,370 148,084 14,413 68,252 55,270Value


Source: CUBL Data 1997/98.1Expenditures for electronic resources are calculated as the money spent on computer files owned by the library as well as access to electronic databases includedin the miscellaneous category.2Percentages are calculated for complete cases only. Percentages will not add up to 100%.

schools that reported electronic resources expenditures spent more onelectronic than print resources. For the 16 schools, expenditures onelectronic resources range from $55,270 to $714,748, with a medianexpenditure of $126,500.

Commercial Databases

The CUBL data includes a detailed table of commercial data-bases available at the reporting libraries. The history of this sectionof the CUBL statistics is explained in a report by Schnedeker(Schnedeker, 1999). The 1997/1998 list of databases contains 123commercially available electronic information resources, which isindicative of the wide array of electronic resources of interest tobusiness researchers. Of the total number of electronic resources onthe list, 24 databases are available at more than 50% of the librariesin the sample. These databases are listed in Table 2. Only onedatabase, ABI Inform, was available at all 20 libraries in the study.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


It is interesting to note that not all of the bibliographic and full-textdatabases subscribed to by the libraries focus on business literature;15 of the 20 schools subscribe to PsycInfo and 15 subscribe toSocial Sciences Citation Index.The 24 databases included in Table 2 fall into four categories:

bibliographic databases, full-text databases, statistical/financial data-bases, and directory databases. Given that each of the databases isavailable at a majority of the 20 libraries, one could argue that this listrepresents a core collection of databases for academic business li-

TABLE 2. Databases Provided by More than 50% of the Libraries of 20 TopBusiness Schools

Database Libraries Providing% (#)n = 20

ABI Inform 100% (20)

Nexis Academic Universe 95% (19)

Stat USA 95% (19)

EconLit 85% (17)

D/SEC Compact D 80% (16)

Investext 80% (16)

Worldscope (D/Global) 80% (16)

Data Stream 75% (15)

PsycInfo 75% (15)

Social Sciences Citation Index 75% (15)

Bloomberg 70% (14)

National Trade Data Bank 70% (14)

PAIS International 70% (14)

American Business Directory 65% (13)

Business and Industry 65% (13)

CRSP 65% (13)

Dow Jones News Retrieval 65% (13)

Proquest Direct 65% (13)

Dow Jones Interactive 60% (12)

Dialog Information 55% (11)

Global Access 55% (11)

LaserD 55% (11)

Uncover 55% (11)

Wall Street Journal 55% (11)

Source: CUBL data 1997/98.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


braries. It is also clear that academic business libraries continue tooffer access to a wide range of commercial databases, suggesting thatcommercial databases are supplemented by free information availableon the World Wide Web and not replaced by it.

Library Web Sites

Library Web sites can be considered to be both a resource and aservice. For this discussion, they are included in the resource section.All the libraries in the sample have created Web sites to provideinformation to their patrons, but the sites vary a great deal in terms ofdepth and scope. The authors visited these sites during the end of thespring semester 1999, and analyzed their content. The content analysisrevealed nine key types of information appearing with varying degreesof frequency in the 20 library sites. Table 3 lists the nine content areasand the frequency of their occurrence.Nearly all the libraries offer general information about the library

and links to subscription databases and business-oriented Web sites.About half the libraries offer annotated bibliographies of sources ontopics such as company or industry research. Finally, a minority oflibraries offer course-specific bibliographies, research strategies anddiscussions of business terminology, information about user educationprograms, career and job search information, and database or Websearch guides. These content elements are discussed in detail in thefollowing sections.Library information such as hours, staff, departments, floor plans,

policies. All 20 libraries include at least some information about thelibrary in their Web sites although there is considerable variation in theextent and scope. Some merely offer campus location and hours, whileothers provide complete staff directories with contact information,library use and circulation policies, and library floor plans. Becausethe Web is frequently considered a good resource for directory infor-mation of this kind, it is not surprising to find it in all 20 sites.Links to subscription databases and Web sites for business re-

search. All library Web sites except one provide links to subscriptiondatabases, and all but three provide links to other Web sites appropri-ate for business research. Among these libraries, there is considerablevariation in the ways the links are organized and presented.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


S Nine libraries present subscription databases and Web sites intwo separate lists. In most cases, the lists of databases are pre-sented in alphabetical order (seven out of nine), and annotatedwith descriptions of the databases (all nine). Only two librariesprovide database links in both an alphabetical and a classified ar-rangement. In contrast, eight of the nine libraries present theirlists of Web sites in classified rather than alphabetical order. Sixof the nine libraries annotate their lists of Web sites.

S Eight libraries offer links to both databases and Web sites, but donot present the links in two discrete lists. They either integrate thetwo types of links in an alphabetical and/or classified list, or theyoffer a mixed model, with databases listed once alphabetically, andlisted again in a classified arrangement that includes Web sites.

S Two libraries provide only a list of subscription databases and nolist of Web sites. One of these presents its database links in classi-fied order and the other presents its links in both alphabetical andclassified order. Both libraries include annotations.

S Only one library provides no links to databases or Web sites.

Subject-oriented bibliographies. About half (11) of the librariespost subject-oriented bibliographies of resources on their Web sites,and all of these include at least some degree of annotation. Typicalsubjects include company research, industry research, statistics, and

TABLE 3. Content Elements of Business Library Web Sites

Type of Information Number of LibraryWeb Sitesn = 20

Library information such as hours, staff, departments, floor plans, policies 20

Links to subscription databases for business research 19

Links to Web sites for business research 17

Annotated, subject-oriented bibliographies 11

Information about user education program 8

Research strategies or other educational content 7

Course-oriented bibliographies 6

Career or job search information 6

Database or Web search guides 6

Source: Web site analysis.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


international business; typical resources include print works, data-bases, and Web sites.Information about user education. Eight libraries provide informa-

tion about their user education program; seven of these include aschedule of library instruction classes and seven include instructionson how to schedule a class.Research strategies or other educational content. In addition to

providing lists of resources, seven library Web sites make some at-tempt to offer educational content in their Web sites. Examples includesuggested search statements for use with various databases, explana-tions about the difference between public and private companies, anddefinitions of business terms such as ‘‘beta coefficient.’’Course-oriented bibliographies. Six libraries post course-oriented

bibliographies on their Web sites. These are lists of print and electron-ic resources that will be helpful to students enrolled in a particularclass or completing a particular research assignment. Only half ofthese libraries annotate their course-oriented bibliographies.Career or job search information. Six library Web sites include a

link to career or job search information such as company directories,job search advice, or tips for researching a company.Database or Web search guides. Six libraries include guides to

searching databases or the World Wide Web. These guides includesuch content as preparing a search statement and using truncation andBoolean operators.

Services

Scope and Nature of User Education

Bibliographic instruction has always been an important service inacademic business libraries and in academic libraries in general, andpresently is receiving a great deal of attention in the literature with theincrease in end-user searching. Over the years, the focus of this servicehas broadened from bibliographic instruction to user education andmost recently to information literacy (Stoffle, 1998). In addition toworking with individual students at the reference desk and in sched-uled consultations, all of the libraries responding to the survey offeruser education classes.In developing these programs, libraries must make decisions about

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


whether classes are most effective when they focus on specific re-sources (such as training students to search Lexis-Nexis) or on specif-ic topics (such as teaching students how to research a company orindustry). Information provided in the survey by the 14 businessschool libraries that track their user education sessions indicates aclear preference for the latter. Ten of the 14 libraries offer a majority oftopic-oriented classes, and only two hold more resource-orientedclasses. Two libraries offer an equal number.Classes offered in business school libraries may be initiated and

scheduled by the librarians who have observed a need among stu-dents, or by teaching faculty who want students enrolled in theircourses to have library instruction related to a particular researchassignment. Data on this factor are fairly evenly divided. Six offermostly library-initiated classes, seven offer mostly classes initiatedby the teaching faculty, and one offers an equal number of each kind.The fact that many classes are initiated and scheduled by librariansprobably reflects the nature of a specialized library, where librarianshave a depth of subject expertise and serve a relatively homogeneouspatron population. In this setting, librarians have the opportunity toidentify class topics that would be helpful to a large number ofstudents (see Table 4).The availability of the World Wide Web and interactive technolo-

gy offers libraries the possibility of offering user education online.All of the libraries in the study maintain Web sites, and many ofthem have posted research guides and pathfinders on these Websites. The development of truly interactive, online tutorials is lessprevalent, however. Of the 16 libraries responding to the survey,five indicated they offer such tutorials, and four of those plan toprovide additional tutorials in the next year. Six libraries do notoffer any online tutorials, but plan to provide one or more in thenext year. Five libraries do not offer online tutorials and have nodefinite plans to develop any in the next year. Despite these initialforays into the use of technology for teaching, it is clear that librari-ans still see value in their classroom instruction programs. Of the10 libraries that plan to add online tutorials in the next year, onlyone indicated that it expected these to replace and not supplementin-person instruction.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


TABLE 4. Type of User Education Classes Held

Type of Class Average Percent of TotalClasses Held

n = 14

Topic-oriented classes, 36%initiated and scheduled by the teaching faculty

Source-oriented classes, 26%initiated and scheduled by the library

Topic-oriented classes, 25%initiated and scheduled by the library

Source-oriented classes, 13%initiated and scheduled by the teaching faculty

Source: Survey.

Reference Services

Advances in technology and the availability of online resourceshave led some to predict decreased demand for traditional referencedesk service and an increase in the use of alternative reference deliv-ery modes (Brandt et al., 1996). All 16 libraries responding to thesurvey currently staff a reference desk and provided professional ser-vice for an average of 46.25 hours per week during the 1997/98academic year. When asked about their plans for next year, 75% ofthese libraries said they expect to staff the desk with professionals foreither the same or a greater number of hours. Over a longer planninghorizon, however, their vision changes. Five years from now, only53% expect to staff their desks for the same or greater number ofhours. Almost half (47%) expect the desk will be staffed for fewerhours five years from now.One alternative reference delivery mode is e-mail reference,

through which patrons submit their questions and receive answers andadvice from librarians via electronic mail. This service is widely usedby the libraries in the study. An analysis of library Web sites andresponses to surveys indicate that at least 17 of the 20 libraries (85%)offer e-mail reference, with 1 additional library indicating plans toimplement the service. Most libraries did not have statistics to reporton the use of e-mail reference, but of the five that did, four showedsubstantial increases over the last two academic years.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


Organizational Structure

In this study, CUBL data were combined with survey data to deter-mine the following for each library: (a) the reporting structure, (b) thephysical location of the library, (c) whether it is exclusively a businesslibrary, and (d) the source of funding for the library. If a patternemerged, this might provide insight into successful organizationalstructures.

Reporting Structure

The majority of the libraries in this study report to the centrallibrary. Of 19 libraries for which data could be verified, 12 report tothe central library, five report to the business school, and two report toboth the central library and the business school.

Physical Location

Thirteen of the 20 libraries are located within the business schoolbuilding or complex, five are located in the central library or socialsciences library, and two are located in buildings adjacent to the busi-ness school. As would be expected, those libraries that report solely tothe business school are also physically located in the business school.

Focus of Library: Dedicated versus Shared

Fourteen of the 20 libraries are dedicated business libraries. Of thesix that are not, the most common associated discipline is economics.

Source of Funding

No clear pattern of funding emerged from this study except that nolibrary reported receiving any funds from university overhead. In themajority of cases, funds for the library budget come from severalsources. Nine of the 16 libraries responding to the survey indicatedthat most of their funding comes from the business school: five receive100% of their funding from the business school; four receive between57% and 99%. The central library is the primary source of funds forfour libraries (91%-98%); only one library receives 100% of its fund-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


ing from the central library. Seven libraries do not receive any fundingfrom the library budget and one receives only 1%. Other sources offunding, such as endowments, income, gifts and restricted funds pro-vide less than 20% of funding for five of the libraries in the sample.

Link from Business School Web Site

In addition to analyzing the contents of the library Web sites, theauthors checked for the presence and location of a link from thebusiness school Web site to the business school library Web site.According to the literature, business school students rely heavily onthe Web (Bell, 1998). Given this trend, it seems important that thelibrary’s Web site have a prominent position on the business schoolWeb site. The data collected regarding the location of the library linkon the business school Web sites represents a snapshot in time insofaras the business school Web sites are being revised constantly. In fact,changes were found in the placement of the library link during thecourse of this study.All of the business schools do link to their libraries, but finding the

link is sometimes difficult. Only four of the 20 business schools have alink to the library on the home page itself. For 15 of the businessschools, the library Web site is available after two clicks. In thesecases, users must identify the correct category under which the librarylink is placed. The exact name of this category varied among the 20business schools with the most common category being a resources-related category. Other categories include: Services (including com-puter), General Information, Campus/Community, Facilities, and In-tranet. During the Web site analysis, the authors noted that a link tocareer centers is much more visible than the library link.Library Web usage statistics were not gathered for this study; it would

be interesting to investigate the relationship between the usage of thelibrary’s Web site and the location of the link on the business schoolhome page. Exploratory research at the University of Maryland revealeda low level of awareness of library resources among business schoolstudents where until recently, there was no link to the library Web site.

Summary of Organizational Structure

There are various organizational structures in place in academicsettings. This is an area in which institutional policies, politics andeconomic conditions may have influenced the development of the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


business library. No pattern emerges when the elements describedpreviously are combined. Rather, there are nine different models ofreporting structure, source of funding and physical location. Table 5summarizes these organizational structures.

CONCLUSION

Interestingly, the organizational structure of the 20 libraries in thestudy varies greatly. Some business library directors report to thecentral library, others report to the business school, and still othersreport to both. Some of the libraries are dedicated and others areshared with another school. Funding may come from the central li-brary budget or from the business school or both. The libraries may belocated in the business school, adjacent to the business school, or inthe central library.The business libraries of 20 top business schools have devised

services and resources that are similar in many ways in spite of the factthat the organizational underpinnings vary greatly. As should be the

TABLE 5. Organizational Structures in Academic Business Libraries

Organizational Structure: Reporting structure, funding, and Number ofphysical location Libraries

n = 16

Report to the business school; funded entirely by the business school; 5located in the business school.

Report to the central library; funded primarily by the business school 2with some funds from the library; located in the business school buildingor complex.

Report to the central library; funded primarily by the library (and 2additional other funds or minor contributions from the business school);located in the central library.

Report to the central library; funded at least 91% by the library; located 2in the business school building or complex.

Report to the central library; funded primarily by the business school 1with some funds from the library; located in the library.

Report to the central library; funded by both the library and the business 1school; located adjacent to the business school.

Report to the central library; funded at least 91% by the library; located 1in the library.

Report to both the business school and the central library; funded by both 1the central library and the business school; located in their own building.

Report to both the business school and the central library; funded 1primarily by the business school with additional other income; located inthe central library.

Sources: CUBL data 1997/98, survey results, and data gathered from Web sites.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


case, it seems that user needs are the driving force in the delivery ofinformation services and resources. Variations in the level of servicesprovided and in the resources made available may be due to budgetaryconstraints. However, the libraries in this study seem to be headed inthe same direction.A reconfiguration of CUBL data together with data gathered from

an analysis of library Web sites and a survey are indicative of thefollowing trends:

S The trend to develop Web sites that offer access to a variety ofservices and resources is now well established.

S Also well established is the offering by libraries of a variety ofcommercial online databases, normally made accessible throughtheir Web sites.

S A clear trend is the growing reliance by libraries on e-mail refer-ence service.

S There seems to be a preference for user education sessions thatfocus on topics over resource-specific sessions.

S It appears that interactive tutorials may grow in number but willremain as supplements to and not as replacements for classroominstruction.

S Reference desk hours are expected to remain stable in the shortterm, but will likely begin to decrease five years from now.

S There is at least a tendency for libraries to spend more of theirmaterials budget on serials than on monographs.

Awareness of these trends may be useful in service development,resource allocation, and communication with upper management. Thebudget analysis shows that median expenditures on wages and materi-als are almost equal, indicating that both staff and resources are essen-tial to these libraries. The survey data suggest that demand for in-per-son reference remains strong, although many library directors in thissample predict a long-term decrease in staff hours at the referencedesk. At the same time, libraries that track e-mail reference are observ-ing increased demand for that service, suggesting a shift of somereference interactions from in-person to remote and electronic. Mostlibraries in this study offer extensive end-user search services andprovide access to subscription databases through their Web sites. Yet itis clear that end-user searching does not mean the end of mediatedreference services or user education. Rather, library directors ex-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


pressed a continued need for in-person library instruction, and theyplan to spend more time developing online help and tutorials. In theface of technological change, the knowledge, skills and services ofbusiness school librarians remain vital.Funding for materials and resources remains critical, too. Although

most libraries have included links to other useful sites on their WorldWide Web pages, they still find it necessary to offer a wide array ofsubscription databases at significant cost. It appears the core databasesidentified, or other similar products, are essential to business schoolcollections. Furthermore, the budgetary emphasis on serial collectionsargues that the journal is still a necessary component of a businessschool library collection. The emergence of new technology will re-quire business school libraries to adjust their practices. However, thetrends identified in this study make clear the continued need for fund-ing to support library services, staff, and resources.

REFERENCES

Bell, S. J. (1998). Weaning them from the Web: Teaching online to the MBA Internetgeneration. Database, 21(3), 67+.

Brandt, K.A., Campbell, J.M. & Bryant, W.F. (1996). Reflections on reference ser-vices. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(3):210-216.

Reingold, J. (1998). The best B-Schools. Business Week, 87-92.Schnedeker, D. (1997). Academic business library statistics. Journal of Business &

Finance Librarianship, 2(3), 51-67.Schnedeker, D. (1998). Academic Business Library Statistics, 1995/96 Update. Jour-

nal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 3 (3), 43-57.Schnedeker, D. (1999). Academic Business Library Statistics--Database Access.

Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 4(2), 49-66.Schools of business, the top schools. (1999). U.S. News and World Report, 126, 86.Stoffle, C. J. (1998). Literary 101 for the digital age. American Libraries, 29(11),

46-48.Ternberg, M. (1999). Trends in U.S. Academic Libraries. Special Libraries Associa-

tion, Business & Finance Division, Bulletin, (111), 27-34.

SUBMITTED: 01/07/00REVISION SUBMITTED: 03/21/00

ACCEPTED: 05/15/00

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4


APPENDIX A. Schools Included in the Sample

Columbia University

Cornell University

Dartmouth College

Duke University

Emory University

Harvard University

Indiana University

Purdue University

Stanford University

University of California, Los Angeles

University of California, Berkeley

University of Michigan

University of Pennsylvania

University of Rochester

University of Southern California

University of Virginia

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Vanderbilt University

Yale University

Note: All schools were included in phases one and two of the research.Eighty percent of the schools responded to the third phase survey.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

6:46

08

Oct

ober

201

4

current practices and trends in 20 top business school libraries

Documents