Depository Libraries and Public Services

Ridley Kessler*

The Wright State University policy directive on “Customer Service” is a forward-thinking idea that recognizes and tries to define the age-old truism that the patron comes first. This

“commitment” covers the entire library and includes library areas that do not normally come under the headings of public service groups like collection development, cataloging, and reshelving. It is short, to the point, and easy to understand. It appears to have been cre- ated with the library-using public in mind and avoids a lot of library/techno mumbo jumbo.

At first reading it appears to be a simplistic document that merely states the very obvious. However, that is only on the surface because it is really attempting to identify and codify

the long-standing library mythology concerning public service, that is, that libraries know what services patrons want and are already providing them. This document is Wright States’ attempt to spell out and put into library policy the service standards that the library

can be held accountable for by its clientele. Wright States’ endeavor offers a real challenge for the depository library community who, as a group, has long maintained that they are the protectors and defenders of the public’s right to know. In effect, depository librarians strongly believe, rightly or wrongly, that they offer the ultimate in public services and that they are, as someone in the distant past said, “a demand driven and service oriented orga- nization.“’ Depository librarians have long held that their services are “value added” and that their chief contribution to government information is dealing directly with the public

to make sure that patrons get the information that they need for whatever purpose they want to use it.

However, the ultimate question is, what kind of public services do depository libraries offer and how well do they perform them? Even more important, do documents librarians even know what the public wants and expects from depository libraries? The Wright State University “manifesto” offers the depository community a good model to follow in helping

to set up service standards or guidelines that patrons should expect when they enter federal

* Direct all correspondence to: Ridley Kessler, Regional Documents Librarian/Assistant, Head of Reference,

CB# 3912, Davis Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514-8890 <KESSLER.DAVIS@MHS.UNC.EDU>.

Government Information Quarterly, Volume 15, Number 1, pages 93-96. Copyright 0 1998 by JAI Press Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. ISSN: 0740-624X

94 GOVERNMENT INFARCTION QUARTERLY Vol. 75iNo. 111998

depository libraries. Depositories already have many guidelines and criteria describing and

defining what the Government Printing Office expects from them for the privilege of re-

ceiving free government information. The various manuals, guidehnes, and instructions

spell out what depositories can collect, how they should organize it, how they can discard it, what the collections relationship should be with the other materials the library owns, and

so forth. However, very little space is devoted to public services outside of the two major commandments of documents profession which are, “Thou shalt offer access for all per-

sons desiring government information,” and “Thou shalt not charge for this service.“’ None of the guidelines define specific and basic customer services. Certainly none at-

tempt to define basic services from the patrons’ point of view. This is an area that docu-

ments librarians as a profession should have dealt with many years ago--in fact, guidelines for customer service should have been at the very top of the list. For whatever reason, de-

pository librarians have either not thought of setting standards for service or have felt like

they were doing it well enongh~specially for the paper and fiche materials that they have traditionally held. However, the advent of government info~ation in electronic formats

has added a new dimension to service issues mainly because these new formats were unfa- miliar to librarians. Most depositories are just now becoming fully aware of the problems

and benefits of offering government information in varied formats, It has taken several years for the system to come to terms with equipment needs and to understand the full im-

pact that government information in electronic formats will have on documents collections and especially services; in fact, depository librarians are still not sure what these service is-

sues are and are still debating and discussing them. However, they do realize that their ser-

vices are affected (a step in the right direction) and that they are going to have to offer services that have not been offered before. Depository librarians are certainly worried

about whether or not they will be competent and able to meet the service needs of patrons who want to use electronic services. The recent literature is full of articles about electronic

information and its impact on depository libraries and the service implications; for in-

stance, see Stephanie Ford’s article, “Public Access to Electronic Federal Depository In-

formation in Regional Depository Libraries.“3 Also indicative of these discussions are two entire issues of the J~ur~ul of Government

Information, edited by Susan Tulis and Debora Cheney, devoted to access to government information.4 The difficulties of downloading and printing large files; the complications

that government produced CD-ROMs cause because of their complicated documentation and the constant growth needed in computational power to run them; and the problems of

dealing with software and licensing agreements in order to provide service have brought

the profession to the realization that there needs to be some basic service standard that the public can expect from any depository library they may want to use. These service issues were an important part of the Fall 1996 Depository Library Council in Salt Lake City where this author led two focus group sessions dealing specifically with service issues.

The results of these discussions led to “Service Issues/ Guidelines for Government Infor- mation in the Electronic Environment and Depository Libraries,” a report presented to the Depository Library Council during the Spring 1997 meeting in Arlington, Virginia. Includ- ed in this report was a “Draft Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Govem-

ment Information in Electronic Formats.“’ This draft offers 11 guidelines dealing with

public services that should or could be offered by depository libraries to the general public

Depository Libraries and Services 95

(see Appendix6). These guidelines are suggestions for future discussions at the Depository

Library Council and for discussion and reaction in the depository library community. The

report and the guidelines are discussed more fully in Dan Barkley’s article in this issue of

Government Information Quarterly. Jan Fryer, Chairperson of the Depository Library

Council, set up a service guidelines working group to carry on this work and report back to

Council during the Spring 1998 meeting. The Wright State “Commitment to Customer Ser-

vice” document should definitely be examined carefully by the Council Workgroup during

its deliberations as a possible model. The Hemon and Calvert article, “Library Customers: A Survey of Your Expectations,”

is also something that can help the Council Workgroup as it studies depository customer

service guidelines. This New Zealand survey is unique in that it bothers to ask the library-

using patrons what it is they want from the library. What a simple but clever idea! Librari-

ans as a rule, and this is true of the Wright State guidelines, tend to decide for themselves

what it is that they think patrons want. However, the New Zealand survey starts with the

cart behind the horse instead of in front of it. This survey is a good idea and a good starting

point for any library that sincerely wants to improve public services and to empower its li-

brary users. Service guidelines are definitely something that every depository library should be re-

quired to prepare to fit its local clientele and conditions. These types of guidelines are prob-

ably something that the depository library program should require from each depository

library just as a collection development plan is required. Depositories would be wise to in-

volve their users in such a plan and attempt to find out what their needs really are. It bears

repeating that patrons must be allowed and encouraged to inform the depository librarian

about what kind of help and instruction they need in order for them to make the most effec-

tive use of government information, particularly in the new electronic formats. Then the

depository libraries should draw up guidelines similar to the Wright State model which of-

fer a compromise between what the customers need and what the libraries are actually will-

ing or able to offer and support. It is time that the depository library program actually begin

to study and plan for customer services. We have been talking about it forever, let us do it.

Hooray for Wright State University: they have offered us a challenge and a pathway that

we cannot ignore!

APPENDIX: DRAFT DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PUBLIC SERVICE GUIDELINES

FOR GOVERNMENT INFORMATION IN ELECTRONIC FORMATS

1. Make computer terminals available for general public. 2. Make tangible electronic formats such as CD-ROMs and floppies available to the

public in a timely manner. A. For non-supported tangible electronic products make available within 24

hours notice. 3. Make Internet available for general public:

A. WWW access B. FTP. telnet

96 GOVERNMENT INFORMATION QUARTERLY Vol. IS/No. l/l998

4. Where possible depositories should mount homepages (or share with or use home- pages from other depositories in state or from Regional) linked to prominent or useful sites for general public. Make fax service available to general public with reasonable limits on number of pages. Maintain gove~ment info~ation E-Mail reference address for patrons. Allow reasonable amount printing-may limit number of pages and/or charge rea- sonable amount per page (should he kept as low as possible). Allow downloading to floppies. A. Provide hard disk space on public access computers for this purpose and file

compression and splitting software. 3. Provide FI’P site where possible for downloading purposes and for short-term

storage of files for patrons. 9.

10.

11.

Allow users to E-Mail government information to themselves. Provide adequate help guides and documentation of tangible electronic products and the Internet for the public. If depository maintains a homepage then it should offer help guides from the page. Offer training in CD-ROMs Internet resources for the public in order for them to access government information.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. “Public Printer Turns His Agency Around,” Adminisfmtive Notes. 9 (8) (May, 1988): 4-6.

2. L&rap Programs Service, Federal Depositop Librq Manual, 2nd ed. (Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office, 1993) pp. 170- 17 1.

3. Stephanie Ford, “Public Access to Electronic Federal Depository Information in Regina1 Depository Librar-

ies,” Government Informution Quarterly, 14 (1997): 51-63.

4. Debora Cheney & Susan Tulis, guest eds., “Special Issue Challenges to U. S. Government Information

Access (Entire Issues of Part t and 2): Jolournaf of Gove~~~~~f ~~for~otio~. 23 (3 and 4) (1996).

5. Dan Barkley & Ridley R. Kessler, Jr., ‘XI. S. Government Electronic Info~ation Service Guidelines,” North

Carolina Libraries, 55 (3) (1997), in press.

6. To appear in a future issue of Administrative Notes.