international staff exchanges for academic libraries

International Staff Exchanges for Academic Libraries

by Tony Kidd and Karen Roughton

Internationalization is a major concern for many universities,

and library faculty exchanges have increased in importance for the participants and their academic communities. This

article reports on a survey of academic library directors

and exchange participants from both the United

Kingdom/Ireland and the United States/Canada.

Tony Kidd is at the

Glasgow University Library, Hi//head Street,

Glasgow C72 8QE, Scotland.

Karen Roughton is at the

Parks Library, lowa State University,

Ames, Iowa 5007 7.

U niversity communities play a key role in educating students to assume roles in global communi-

ties. Curriculum changes, administrative priorities, and faculty development are key issues in improving multicultural education. Many institutions have tradi- tionally supported study and work-abroad opportunities for students, and there is an increasing awareness that providing similar opportunities for faculty enhances educational and research programs.

Reflecting this broader environment, library faculty exchanges have become, if not common, at least more widespread over the last 15 years. There have, however, been few attempts to assess what types of exchange work best, and whether the effort involved in setting up exchanges is worthwhile. Over the past decade, nearly 50 articles have described librarians’ experiences working abroad on international exchange.’ Most of them are short descriptions of the staff member’s time abroad; they offer a mixture of personal and professional observations. Some articles provide more detail about racti- cal arrangements for exchanges. ? The American Library Association’s Intema- tional Relations Committee/International Relations Round Table has published a useful guide for Americans working abroad (on exchange, or otherwise),3 and the Library Association’s International and Comparative Librarianship Group is preparing a similar publication from the perspective of British librarians.4

During 1992, we distributed a survey on library international exchanges to 109 library directors-those in all universities in the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland, including the larger University of London colleges that are members of the Standing Conference of National and University Libraries (SCONUL). In North America, we distributed surveys to the 120 members of the Association of Research Libraries

(ARL). The survey consisted of two sepa- rate questionnaires, one to be completed by the Library Director, and the other to be completed by staff who had been on exchange abroad. Some 60 Directors in the UK and Ireland (55%), and 60 in North America (50%), responded. In addition, 27 library staff members from Britain and Ireland, and 13 from North America, pro- vided information on their exchanges.

“There have, however, been few attempts to assess what types of exchange work best,

and whether the effort

involved in setting up exchanges is worthwhile.”

Library Exchange Staff According to Sager, who wrote on the

international exchange of library staff

Foreign exchange presents a number of challenges. It is really remarkable for a person to consider leaving a comfortable spot and a secure position to travel thou- sands of miles to a foreign country. It takes a lot of commitment and courage. One must possess more than a little faith that a colleague in a foreign country will be able to adjust to conditions in this nation, and must have equal faith regarding one’s own adjustment to the circumstances that may be experienced overseas.5

Destination and Length of Exchange. Most exchanges took place between English-speaking countries. For British/ Irish staff members, the United States was the most common destination. Exchange staff traveled to a wide variety of institutions, ranging from the largest universities to community colleges in 10 different states. Seven exchanges were with staff

November 1994 295

from Australian university libraries. Three staff visited Germany on exchange, and there was one exchange each to Canada, New Zealand, and Sweden. U.S./Canadian staff members mainly traveled to Austra- lia, Scotland, England, Ireland, or New Zealand. The American staff members who exchanged in non-English speaking countries nearly always were participating in a formal exchange program between the home and host institutions.

Language is obviously a very important consideration for most staff members participating in an exchange program and many participants opt to experience the less overwhelming differences in culture, society, and economic conditions among the United States, UK, Ireland, and the “Old Commonwealth.” Only four UK/ Irish exchanges were to continental Europe. One librarian who visited Ger- many commented that German librarians are very interested in working in the UK, but that it is difficult to find British librarians who want to work temporarily in Europe.

British/Irish librarians’ exchanges lasted longer, on average, than American/ Canadian exchanges. The four one-month exchanges from Britain (two to Germany, one to Sweden, and one to New Zealand) were not simultaneous. These exchanges were more in the nature of study visits, and not long enough to allow the exchange participant to carry out a job in the other library. All other exchanges were approxi- mately simultaneous. Five exchanges lasted 3-5 months, six from 6-8 months, five for 9- 11 months, and seven for a year.

Most North American exchanges lasted between three and six months, with three months the shortest exchange period reported. Exchanges through established university programs were less likely to be simultaneous. Participants were frequently “consultants,” or “observers,” working on one-time tasks rather than performing a specific job for the duration of their stays.

Personal Characteristics. On both sides of the Atlantic, most exchange partners were in their 30s suggesting that lower to middle management post holders are most likely to take advantage of, or be offered, the exchange opportunity. This is also an age when many people have family responsibilities and is perhaps one reason why relatively few “eligible” staff are interested in an exchange.

Exchange Arrangements. A wide variety of arrangements was reported. Few exchanges, especially from Britain, took

place under the auspices of official university programs. Most originated from personal contact, although various organ- izations, for example, LIBEX, the Bureau of International Exchange based at the Col- lege of Librarianship, Aberystwyth, Wales;6 Bibliothekarische Auslandsstelle, Germany, and the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL), facili- tated some exchanges. One respondent began negotiations via a note at the bottom of an interlibrary loan request form.

“Several exchanges occurred after only six months of

negotiations, but many took over a year to materialize.”

Considerable initiative and persever- ance are needed to arrange an exchange, something that was also obvious when respondents were asked how long it took from first contact to the beginning of the exchange. Several exchanges occurred after only six months of negotiations, but many took over a year to materialize. Four years was the record reported in the survey. Participation in a university exchange program is no guarantee of speed: most of these exchanges took over a year to reach fruition.

Respondents were asked about financial exchanges. In most cases, exchange partners retained their full salary from their home institution. One U.S. and three UK exchange participants swapped sala- ries and also posts. Salary retention is no doubt easier to handle administratively; it does not cause problems over pension rights, etc. Exchange rate variability can produce uncertainty and lead to substan- tial windfall “profits” or “losses” for staff on exchanges. Financial problems can be eased if accommodation, in particular, is exchanged, and most exchange participants were able to arrange this.

Position Title and Academic Rank. Librarians from every walk of professional life on both sides of the Atlantic participated in exchanges: subject special- ists (covering everything from mathemat- ics to law and English literature), heads of interlibrary loan, cataloging and circula- tion departments, an associate director, technical services librarians specializing in serials and monographs cataloging and acquisitions, documents librarians, systems librarians, and bibliographic instruc- tion librarians.

Most British/Irish staff members were on Assistant Librarian grades, but there were also four on the higher Sub-Librarian grade, together with three Library Assis- tants. In North America, there was even representation at the assistant through full professor level, with only one instructor returning a questionnaire.

Librarians exchanging to a non-English speaking institution were likelier to have less specific duties during their exchange, acting as consultants and observers regardless of the time-span of the exchange. Staff going to English-speaking countries, but on exchanges of six months or shorter, were also likely to be assigned a short-term project outside their area of expertise. It is understandable that there might be reluctance on the part of the host institution to provide in-depth training, or invest too much responsibility, in staff working in their library for a short period of time. On the other hand, staff in this situation were most vocal in their complaints that they were underutilized during their exchange. Typical comments were that it was “difficult to feel useful when you have no “real” duties” and “I did not have the interactions with host institution staff that I would have appreciated.”

In only two North American cases did an exact exchange of duties between partners take place, although several other participants spent some time in their areas of expertise, or within the same library division as at their home institution. Brit- ish and Irish librarians, on average, engaged in longer exchanges, and did on the whole carry out the same type of work abroad as at home, although about five had a different experience, for example, working in serials rather than systems, or reference rather than acquisitions.

Professional Benefits for Staff. Most staff members found their exchange pro- fessionally satisfying. It seems that satisfaction is related to the closeness of the relationship between an individual’s assignment at home and his/her assignment abroad. The negative comments, although in a minority, were illuminating: “the library is not as far advanced in use of com- puters as one I work in normally,” “the Uni- versity Librarian made no effort to involve me in policy or administration,” “I felt underemployed and frustrated for some of the time,” “the library did not really seem prepared for me coming: more pre- exchange communication would have helped,” and “Director [of host institution] was no help at all.” (Only the last of these remarks, incidentally, is from a North

296 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

American librarian). The negative comments underline the need for careful preparation before an exchange to ensure that expectations are met on both sides, because this is an activity in which people have invested a great deal of time, money, and personal energy.

Personal Benefits for Staff. There was almost unanimous personal satisfaction from the exchange experience. Broad- ening one’s outlook and experiencing another society in depth were cited as frequent personal benefits. Many mentioned the hospitality received, and the lifelong friends they had made. An interesting (American) comment was “I feel I am per- ceived differently by my colleagues since undertaking this adventure.”

Promotion Prospects. There was little illusion that an exchange had improved promotion prospects within the home library. More than half thought that their prospects were “definitely not” or “probably not” improved. No one in North Amer- ica suggested a “definite” improvement, although four from UK/Ireland were will- ing to suggest this. One American felt that exchanges were actually held against the participant because the “campus faculty council felt that exchanges were one long vacation.” It was unclear how many considered that they had achieved internal promotion through their exchange, but it appeared to be the case for only one or two staff members. There was more optimism on the prospects for promotion elsewhere. This time, more than half thought their prospects were improved.

Motivation, Performance, and Other Benefits. Most staff members experienced improved motivation as a result of their exchange. There is no sign here of staff becoming discontented on their return from abroad, something that worried a few library directors. Some North American librarians (31%), decided to make a lateral move within their home institutions, perhaps, in part, as a result of their broadened outlooks. Similarly, most felt that their work performance had improved.

Respondents were asked to list any specific contributions they felt they had made as a result of the exchange. Two stated flat out: “None. I was sent to contribute there.” More typical responses mentioned words and concepts such as attitudes, confidence, service-orientation, communications, and advocacy. Most staff felt they were able to encourage specific changes at home.

Disadvantages and Drawbacks of Exchanges. Most staff members noted

some problems, although very few felt that the drawbacks outweighed the advantages. British/Irish librarians mentioned financial difficulties and a few others listed other “personal” problems, such as children’s education, damage to accommodation, and the missing of family events. Staff on short-term non-simultaneous exchanges from all geographic areas wrote about the workload awaiting them on their return. Staff on longer exchanges were likely to feel out of touch on return (although this did not usually last long), or they had missed important library developments (several mentioned the advantages of e-mail in encouraging communication during the exchange). A few could not help feeling guilty about the extra burden that had fallen on their colleagues while they had been away. Three British/Irish librarians were very con- scious of the contrast between resources available abroad and the straitened circumstances at home. Finally, two respondents used the phrase “itchy feet,” which could be considered as a disadvantage or the opposite, depending on whether it leads to frustration, or to a satisfying move within or away from the home library.

“Most staff members experienced improved motivation as a result

of their exchange.”

Other Comments. Both sets of respondents stressed two considerations. The first was the need for communication, institutional support, and advance preparation. There has to be a clear statement of what the participant’s duties would be for the exchange to be useful and fulfilling. This was less of a problem where there was a direct exchange of duties, but such neat arrangements were in the minority. Staff on short-term and/or indirect exchanges stated that “observer status was not conducive to any in-depth understanding,” and “I felt welcome, but underutilized.” Another point was that “exchanging libraries should be at roughly the same stage of development.”

The second consideration was the con- cept that “probably an exchange for a year would allow for more significant contributions at the host libraries.” Most participants felt that a longer exchange (especially to a non-English speaking country) gave a chance for a more valid

assessment of different practices and their underlying theoretical bases. A short exchange or study visit, on the other hand, where the complicating factors of learning the details of performing another person’s job do not necessarily arise, might often be enough to find out information on a particular topic.

Library Directors’ Experiences and Views In 1989, K.C. Harrison wrote about

exchanges:

For any such scheme to become perma- nent, the idealism has to come from both ends. The senior people at both the receiving and the dispatching libraries must be imbued with the true spirit of internationalism. They must be citizens of the world with a strong faith that what they are supporting is really worthwhile, and that both short-term and long-term good will come from it.’

Reasons for No Exchanges. Direc- tors where no exchanges have taken place were invited to give reasons, from a suggested list, why this was so. The most common reason given was that “no staff have been interested in exchange,” although several modified the questionnaire to “no staff have expressed interest in an exchange,” indicating an understanding that staff might be interested but not know how to proceed. The next two most cited reasons were also shared in both communities: “Staff shortages/pres- sure of work” and “administrative/financial arrangements have proved difficult.” Few directors reported that the “parent institution does not encourage exchanges,” while just two (both from North America) stated that “exchanges would not improve the effective working of the library.” Some directors mentioned a lack of appropriate exchanges, and various practical problems, including potential exchanges that had fallen through in the final stages.

There seems to be very little opposition to the principle of exchanges, at least from library directors who responded to this survey. There is, however, a recognition of potential practical problems, both for the individuals considering exchanges and for libraries having to cope with the extra work organizing exchanges, and doing without experienced staff away on exchange in a period of staff shortages. There may also be a communication gap between directors and staff, based on the recurring refrain “we would be happy to support exchanges if staff were interested.”

November 1994 297

Performance of Exchange Staff. Most library directors were satisfied with the performance of staff who came on exchange from abroad. In only one (Brit- ish) case was there any expression of reserve, with a note that the exchange part- ner had not been “properly selected [and was a] volunteer rather than the appropriate person for the post.” Most comments indicated admiration for the staff member from abroad, for example, the “visiting librarian adjusted to the new situation with ease, ” “very flexible, adaptable and outgo- ing.” Staff returning from abroad were, on the whole, viewed as positively as their partners and directors agreed that staff had been able to make specific and positive contributions as a result of their time on exchange.

Benefits of International Exchanges. When given an open-ended invitation to list the main benefits of international exchanges, American/Canadian and Brit- ish/Irish directors responded differently. The most frequent North American response suggested an improved image- locally, nationally, internationally for the library, and the strengthening of international contacts through establishment/ enhancement of materials exchange programs. No British or Irish directors mentioned image, an indication of the continuing underdeveloped nature of pub- lic relations in the British Isles. British Irish directors (22%) did mention closer links withoverseas institutions, but usually in fairly general terms, with only two or three mentioning acquisitions/exchange benefits.

British/Irish directors were most interested, on the other hand, in benefits for the staff member exchanging in terms of wider horizons or general career development. British/Irish directors also discussed benefits for the host library, from the returned exchange participant or the visi- tor from abroad. A recurring theme on both sides of the Atlantic was the remoti- vation of staff who had been in post for some time, echoing Sager’s analysis:

From my perspective as a library director, I have seen how individuals who have become stagnant in their work can be revitalized because of this enriching experience. Often these are perfectly sound, effective, and motivated people who have been in a job doing the same thing year after year. They may have become bored with their work and may be considering leaving. In many cases, an exchange restores their minds and spirits, encourages them to stay on with the institution. (After all, another

exchange opportunity may arise in the coming years!).*

Half of the North American respondents felt that the overseas library bene- fited more than they had. This was still considered an advantage: being able to point out to university administrators solid accomplishments which staff abroad made was important to several library directors. The North American directors’ general concern with image and international relations, as opposed to the British/Irish con- centration on benefits to individual members of staff and the internal work- ings of the library, was a striking survey finding.

Disadvantages and Drawbacks of Exchanges. The most common type of difficulty, cited by about half of the Brit- ish/Irish respondents to this question, cen- tered on resource problems, for example, “loss of short-term productivity,” “difficulties of arranging cover,” and “some areas of job may have to be farmed out or left undone.” Next in popularity was the administration of setting up an exchange in terms of time, paperwork, and general “hassle.” Twelve British/Irish directors were worried about possible difficulties with the person coming on exchange from overseas, for instance, “systematic evalua- tion of those coming not always possible” and “no guarantee that incoming member of staff will be competent to perform new tasks.” Ten directors mentioned training and familiarization as a problem. Other difficulties included personal problems for visitors, the cost of exchange, problems of discontented staff on return from exchange, difficulty of exchanges at senior level, and lack of understanding by staff remaining at home.

North American directors appeared less concerned, but time, in different categories, was a problem: time to set up and monitor the exchange, time to replace supervisory and/or technical responsibilities, the time during which organizational goals had to be suspended while a key staff member was gone, and time away for senior staff. Although North American directors were more positive than British/Irish directors about benefits to be derived from exchanges, and were certainly less inclined to enumerate disadvantages, a substantially lower proportion ofAmerican libraries had actually engaged in exchanges.

For the UK/Ireland, the authors exam- ined differences in emphasis between libraries with experience in exchanges and those without. Directors of libraries where exchanges had taken place were worried

about difficulties with the person coming on exchange (perhaps reflecting some particular experiences, despite the general satisfaction expressed in the survey), about resource problems and about administration. Resource problems particularly concerned libraries where no exchange had taken place, while administration and training were also major concerns. It may be that these loomed as potential problems to directors where no exchanges had taken place, while libraries with experience of exchanges take a more relaxed attitude. There were no comparable differences in emphasis when library directors considered the benefits to be derived from exchanges.

“A common perception of a library staff exchange is one in which the partners, under the guidance of a formal program,

swap jobs and living arrangements for a relatively long time period. In fact, this

type of exchange is frequently an exception, rather

than the rule.”

Summary A common perception of a library

staff exchange is one in which the partners, under the guidance of a formal program, swap jobs and living arrangements for a relatively long time period. In fact, this type of exchange is frequently an exception, rather than the rule. There were two significant areas of possible misconceptions occurring between directors and staff.

The most common reason given by library directors, when asked why no exchanges had taken place at their institution, was that “no staff have been interested.” Staff who had participated in exchanges, however, largely felt that it was their individual initiative and perse- verance that actualized the exchanges. If exchanges are deemed valuable to institutions and staff (and both directors and participating librarians felt they were), a mechanism to explore possibilities, for- malize channels of communication, define expectations and set goals, educate potential exchange partners, and arrange for them to share their gained knowledge and experiences upon their return, should be

298 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

built into a library’s staff development program.

The second “mismatch” in expectations concerns promotion, and many participants in international exchanges felt that their experience had not improved their promotion prospects, despite the fact that library directors seemed proud of exchanges and felt they garnered renown and respect (at least in the U.S./Canada). In 1987, Sager wrote that:

More opportunities for promotion may come as a result of a foreign exchange. I have seen individuals passed over for promotions because other applicants have a greater breadth of experience; they have known other methods, gained insight into other procedures and resources, and may have had more professional experience and more contacts in association work. Often this can make a difference when an administrator is choosing between individuals with the same degree of experience within an institution.’

Perhaps the initiative that carried exchange participants through the realiza-

tion of their exchanges must be continued upon their return, in the form of tangible accomplishments, for them to receive sat- isfactory recognition and advancement. Library administrations must use the extra resource-staff members returned from abroad, giving them encouragement and opportunity to use and pass on their newly gained knowledge and experience, ensur- ing that both the institution and the staff members realize the full benefit of the costly exchange process.

Notes and References 1. For example, see Terry Ann Mood, “An Exchange in England,” Reference Services Review 13 (Fall 1985): 9-12; Hal Tarr and Ivana Kotasek, “Exchange of librarians between the ‘City of Brotherly Love’ and the ‘Land down under’,” Community & Junior College Libraries 5 (1988): 7-22; Gillian Varley, “An English Art Librarian in Paris: A Report and Diary,” Art Libraries Journal 14 (1989): 9-15; and Jane Humphrey, “From Aldershot to the Antipodes: A Job Exchange in New Zealand,” Library Association Record 92 (December 1990): 923.

2. See David L. McChesney, “Trading Places: Planning an International Job Exchange,” College & Research Libraries News 50 (November 1989): 919-922; and Terry Hanson, “The Mechanics of International Job Exchanges,” Library Association Record 91 (April 1989): 216-220. 3. Linda E. Williamson, Going International: Librarians’ Preparation Guide for a Work Experience/Job Exchange Abroad (Chicago: American Library Association, 1988). 4. “LIBEX Annual Report 1992,” Focus on International and Comparative Librarianship 24 (May 1993): 36-38. 5. Donald J. Sager, “An Administrator’s Perspective on Foreign Exchange,” Law Library Journal 79 (Fall 1987): 722-726. 6. John Roe, ‘The International Exchange of Library Staff,” in Developments in International and Comparative Librarianship, 1976-1985, edited by Inese A. Smith (Birmingham: International and Comparative Librarianship Group of the Library Association, 1986) pp. 92-97. 7. K.C. Harrison, International Librarianship, (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1989) p. XV.

8. Sager, “An Administrator’s Perspective,” pp. 723-724. 9. Ibid., p. 723.

November 1994 299

international staff exchanges for academic libraries

Documents