I could be cited myself (from the web) as saying that it is the job of the libraries to put the nation’s literary culture to work in society. Literature and information can make a great deal of difference to people’s lives. Books are of value in most contexts of our lives – given how many and varied those contexts this is not an easy subject to quantify (we’re talking about understanding how a culture and civilisation grows and develops I guess at this point). However the evidence of the value of our literary ecosystem is to be found all around us and within all the contexts of our lives.

As the National Association for Literature Development (NALD) reminded us it is also not just writers, publishers, bookshops and libraries that maintain the literary ecosystem that we enjoy – “all those involved in the development of creative writing and reading”, (http://www.literaturedevelopment.co.uk ).

With regards the issue of this thread, behind the community library counter staff frequently and ritually bemoan that issues and footfall do not do justice to the community library and work they do. As phrased above a library is of value in more or less every context of our lives (though more important in some than others), it is not easy to pinpoint exactly the value of the library to a community given how varied and many the contexts are to our lives. Abstracting things out a library provides literature and information to people who want it (and libraries are charged with the duty since 1964 to develop their use as well), but measuring a library’s worth in more detail beyond issues of books and footfall in an attempt to value literature and information is not an easy task, and hence I think the status quo seems to settle at the point where administrators ask for the only practical thing they can ask for (library usage figures), while staff complain these do not represent the actuall value of the work they do, and while librarian academics research the value otherwise but not really making any progress in increasing our overall ability to view the entire forest (rather than individual trees).

Though having said that! Library staff do have the new government well-being index to factor in (ref. web link in prev. comment) – I’m sure at some point public libraries will hook into this — this may prove to actually be a workable level of abstraction for libraries to value themselves at beyond that of usage figures – measuring their contribution to the happiness of people isn’t too specific (i.e., more detail than anyone knows what to do with), however indicative of an active role (it would, e.g., factor in the person who only uses the library once in a while but when they do they find it of considerable value to them). The government is doing the necessary groundwork on what is not a straightforward subject, and so it should take only a minimum of effort for libraries at that point towards the ends of understanding the goings on and application.

On the subject of technology in libraries. Tim points out that if a library wants to make progress it puts the “books and journals that writers are writing and publishers are publishing onto their shelves.” Now that would be real progress.

However if I were to sketch out what Edward de Bono calls an ‘achieving network’, and talk about the broad concepts, specific means and actual detail of achieving this (and other ends), and while I acknowledge that libraries have little means to focus in on anything other than the bones of the library service at the moment, it is still necessary I think to cultivate a creative culture for the future (as the environment changes).

While technology is **not an end in itself**, it is certainly a **means**.

So by all means put technology in its place (a means to an end, of which there may be other means), but an organisation needs a creative culture, and towards that end is exploring all of the possibilities of new technologies – maybe a ritual that shouldn’t at least be discouraged.

Teamwork in the end I think, the ends clearly defined, but creatively working on the means. Have public libraries lacked a clear sense of direction and the ends and priorities? (If so why?)

Back on the subject of the means, in the past DVDs, Internet access, etc. have increased footfall, however can I suggest the following as this year’s agenda for reaching out to the public and actually getting people engaged in using the public library service:

– social media strategy (an increasingly preferred method of communication of the public, if in not fact becoming the norm)
– information literacy (particularly finding literature and information, though specific relevant domains also)
– cultural role (literary heritage)
– using staff time freed by technology for more outreach work (encorporating all of the above)
– R & D (the library is of value in every context of our lives – the libraries have by no means exhausted all the new possibilities presented for a more efficient and effective service in the technological and political age we live)
– e-books, getting people using these (demonstrating and coaching in ‘how to’, etc.), and working on the necessary legal framework for libraries (ref. comment to PLN 2 Jan 2012, E-book reading jumps, print book reading declines, http://www.publiclibrariesnews.com/2013/01/buckle-up-for-the-new-year.html#comment-5602 )

Gareth – there is nothing dead about living in the world of publishing. Librarians often talk about how they should be at the ‘cutting edge’ and the need to ‘make progress’ . The way that they can and should do that is not to keep adopting every new technology that comes along, but to put the books and journals that writers are writing and publishers are publishing onto their shelves.

It is not for librarians to keep on changing what they do – it is for them to support writers who do that all the time

A second recent quote from what will probably be the next government:

“Labour will review the purpose and value of all public spending if it wins the next general election”
Labour pledges ‘ruthless’ post-election spending review
28 September 2012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19750556

How would Tim Coates then propose the libraries justify the value of publically accessible literature and information to the next Labour government?

I have to admit I have frequently been on the receiving end of the same criticism from TC, but have also valued this particular criticism. His perspective I think is doubly of value in these times where libraries have long since burned all the fat off and are now consuming muscle for calories (effectively canabalising itself to survive). A message to focus on what is important – the core competence of the service, and not to waste energy on activities that can be had else where. I agree entirely with Tim Coates in this respect.

However, “but a library could never have the skills or resources to undertake that kind of community well being”, it seems to me that this is a valid impression that someone might have of the current state of the public libraries, and while my career in libraries only began in 2003, from what I can gather there was prior to the Thatcher era during the 60s and 70s a very rich culture of librarianship and public service (there was a great deal of research being undertaken at this point). So TC’s conclusion is not entirely correct (TC asserts “could never”). Also I would add that times have changed so much that if such a body of knowledge and rich a librarian culture were to build up again, it would be very different from that of 50 years ago – it would have to begin not entirely afresh, but from a starting point.

On a slightly more creative point, I note TC uses the phrase community “well being” here, this is a term the Office of National Statistics (ONS) use[1], and also I note the phrase Wikipedia uses in defining happiness (“mental or emotional state of well-being characterized by positive or pleasant emotions”[2]). The government at the moment is starting to ask departments to justify their funding not only in terms of the traditional measures of the society we live in (GDP, the deficit, trade balance, etc.), but also using a new well-being index. Library surveys to my knowledge do not currently base any of their questions on this – but will they in the future? (While not detracting from TC’s reminding of the distictive competence of the libraries, important in terms of overall policy.)
[1] http://neweconomics.org/blog/2011/07/26/sir-gus-and-the-well-being-revolution
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness

My conclusion – public libraries do need assertively and if necessary somewhat cruelly (it is what they are paid to do) reminding of their core competency. But also I would ask if Tim Coates’ approach is preventing the public libraries from making progress in seeming to be so rigidly retrospective. If libraries are to continue to maintain our nation’s literary tradition, then they do have to be a live living entity within the culture of the nation.

PLN reports the news and the news does not, generally, include a celebration of libraries at the moment. I hope it will for National Libraries Day (of which there is an advert on the right-hand side of the screen) although I have seen little sign as yet.

If you, or anyone else has such a list then do please ciruclate.

Including the titles of books and websites which show alternatives to the austerity programme would be useful.