By: Steven Heywood

Steven Heywood — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 23:16:46 +0000

I have to concur: having a book stagnating on the shelf for 17 years isn’t poverty, it’s either an isolated accident or the result of a culture of hanging on “just in case.” (Back in the old days, when I worked for the library service and it had a ginormous book fund I found myself removing nine-year-old copies of the Disability Rights Handbook off the shelves of a reference library, despite protests from those librarians who were supposed to be managing the stock).

There’s an argument for having some stock that hardly ever goes out because it fits a specific local interest need, though in that case I’d argue for its going into reserve stock (mind you: I wonder how long anyone will be having reserve stock?) The other case would be where the book is extravagantly “different” enough to make it obvious that some new stock’s come in (but not after 17 years…)

The cuts make it harder to make time for stock management and for supervising the results but any decent library management system should be able to run up reports of those items you might want to check as a matter of priority.

By: darren smart

darren smart — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 07:53:14 +0000

Hi Ian,
Good editorial re out of date bookstock (& the guide to stock management is a handy tool) but I must disagree that recent funding cuts are the main driver for this. In my experience it is often simply a poor stock policy and/or a staff culture of keeping something “just in case”, especially with regards to adult non-fiction. However, I do accept that cuts have exacerbated these problems

Comments on: What does it mean if your library has a book in it unloaned since 1997?

By: Steven Heywood

By: darren smart