College and Research Libraries MIRIAM A. DRAKE Mana~nglnnovation in Academic Libraries ~--:..' Innovation is an economic or social change resulting from a deliberate and · purposeful process. Academic libraries could be substantially changed by the adoption of technological innovation in information service or made ob- solete by competition from the private sector. This paper explores key issues related to innovation in academic libraries and concludes that innovation requires a conducive climate, capital investment, and a leadership that is enthusiastic and committed. FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES in the economics and technology of academic library opera- tions have stimulated librarians and admin- istrators to seek ways of introducing and implementing innovation in libraries. Zaltman has observed, "The impetus to innovation arises when organizational deci- sion makers perceive that the organization's present course of action is unsatisfactory. When a discrepancy exists between what the organization is doing and what its deci- sion makers believed it ought to be doing, there is a performance gap. " 1 Many academic library decision makers . are feeling the frustration of this "perfor- mance gap." Several new ideas and innova- tions are serving to help close the gap, such as the proposed National Periodicals Cen- ter, shared cataloging through RLIN, WLN, and OCLC, and the interlibrary loan system ofOCLC. While these services are contributing to the efficiency of libraries, they are not suf- ficient, by themselves, to close the gap be- tween current library and information ser- vice and the potential for service that could become a reality if existing technology were adapted to user information needs. These services are also not sufficient to close the gaps between user expectations and the li- Miriam A. Drake is assistant director, adminis- trative services, Purdue University Libraries, West Lafayette, Indiana. brary' s ability to meet those expectations. Lancaster has observed, "The profession seems to have its head in the sand. The paperless society is rapidly approaching. Ig- noring this fact will not cause it to go away. "2 In a forecast of telecommunications in the year 2000, Martino has stated, "Rather than visiting a library, any indi- vidual might be able to search the library files electronically and receive a printout of specific information or a facsimile copy of a desired document. "3 During the 1980s libraries could be re- duced to archival repositories because people will be accessing bibliographic data bases and text through computers in their homes and offices. These predictions while extreme and painful are indicative of trends with which librarians must deal. There is little doubt that technology can make these predictions become a reality; however, they ignore the human service functions fulfilled by libraries. Adoption of computer and telecommuni- cations technologies to library and informa- . tion service needs will require capital and innovative thinking in the library profession. How can libraries maintain their function of human service in a machine environment? How can libraries use this technology to provide more responsive service? These questions are only two of the many that need to be addressed. The purpose of this paper is to present issues related to the managerial aspects of 503 504 I College & Research Libraries • November 1979 innovation in academic libraries. The spe- cific issues to be covered include perfor- mance gaps , incentives to innovate , nature of innovation, barriers and constraints , im- pact of innovation, and implementation of innovative strategies . PERFORMANCE GAPS Library directors, librarians , and support staff appear to agree that something is wrong in the library. In many cases, teach- ing faculties , students , and institutional ad- ministrators agree that the library is not performing as they would like. The perfor- mance gaps relate to the differences be- tween services being provided and services that could be provided with the adoption of technology , relationships between library and teaching faculties, library and institu- tional administrations, and library adminis- tration and staff. Perceptions of the service gap cannot be generalized . They vary from library to li- brary and depend on faculty and student awareness of technology, budget situations, and user demands. Several library directors have expressed extreme frustration over the decreasing purchasing power of funds at a time when faculty demands for instant grat- ification in the form of more books are in- creasing. Other library directors , dealing with technologically aware faculty, are try- ing to find capital to provide improved in- formation retrieval services and faster document delivery methods. These pressures are exacerbated in some institutions by administrators who are trying to compensate for enrollment declines with greater sponsored research activity. More intense competition among faculty members for tenure and promotion causes them to place greater demands on libraries. These demands coupled with budget pressures and other barriers to innovation create a per- formance gap. Growing and changing demands will place greater pressure on library administrators to enhance fuzzy mission statements with op- erational goals and objectives. McClure states , " One must recognize the difference between goals and objectives-they are not the same. Goals provide long-range guidelines (five years or more) for organiza- tional activity; they might never be accom- plished, and they are not measured. In con- trast , objectives are measurable, short range , and time limited . " 4 McAnally and Downs indicated that the libraries have rarely done a good job of planning. 5 Without purpose, planning is an exercise in futility. Achievement of objectives may require the elimination as well as the addi- ~ tion of services and materials. In order to have operational objectives , the library, teaching faculty, and institutional adminis- tration will have to agree on specific ser- vices and materials to be provided by the library and adjust their expectations to fit the objectives. This task is particularly difficult in a large university where faculties are often in conflict with one another. Humanities faculties tend to equate good li- braries with big libraries , while engineers and management people seek information rather than books. In the setting of goals and objectives, the library and academic administrators become negotiators between the warring factions. The administration of the college or uni- versity will need to acquire a greater under- standing and sensitivity to the ecmiomics of libraries in terms of costs and benefits as well as inputs and outputs. Since libraries are part of overhead costs and adminis- trators are charged with keeping costs as low as possible, academic administrators are likely to look to the library as a place to cut costs . Many library budget cuts are not pur- poseful cuts. The director is told to cut X percent from the budget and may not be given any guidance on what services or ma- terials to cut. Academic administrators fac- ing severe overhead cost problems engen- dered by a variety of federal regulations may not realize or be sensitive to the im- pact of undirected cuts in terms -of the li- brary's ability to serve the needs of its clien- tele. Staff present a different set of problems to library administrators. McAnally and Downs observed in 1973 that library staff ranked second out of five in the growing pressures on library directors. They further observed, "It may seem strange that the director should be under attack from his own staff, or fail to receive badly needed support in relations with administration and faculty, but it is so in many cases. . . . They want and expect a share in policy decisions affect- ing themselves and the library. "6 Library directors have tried and are try- ing a variety of schemes to involve staff in the decision-making process. Dickinson has pointed out that " ... 'participative man- agement' has been used indiscriminately to mean everything from a situation wherein the library management simply seeks infor- mation and/or advice from staff members to one wherein the library is governed by plebiscite. "7 Despite the best efforts of many library directors to change managerial style, n ify more heavily on committees, and generally involve staff in decision-making processes, staff remain dissatisfied. In recent years, staff discontent has been exacerbated by the failure of salaries to keep pace with the cost of living, changing student and faculty de- mands, and potential changes inherent in computer and telecommunications technol- ogies. Some library staff members may feel that their jobs or work habits are threatened by technological innovation. INCENTIVES TO INNOVATE Despite the potential threat to the profes- sional and psychological well-being of some library personnel, library administrators may have no choice but to adopt innovative strategies to meet objectives and goals in a different society. Lancaster and others have raised the question of whether libraries will be needed in an electronic world. He states that the library problem may not be lack of space or financial resources ; "rather it is likely to be one of justification for existence and simple survival. "8 Technology can and will bring information directly into the home and office of the fu- ture. The place of the library in society will depend on how rapidly it integrates technology into its operations and how rapidly the engineers and designers of in- formation systems will recognize the library as an important link in the system. While technology appears to be the major driving force for innovation, there are other factors contributing to the need to innovate. As echnology has developed more effective nd cheaper electronic computing and tele- ommunications devices, the economics of Managing Innovation I 505 library operations has changed dramati- cally. The rate of increase in the cost of li- brary inputs has been consistently higher than the general inflation rate. Library out- put costs consisting largely of labor have not risen as rapidly. Because input costs are generally fixed costs in a library, the aver- age cost per unit of output is rising in librar- ies where output levels have remained rela- tively constant or decreased. Labor productivity and user productivity have been declining as collections, catalogs, and files have increased in size. The amount of capital invested in laborsaving equipment and processes is minimal in most libraries. Teaching faculties and librarians may find the term productivity offensive as it is usu- ally related to the output of factory workers and farmers. Productivity in a library con- text relates the value of results obtained by staff or users from a given amount of effort in searching for information or documents. Changing patterns of demand also provide incentives to innovate. In addition to pro- viding course-related reading material, li- braries are being asked to provide substan- tive information when needed and in a form that is- convenient for the user. The poten- tial of technology to provide information when and where needed coupled with the need to reduce the labor intensity of library operations is a prime motivator in innova- tion. THE NATURE OF INNOVATION Innovation is not limited to science and technology. Drucker's broader definition is " . .. the task of endowing human and ma- terial resources with new and greater wealth producing capacity. " 9 In Drucker's terms, innovation is economic and social change which does not create new knowledge but creates potential for action and added wealth . Sawyer defines innovation as a "use- ful new combination of resources." 10 Inno- vation is not a device or a scheme. Rather it is a concept or a change in human activity. The concept is "continually evolving as the uncertainties are made to disappear and the targets turn into outcome. " 11 Innovation is a deliberate process rather than a chance happening or discovery. Motivating people to want to change and to implement new 506 I College & Research Libraries • November 1979 plans and ideas is at the heart of innovation. "Innovation is not R & D, though it be- gins with research and continues with the entirely different process of develop- ment. " 12 While research may result in in- vention and development may refine an in- vention into a finished, marketable product or process, innovation results in a change in the way people live and accomplish specific tasks. Innovation may be adoption of a technological device or process or it may be a new managerial or social process. What- ever it is, it relies heavily on human per- ceptions of something better in the future. This development usually is to achieve a specific purpose and is a directed effort. The development of the MARC record, shared cataloging, electronic message sys- tems, and management by objectives repre- sents innovations that were initiated, de- veloped, and implemented to achieve spe- cific outcomes. The literature of innovation, for the most part, deals with the concept in profit- making corporations . Discussions of innova- tion in the public sector point out that ser- vice industries and state and local govern- ments are consumers of innovation rather than producers. The federal government is both a consumer and producer of innova- tion. 13 Innovation in information retrieval and other areas of human activity was funded initially by the federal government. BARRIERS TO INNOVATION There are a variety of barriers to innova- tion in academic institutions and libraries. These barriers relate to psychology, organi- zational factors, perceptions of the future, and economic factors. The psychological constraints to innovate stem from fear of change, especially planned change, and the unknown. Library staff and users accustomed to the present-day library are reluctant to give up comfortable habits and established ways of accomplishing tasks. Library staff may feel threatened by systems analysts, computer types, and others who do not speak their language and appear to · have little sympathy with their problems. There may be feelings of being manipu- lated. "People resist being changed by other people ... ," 14 especially planners and in- novators. Their resistance may be based on fear of change, threat of being manipulated, conflicting interests, constrained freedom of choice, or failure to see the value of the in- novation. With technological innovation in libraries, users and librarians legitimately fear that the library will be more impersonal and the art of the book will die. The organizational factors inhibiting change are both internal and external to the library. While most academic administrators believe that a library is essential to an edu- cational institution, for some, the library has retained its "bottomless pit" image. Other administrators see innovation as a way to give the pit a bottom but either don't know how to stimulate and reward innovative thinking or don't want to invest the neces- · sary capital. The lack of understanding and support leaves librarians in an impossible position of being "damned if they do and damned if they don't." Planning and budgeting in publicly sup- ported colleges and universities are not geared to investment and innovative activ- ity. There is ·a tendency to allocate the budget on a "use it or lose it" basis rather than a planned basis leading to sufficient funding for academic services that are valu- able to the institution. While many univer- sities have obtained funds for the addition of audiovisual equipment and materials and computer-aided instruction, these innova- tive techniques remain underutilized in many instructional programs. The chalk and blackboard are comfortable and require lit- tle new thinking or activity. Universities also create barriers to innova- tion because innovation may not be re- warded, especially in the library. Across- the-board salary increases and competitive promotion and tenure situations tend to in- hibit rather than stimulate innovation. The lack of output measures of value in library operations constrains innovation. Academic administrators are more con- cerned with the cost of input than the value of output. They may be unsympathetic to library innovation because of focus on input and fail to see the contribution to output. Information, knowledge, and reading pro- duce social value that cannot be easily quan- tified. Measurements of input versus social • output or costs versus social benefit are elu- l sive and do not provide needed justification for capital investment. Economic factors limiting innovation in the library relate to capital, investment, risk, and uncertainty. The "use it or lose it" approach to budgeting does not allow the library to accumulate capital to invest in technology or innovation. Capital appropria- tions generally are one-shot deals used for new typewriters, buildings, or stacks. The result of this practice is that not only are li- braries technologically underdeveloped, they are also starved for capital. University administrators appear unwill- ing to invest funds in innovation that will improve library staff and user productivity or make the library more efficient. Payoffs from investments in libraries are difficult to calculate. The value of the librarian is per- ceived in terms .of the salary paid rather than the value produced. There is little con- sideration given to the value of user time in the library and how that time can be made more productive. Risk and uncertainty are key factors in the process as well as the economics of in- novation. Although innovation is a deliber- ate process, there is a risk that a particular project will fail or that results will be less than expected. "The most dramatic evi- dence of the risk involved in . . . innovation is the recent experience of Princeton Uni- versity Library with 3M's automated circula- tion system .... " 15 This project ended in failure, the 3M system has been withdrawn from the market, and Princeton has re- turned to a manual method to charge out books. This failure, however, is more than bal- anced by successful projects in many librar- ies; for example, the Ohio State University circulation system, a high-risk project at its inception, is a success. Implementation of shared cataloging and its by-products, in- volving hundreds of libraries, is another example of successful change. Uncertainty is related to project success and failure as well as future conditions and investment. Academic institutions are facing an uncertain future with regard to enroll- ment, government funding, research activ- ity, and endowment funding. In a highly uncertain economic environment, a natural tendency is to try to conserve what is at,. Managing Innovation I 501 hand rather than invest for future gain. Project selection and the process of the in- dividual projects also contain elements of uncertainty. With many projects from which to choose and fuzzy measures of payoff and benefit/cost, management has to live with the idea that the projects chosen may not turn out to have been the best selections. "Uncertainty resides at the level of the in- dividual project, where the 'best' way to proceed seldom is apparent and the indi- viduals involved instead have to be satisfied with finding a promising way."16 Until recently, librarians have had the luxury of living in a relatively certain and risk-free environment. An innovative envi- ronment calls for new skills in risk assess- ment, ability to understand uncertainty, and ability to manage increased entrepreneurial activity. THE IMPACf OF INNOVATION Innovation has changed and will continue to change everyone's life in dramatic ways. Downs and Mohr have identified three categories of benefits related to innovation: (1) programmatic, (2) prestige, and (3) struc- tural.17 Programmatic benefits are greater ef- ficiency or effectiveness in accomplishing organizational goals, such as increased profit or market share in the private sector and production of improved service at the same or lower cost in the public sector. The prestige benefit is the recognition and approval that are associated with early adoption of a new program or technology. Structural benefits are related to indi- viduals in the form of greater worker satis- faction or some other internal value. Innovation in libraries, thus far, has pro- duced both advantages and disadvantages. Shared cataloging systems have resulted in programmatic benefits for libraries but have resulted in some disadvantages for the worker. While some catalogers may feel greater satisfaction at being able to share their knowledge and skill, others may feel that the value of their professional judgment has decreased because they are prisoners of the terminal. The potential impact of technological and systems innovations on libraries is difficult to forecast. H libraries survive as viable or- 508 I College & Research Libraries • November 1979 ganizations giving useful and valuable ser- vice, it is unlikely that their present forms of organization and operation will persist. It is likely that academic libraries will evolve in different ways. The small college library serving primarily instructional programs will . not change in the same way as large univer- sity libraries serving research as well as in- struction. There is not nor should there be uniformity among academic libraries. Each library should be encouraged to recognize the important factors and the unique ele- ments within its own institutional setting. A "me too" approach should be used only when it is compatible with the goals and operations of the library. As innovation proceeds, library staff and users will need to adapt to new ways of finding information and documents . The li- brary's role in the information process will depend heavily on how quickly it adopts technology to make that process more efficient while retaining personal service. Information technology is developing rapidly in the private sector. Libraries no longer are the sole sources of information for teaching and research faculties. Many li- brarians feel that this competition is unfair. In an era of tax revolts and taxpayer de- mands for spending limitations, competition is probably a fact of life. Competition from the private sector could reduce the impor- tance of libraries in many areas. IMPLEMENTING INNOVATION Given the constraints , how can libraries adopt and implement innovative strategies? There is no recipe for transforming libraries into innovative organizations; however, ex- perience in other kinds of organizations has identified some of the char acteristics of in- novators and innovating organizations. The first characteristic is a positive at- titude about the future and a belief that the future can be modified by ·decisions made in the present. Drucker has stated, " Innova- tive organizations spend neither time nor resources defending yesterday. " 18 An in- novator does not concern himself or herself with the past but focuses on a vision of the future. Within innovative organizations, the climate nurtures creative thinking and change. The climate does not develop overnight but is built over a period of time. People with new ideas and the ability to develop those ideas are rewarded and recognized in innovative organizations . "Readiness for change gradually becomes a characteristic of certain individuals , groups, organizations · and civilizations . They no longer look nos- talgically at a golden age in the past but an- ticipate their utopia in days to come. "19 The responsibility for creating readiness for change and innovative strategies rests with management. Daft points out that top managers bridge the gap between. the or- ganization and technological development. Their status places ". . . them in a position to introduce change into an organization. "20 They are exposed to new ideas from outside the organization and can stimulate new thinking within the organization. "The indi- vidual manager controls in large measure the kind and quality of ideas he will hear, by the questions he asks and the interest he ·shows in the answers. In that part of the job concerned with innovation , each manager must be responsible for stimulating the flow of ideas by appropriate questions and inter- est and by considerate screening of the idea he receives. "21 Most of the ideas received are likely to be rejected ; however, accep- tance or rejection must be based on standards and appropriateness and be in harmony with organizational goals. Only a few ideas will merit further investigation and careful evaluation. Innovative managers recognize that inno- vation doesn't just happen . An idea without development remains·an idea, good or bad . Innovation is deliberate , purposeful, and , in most cases , a planned process or program . There is an objective or goal to be achieved that requires resources to develop an idea into a program or innovation to be incorpo- rated into library operations. "In . . . con- centrating effort on the best ideas, the man- ager takes up the bare essence (which is the idea) and breathes life into it; he gives it form and dimension . He makes the idea his own, not in the sense of taking it from the originator, but in the sense of giving com- mitment, and adding the weight of his own recommendation to the request for additional development. "22 Innovation and change require an organi- j zational structure that facilitates the flow of communication up and down . Ideally, in- novative ideas should originate at both ends of an organizational hierarchy. Administra- tive ideas originate at the top and move . down while technical innovation originates near the bottom and moves up. 23 A great many words have been written about man- agerial styles and communication in librar- ies. McAnally and Downs suggest, "The di- rector has to surrender some of his old au- thority and becomes more of a leader"24 in a more participatory environment. The staff dissatisfaction discussed by McAnally and Downs in 1973 has not abated in 1979 de- spite the good faith efforts of many library directors and programs, such as MRAP. Dickinson, in his review of participative management, concluded, "Some library managers are unwilling to admit that they want and need control over the operations for which they are accountable .... par- - ticipative management or power sharing should not-and cannot, if it is to be successful-mean an abdication of responsi- bility for the library on the part of adminis- trators and managers, in the name of de- mocracy. "25 Innovation and idea generation rarely occur in groups. Individuals have ideas. Management is the catalyst needed to bring an idea to the point of innovation. The usual library committee structures are not condu- cive to idea generation or innovative think- ing. In using committees in the innovative process, managers should keep the words of L. J. Peter in mind: " No committee could ever come up with anything as revo- lutionary as a camel-anything as practical and as perfectly designed to perform effec- tively under such difficult conditions. " 26 Committees are useful in studying specific issues and defining problems. A special task force drawn from appropriate departments of the library can be useful in drawing up plans to implement and integrate an innova- tion into library operations. In the process of managing innovation , li- brary users can be valuable. People respon- sible for developing new library programs should be sensitive not only to the user's needs but also to the user's wants. There may be substantial differences between needs and wants . If innovation is to sue- Managing Innovation I 509 ceed, users will need to be convinced that it is worthwhile. A manager or library director may work at fine-tuning the climate of the library to produce innovation or new ideas and find that there is no response . He or she may proclaim in a loud voice that upward com- munications are welcome but find a quiet telephone or empty mailbox. If libraries are to implement significant change and staff is to be part of that change, library adminis- trators will need actively to encourage change. This encouragement should result in seri- ous review of new ideas and innovation proposals as well as follow-through in de- velopment and feedback to the innovator. In addition , it may be necessary to alter the rewards and punishment system substan- tially so that innovators are recognized and rewarded with salary increases or perqui- sites. Lastly, the library director desirous of clos- ing performance gaps and shaping a mean- ingful role for the library in the future must present possibilities with enthusiasm , com- mitment , and confidence. He or she must communicate a sense of excitement and abil- ity to make improvements in the future. CONCLUSIONS Innovation is purposeful economic and social change . If libraries are to continue their important contribution to the instruc- tional and research missions of academic in- stitutions, a climate conducive to change and generation of new ideas must be created. Library administrators must view innovation seriously and provide follow- through to develop ideas into innovations that can be integrated into library opera- tions. Librarianship may be the fastest- changing and most exciting profession to- day. The potential to improve information service through technology is largely un- realized. Transforming potential into reality will require capital , innovation, persever- ance , and leadership . REFERENCES 1. Gerald Zaltman, Robert Duncan , and Jonny Holbek , Innovations and Organi zations (New York: Wiley , 1973), p.55. 2. F. Wilfrid Lancaster, "Whither Libraries? or, 510 I College & Research Libraries • November 1979 Wither Libraries," College & Research Li- braries 39:357 (Sept . 1978) . 3. Joseph P. Martino, "Telecommunications in the Year 2000," Futurist 13:99 (April 1979). 4. Charles R. McClure, "The Planning Process: Strategies for Action, " College & Research Libraries 39:459 (Nov. 1978). 5. Arthur M. McAnally and Robert B. Downs, "The Changing Role of Directors of Univer- sity Libraries, " College & Research Libraries 34:112 (March 1973). 6. Ibid., p.111. 7. Dennis W. Dickinson, "Some Reflections on Participative Management in Libraries," Col- lege & Research Libraries 39:254 (July 1978). 8. Lancaster, "Whither Libraries?" p.346. 9. Peter F. Drucker, Management: Tasks, Re- sponsibilities , and Practice (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), p.67. 10. George C. Sawyer, "Innovation in Organiza- tions," Long Range Planning 11:54 (Dec. 1978). 11. H. Brian Locke, "Planning Innovation," Long Range Planning 11:21 (Dec. 1978) . 12. H. Brian Locke, "Innovation by Design," Long Range Planning 9:35 (Aug. 1976). 13. J. David Roessner, "Incentives to Innovate in Public and Private Organizations, " Adminis- tration & Society 9:341--{)5 (Nov. 1977) . 14. David E. Ewing, The Human Side of Plan- ning: Tool or Tyrant? (London : Macmillan, 1969), p.44. 15. Miriam A. Drake and Harold A. Olsen , "The Economics of Library Innovation, " Library Trends 28:98 (Summer 1979). 16. Richard R. Nelson and Sidney G. Winter, "In Search of Useful Theory of Innovation," Research Policy 6:51 (Jan. 1977). 17. George W. Downs, Jr., and Lawrence Mohr, "Toward a Theory of Innovation," Adminis- tration & Society 10:379-408 (Feb. 1979). 18 . Drucker, Management , p.791. 19. Zaltman, Duncan, and Holbek, Innot/ations , p.103. 20. Richard L. Daft, "A Dual-Care Model of Or- ganizational Innovation ," Academy · of Man- agement journal 21:193 (June 1978). 21. Sawyer, "Innovation," p.54. 22. Ibid., p .55. 23. Daft, "A Dual-Care Model," p.195. 24. McAnally and Downs, "The Changing Role," p.120. 25. Dickinson, " Participative Management ," p.260--61. 26. Laurence J. Peter, Peter's Quotations: Ideas for Our Time (New York: Morrow, 1977), p.120.