College and Research Libraries Achieving Client-Centered Collection Development in Small and Medium-Sized Academic Libraries Bart Harloe This article presents a model for collection development appropriate for libraries whose primary purpose is to support undergraduate education. After a discussion of the organizational prereq- uisites for client-centered collection development in small and medium-sized academic li- braries, a step-by-step approach to the implementation of such a program is sketched. It is ar- gued that academic libraries following this strategy can create a decision-making structure whereby important collection development initiatives are taken by the library with the advice and consent of the teaching faculty. "An intractable, apparently eternal problem plagu- ing academic libraries is the unevenness of faculty commitment to collection building. " 1-Mary Biggs xhortations to small ana medium-sized academic li- braries to follow the lead of the large research libraries and move from faculty-driven acquisitions process to a library-centered collection de- velopment program appear frequently in library literature. 2 It is argued that those academic libraries whose primary mission is undergraduate instruction need to take control of the library materials budget, as- sume responsibility for selection and take a more rational approach to collection management and development. For ex- ample, it was recently argued in College & Research Libraries that college libraries in particular should adopt this model and es- tablish library authority over the selection process: "The first step must be the aban- donment of the department apportion- ment process. " 3 This article proposes that a collection de- velopment strategy that focuses on budget authority and allocation structure is likely to cause unnecessary conflict. A more positive approach involves the crea- tion of a comprehensive collection devel- opment program which, in turn, creates a different context for selection decision making. The logic of the model proposed here-client-centered collection develop- ment-leads inevitably toward a selection process in which the library makes deci- sions with the advice and consent of the faculty. The focus is not on the materials budgets per se, but rather on the quality of the decision-making process for selection. This article is addressed to librarians who want to improve collection develop- ment, but in a way that does not involve confrontation with the teaching faculty. Other, somewhat overlapping audiences Bart Harloe is Head, Collection Management in the New Mexico State University Library, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003-0006. 344 Achieving Client-Centered Collection Development 345 are librarians who work in colleges with collections in the 100,000-300,000 volume range and those in libraries with collec- tions in the 300,000-800,000 volume range. It is addressed to librarians who find the Standards for College Libraries rele- vant in judging how well they are sup- porting their institutional mission, and those whose libraries have less than the "magic million" in acquisitions budgets, or that serve institutions with stron7 or even lingering liberal arts traditions. Fi- nally, it is addressed to those who are will- ing to consider new ways of doing things and to take the strategic initiative in pur- suit of new organizational ventures. THREE BASIC MODELS OF SELECTION IN ACADEMIC LIBRARIES Let us begin by imagining an organiza- tional continuum with three basic points of reference (see figure 1). On one end is the historical model of selection. Its key characteristic is the faculty-driven acquisi- tion process; book budgets are allocated to academic departments, where the bulk of orders originate as faculty requests. On the other end is the research model of se- lection, whereby a highly organized and mostly library-directed collection devel- opment organization, characterized by a library staff of subject bibliographers and part-time selectors, is largely responsible for carrying out a complex acquisition pro- gram. The third model, located in the center of the continuum, is a shared authority model; although the library is responsible for the collection development program, faculty participate actively in the selection process. Over the last ten years, academic librari- ans have significantly increased their con- trol of the selection process. They have been especially successful within research libraries. While these developments en- hance the position of some librarians and improve collection management, they also create a challenge for librarians in small and medium-sized colleges that are clustered toward the historical model end of the continuum. Given a small profes- sional staff and a tradition of faculty con- trol of acquisitions, how do you move to- ward a more library-controlled effort? Other questions arise in medium-sized ac- THREE MODELS OF SELECTXON XN ACADEMXC LXBRARXES -Traditional library order department -Faculty driven acquisition process -Budgets allocated to departments -Expenditures author- ized by faculty Organ~zat~ona1 Cont~nuum Shar•d Author~ty Mod•1 -Partner5hip between library and teaching faculty -Collection development as public service activity -Liaison system plays critical role -Coordinated decentralized system -"Client-centered" approach FIGURE 1 -Library controlled collection develop- ment -Subject biblio- graphers -"Collect ion- centered" approach Three Models of Selection in Academic Libraries 346 College & Research Libraries ademic libraries that support both under- graduate and graduate education: What is the best way to organize a collection devel- opment program? Is the research model appropriate? If so, can it be implemented? To answer these questions, the basic components of a collection develqpment organization will be sketched and a more specific shared authority model-client- centered collection development-appro- priate for small and medium-sized aca- demic libraries will be outlined. A realistic strategy for phasing in a client-centered program will then be presented. CLIENT-CENTERED COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT What are the signs of an effective collec- tion development organization in an aca- demic library? William Hannaford lists five key indicators: 1. Written policies covering collection development activities 2. Control of and responsibility for the materials budget by the library 3. Presence of someone in the library who is, in effect, the chief collection devel- opment officer 4. Librarians who select, weed, evalu- ate, budget and allocate 5. The presence of a collection develop- ment organization, e.g., faculty liaison5 In addition to these generic organiza- tional prerequisites, a client-centered ap- proach to collection development in small and medium-sized academic libraries should include the following elements: 1. Collection Development for Instruction-In most small and medium- sized academic libraries the collection pri- marily supports instruction; therefore, it is very important that the collection pro- cess be curriculum-centered. The library should be intimately involved in the cur- riculum development process in order to have effective planning in its collection de- velopment program. 6 2. Library Serials Committee-Because of the impact of serials on the budget, it is important that small and medium-sized academic libraries have a well-organized serials management program. Ideally, the serials committee should be composed of librarians and faculty and it should select May 1989 and review serial collections on a regular basis. 7 3. Automation Program-The library should have an automation program that allows it to produce collection manage- ment data, whether it be a new acquisi- tions list produced by its bibliographic utility or a budget/vendor report pro- duced by its automated acquisitions sys- tem. Recent microcomputer develop- ments now make it possible for small and medium-sized academic libraries to have sophisticated collection management pro- grams.8 4. Approval Plan-A well-designed ap- proval plan, based upon a core collection concept of the library's program, is essen- tial to the success of a client-centered col- lection development program. This plan allows the library to manage the selection process effectively and, if developed cor- rectly, may eventually lead to library con- trol of the materials budget. 9 5. Client-Centered Liaison Structure- [An effective automation program and an efficient approval plan are important be- cause they can free library staff for collec- tion development liaison work, the central element in a shared authority approach to collection development.] 11 An effective automation program and an efficient approval plan are im- portant because they can free library staff for collection development liai- son work, the central element in a shared authority approach to collec- tion development.'' CLIENT -CENTERED LIAISON WORK: THE DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES BETWEEN LIBRARIANS AND TEACHING FACULTY The liaison structure would be a dual ap- proach including librarians assigned to ac- ademic departments to facilitate the col- lection development process and classroom faculty liaisons who represent the academic units. This structure com- Achieving Client-Centered Collection Development 347 hines the best bibliographic expertise available in the library with the best sub- ject expertise of the teaching faculty. The liaison system would serve as a communi- cation link, allowing the teaching faculty to communicate its concerns regarding the collections and the library, in turn, to no- tify interested parties of changing policies and procedures related to collection devel- opment. In order to be effective, the client- centered liaison system must be coordi- nated from the library, and the librarians must be the prime movers in this decen- tralized network. It is essential that the library be involved in the development of new academic courses and programs. Librarians work- ing within a liaison structure would typi- cally be involved in the curriculum devel- opment process. They would also review orders from academic departments in or- der to keep abreast of current faculty inter- ests. They could work with the approval plan, developing profiles in cooperation with teaching faculty, review approval books and notification slips, and keep fac- ulty informed of recently ordered materi- als. Librarians would be serving as aca- demic problem-solvers. Faculty should participate in the collec- tion development process. Teaching fac- ulty library liaisons would be responsible for representing current faculty concerns about the collections as they relate to the instructional needs of their departments. Typically, they could also review approval shipments and facilitate new serials re- quests to the library's serials committee. While the library should be flexible about the nature and extent of the role faculty li- aisons play, there must be documented agreement on the division of responsibili- ties and the mutual expectations of the parties involved. A STRATEGY FOR CHANGE: MOVING TOWARD A CLIENT-CENTERED COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM The first step is to determine whether or not the library needs a fully developed col- lection development program. The library might begin a collective self-analysis by answering the following questions: 1. Is the library typically the last unit on campus to be informed of new courses and new academic programs? 2. Are there chronic complaints from · faculty and students about either the quantity or quality of the collection? 3. Is the materials budget in a constant state of crisis? 4. Are serials consuming an ever- increasing portion of the library's materi- als budget? 5. Is there confusion and/ or conflict about the perceived role of the collections in supporting both instruction and re- search? SELF-STUDY I CONSULTATION PROCESS The answers to some of the above ques- tions may be obvious, directing the library toward action, based upon a generally ac- cepted perception of its ability to meet its collection goals. But assuming a need to validate these subjective perceptions, how might the library gather data to con- firm initial impressions? There are three basic options for dealing with this prelimi- nary needs analysis: 1. Small academic libraries might con- sider a self-study manual that has been ex- plicitly developed for smaller academic li- braries: Measuring the Book Circulation Use of a Small Academic Library Collection: A Manual. 10 2. Medium-sized academic libraries might consider conducting a collection analysis project with the Office of Man- agement Services, Association of Re- search Libraries. 11 3. Rather than pursuing a self-study ap- proach, small or medium-sized academic libraries might choose to consult an out- side collection development expert who would make a site-visit. This approach is generally less time-consuming and more flexible than the self-study and the exact nature and extent of the consultation can be determined by the library. 12 During this initial self-study/ consultation process, the library should address "enabling questions," in addi- tion to the five questions posed above. 1. Does the library have the critical mass necessary to launch and implement 348 College & Research Libraries a full-fledged collection development pro- gram? In other words, do the librarians support the effort and is the teaching fac- ulty open to changing their relationship with the library? 2. What is the state of the library's auto- mation systems and what computerized applications can be made toward collec- tion management/development? 3. How extensive is the library's biblio- graphic instruction program and what kind of outreach does it involve? 4. Does the library have effective re- source sharing arrangements?13 5. Is there an existing liaison network, formal or informal, that could be ex- panded and strengthened in order to function as a collection liaison structure? Answers to these two sets of questions should determine whether or not the li- brary moves ahead to establish a collection development program. Obviously, local circumstances will dictate the outcome. As the self-study will quickly demon- strate, much will depend upon the library staff's attitude toward the change and the efforts it would require on the existing col- lection development structure. Thus, if there is no faculty discontent, if the acqui- sitions program is viewed as adequate, if users perceive the collections as strong, if there is no budget crunch, and if an infor- mal communications network effectively addresses collection needs, then library staff may well conclude from the self- study/consultation process that it is not necessary to push ahead with a more for- mal collection development program. PHASING IN A CLIENT -CENTERED COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT PRO- GRAM For purposes of this analysis, however, let us assume that, as a result of the above efforts, a library determines that it needs a more organized approach to collection de- velopment. Let us also assume that the li- brary wants to set up a client-centered program and that there is some support both inside and outside the library for such an effort. The gradual implementa- tion of such a program would include five phases. May 1989 First Phase The first order of business is to establish a collection development committee and chairperson. This committee will provide an internal library forum for the discus- sion of issues related to collection manage- ment and development. It is important that the chair of this group assume re- sponsibility for coordinating collection de- velopment activities and schedule regular meetings with agendas. In this way, is- sues can be addressed on an ongoing ba- sis. "Once a library collection develop- ment group has been organized, the library should move very rapidly to appoint collection development liai- sons, both teaching faculty and li- brarians.'' Once a library collection development group has been organized, the library should move very rapidly to appoint col- lection development liaisons, both teach- ing faculty and librarians. Initial discus- sions should focus on the roles and responsibilities of the two. Once consen- sus on this division of labor has been reached, the responsibilities should be ar- ticulated and documented. The library should also consider during this first phase initiating an approval plan selection process. Approval plan vendors should be invited to the campus for pre- sentations to an audience that would in- clude teaching faculty. A very focused dia- logue between the library and the faculty about the role of the collections in sup- porting instruction and research should result from the presentation. For example, the concept of a core collection will emerge from discussion of the process of creating an approval plan profile. At this point, a pilot approval plap should be established, requiring the allo- cation of part of the materials budget. Even a small approval plan will have an impact, and the subject areas Lhosen and funding allocated should be carefully de- Achieving Client-Centered Collection Development 349 termined, taking into consideration which departments might best work with this ac- quisitions method. Finally, the library should decide whether to enlist the services of a collec- tion development consultant. Careful consideration should be given to the role of a consultant as well as to the expecta- tions of such a visit. For example, the li- brary may decide that an orientation and training program for both library staff and teaching faculty could serve a useful pur- pose and also advance the library's agenda, and a consultant's guidance would prove valuable in establishing such a program. Second Phase It is now time to appoint a serials selec- tion and review committee, which in- cludes representatives from the library and from the faculty. The committee's first task should be to write a serials selec- tion policy statement, the drafting of which should provoke a lively debate about the role of the journal collections in supporting the instructional and scholarly activities of the academic community. Once the serials committee has completed a draft, it is critical that the document be widely circulated throughout academic departments. The liaison system can facil- itate the process of distribution and dis- cussion. The college or university library· committee would be responsible for its fi- nal approval. In this phase, the library should also ini- tiate a trial approval plan in selected sub- ject areas. Key academic departments should participate both in the profiling process and in the screening of approval books received. Although librarians, too, should take part in this review process, it is especially important that teaching fac- ulty evaluate the profile during the first year of operation. As a result of this kind of faculty participation, two things should happen: (1) the approval profile will be further defined and refined; and (2) the faculty will gradually gain confidence in the approval plan as a collection develop- ment tool. During the second phase, the library should launch liaison outreach activities with various academic units, especially with those involved in the new approval plan. Topics of discussion during this pe- riod of development might include: (1) the role of the library in the curriculum devel- opment process; (2) the need for, and the purpose of, collection policy statements; and (3) the role of the new serials commit- tee and especially the procedures for re- questing a new journal. Topics such as these will encourage full discussion and dialogue including both theoretical con- cerns and practical aspects of implementa- tion. Third Phase By this phase, librarian liaisons are ready to play a greater role in the sel~ction process. They should be involved in the review of approval books for their respec- tive academic subject areas. Another way to strengthen the library's role in the selec- tion process is to initiate librarian review of firm orders coming from faculty in the academic departments. While this review may serve primarily to maintain current awareness, these librarians will eventu- ally gain confidence in their ability to an- ticipate the collection needs of their aca- demic departments. During this phase of the new program approval plan performance should be evaluated. Informal discussions with fac- ulty and librarians about the effectiveness of the approval plan should be supple- mented by checking appropriate bibliog- raphies covering the subject areas con- cerned. If the approval program is effective, it should be expanded to cover all core areas of the curriculum. Needless to say, it is critical to consult faculty and reach a true consensus before the ap- proval program is extended. Expansion of the approval plan will re- quire the allocation of a large portion of the acquisitions budget. The approval plan vendor should provide one-year budget estimates, based upon the new, more comprehensive profile. With this in- formation, the library can project spend- ing needs for a new acquisitions program in the next budgetary year. The library should also allocate a budget for new serial titles. This allocation will de- 350 College & Research Libraries pend, in turn, upon the current status of the book budget vis-a-vis the commitment to ongoing serial subscriptions. Once this is accomplished, the serials committee can begin to receive requests for new serial ti- tles. The serials committee may also want to begin a discussion on procedures for re- viewing established subscriptions as well as approving new ones. Fourth Phase The basic structure for selection decision making should be in place by this phase. The liaisons have been appointed and mu- tual responsibilities worked out to the sat- isfaction of both parties. The approval plan pilot program, after a period of test- ing, has been expanded to cover the core curri