College and Research Libraries The Process and Value of Self-Study in a Medium-sized University Library Will~am L. Beck and Marsha L. N olf This paper reports the steps taken to implement, personalize, develop, use, and evaluate a self-study process which follows a set of academic library standards suggested by Antoinette M. Kania. Included are organization and meeting strategies to determine and implement performance measures, qualitative and quantitative measures of the process, and specific recommendations. Ongoing results include improved communication, more effective strategic planning, the establishment of meaningful policies and procedures, and better use of library assets and services, all of which benefit the library employees as well as the patrons and university. uture historians, looking back at higher education in the 1990s, may well call this the Age of Reports. What with program reviews; accreditation reviews; short-range and long-range planning documents; needs assessments; outcomes assessments; user surveys; needs surveys; automation projections; personnel ana- lyses; national and professional compli- ance reports; accountability studies, etc., librarians (and everyone else in the aca- demic world) complain that so much of their time is devoted to writing reports that they neglect the professional duties they are reporting. Besides, who in author- ity ever reads these reports, or, having read them, bothers to act upon them? So, when the library staff of the Louis L. Manderino Library of California Univer- sity of Pennsylvania heard in September 1987 that we were required by the State System .of Higher Education's [SSHE] Board of Governors to conduct an ex- haustive self-study (program review), our response was cynical. Was this really necessary? Would our report be read? What good would it do for our library? We already knew we were doing a "great job" because of recent increases in circu- lation, positive responses from users, and major tangible improvements. As if the SSHE requirement weren't enough, we knew that similar self-ana- lytical reports would soon be required by two other accrediting agencies: the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools and the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. Not one report, but three. We accepted the challenge and, in the end, killed the three birds with one stone. The long, eighteen- month self-study process and ensuing final report provided much of the Manderino Library's portion of the re- quired university report to each accred- iting agency. In this article, we describe what has happened to the Manderino Library staff since that challenge. The self-study pro- gram we have produced is more than just a survey, more than a summary full of charts and tables. It is full of the thoughts and contributions of each William L. Beck is Dean of Library Services and Marsluz L. Nolf is Public Services Coordinator and Bibliographic Instruction Librarian at the Louis L. Manderino Library, California University of Penn- sylvania, California, Pennsylvania 15419. 150 member of our library family. This com- prehensive, introspective accumulation of all aspects of library operations can- not help but tell the truth about what we do and what we should be doing. We've already gone far beyond our original "as- signments" and have used our findings to reorganize major and minor aspects of operations. We now have a structure that functions as a skeleton, as a customized model, as a check-and-balance system, and as a standard of comparison. Our method of self-study proved the value of using an excellently researched outline while allowing ourselves creative modi- fications as we recognized the need for them. Convinced that such a review can benefit the working organization of a medium-sized academic library, we want to share our experience so that others can use what might benefit them. THE UNIVERSITY AND ITS LIBRARY A few words about our university and library and the mandate for the study will help illustrate our starting point. California University of Pennsylvania (CUP) is a public, regional, state university in southwestern Pennsylvania, one of fourteen institutions that comprise Penn- sylvania's State System of Higher Educa- tion. The school, nestled in the Monongahela River Valley, where steel, coal, and coke once ruled, has an enrollment of 6,7 48 students, with 290 faculty in the Colleges of Educa- tion and Human Services, Liberal Arts, Science and Technology, and the School of Graduate Studies and Research. The chief mission of our medium- sized academic library is to support the curricular offerings of CUP and to pro- vide services related to reference, interli- brary loan, online searching, and bibliographic instruction for students and faculty. As a vital part of the area's transition from heavy industry to scien- tific research and technology, our library is housed comfortably in a twelve-year- old building that accommodates a collec- tion of 310,000 volumes, 1,700 periodical subscriptions, 63,000 audiovisual materi- als, and over 1.2 million microforms. The Manderino Library is the largest library among those serving the univer- Process and Value of Self-study 151 sities in the State System of Higher Edu- cation. The library is a selective depository for Pennsylvania state documents and, since 1986, U.S. government docu~ents. Circulation figures exceed 152,834 i terns per year, with the library being an inter- library loan net lender by a factor of four to one. Our online catalog, using TEX- TRIEVE software, is tied to an in-house online circulation system. We currently subscribe to nine indexes on CD-ROM. The staff consists of a dean of library services, a systems analyst (at manage- ment level), ten professional librarians, fifteen clerical assistants, six full time equivalent graduate assistants, and eighty to one hundred student as- sistants. The 1990 budget was $1.7 mil- lion, with one-third of that allocated for materials and operating expenditures. Further, with unionized nine-month and twelve-month employees on staff, we must operate with due consideration to collective bargaining requirements and constraints. Having covered the what, why, and who of our story, we will now tell you how we did our self-study. OUR" ASSIGNMENT" FROM SSHE "Criteria for Review of Support Pro- grams. Universities should develop separate criteria for review of aca- demic and student support programs. Such reviews should include some sort of qualitative feedback from users of the services provided by the pro- gram, cost-benefit data, and assessment of the unit's effectiveness in working with other areas of the university."1 Fortunately, two months after we re- ceived this assignment, the dean of li- brary services and a librarian attended a workshop about self-study in academic libraries. They returned from Rutgers University with Antoinette Kania's ex- cellent and appropriate model for "[encompassing] qualitative standards for accreditation purposes and [suggesting] quantitative performance measures for local self-evaluation purposes." 2 SELF-STUDY BEGINS In January 1988, all Manderino Li- brary employees received copies of rele- 152 College & Research Libraries vant materials and Kania's process. At two subsequent meetings, we explained the rationale and benefits of using Kania's structure to analyze what we do and how well we do it. We carefully emphasized that all library employees would share all the tasks of effecting change where necessary and that, ulti- mately, all of us would benefit. During open discussion, we determined that most were willing to give Kania's model, a model that had not yet been applied, a try. This need for open and complete com- munication is vital for any self-study effort. Our library administrator knows his staff and is accustomed to dealing with them effectively within the confines of two separate collective bargaining agree- ments. Anticipating employees' fears, he carefully planned each innocent detail to minimize internal worries and to estab- lish the prevailing group harmony. The result: about 80 percent of librarians and staff bought the concept during the ini- tial planning stages. This need for open and complete communication is vital for any self-study effort. The dean also took care to balance mem- bership of committees. He worked very hard to select people who were com- plementary in temperament, work ethic, abilities, and qualifications, while mixing new employees with veterans and ex- troverts with introverts. He talked with each employee separately about self- study, then spent several more weeks imagining worst-case scenarios and how to circumvent them. At the third meeting, we formalized our structure. The entire staff was divided into four groups, each repre- senting a mix of faculty and staff, public services and technical services, as ex- plained in the paragraph above. Meeting separately, each group selected its leader and recorder, then listed and discussed the library's strengths, weaknesses, and problems. One hour later, the entire group reassembled, and each of the four recorders March 1992 presented a report orally and on a black- board. Then, the dean of library services offered his perceptions, and they were added to the board. The overall viewpoint that emerged was the same as each group had deter- mined separately. We were amazed to see that everyone had identified the same problems and situations. We al- ready felt united and eager to go on with the self-study. The summarized reports of each group were typed and dis- tributed to the entire staff. We cannot emphasize too strongly that the follow- ing points are crucial when this process is being undertaken in a collective bar- gaining environment: 1. All staff must be involved. 2. Recommendations must be imple- mented in an equal manner through- out the entire library system (i.e., not selectively). 3. Once the self-study process is completed, the report and strategic plan must be implemented, not shelved and ignored. 4. No one is to feel threatened in this process of examining everything. Communicate clearly that this process is not a cover-up for a secret agenda to eliminate or downgrade positions. A STEERING COMMITIEE IS FORMED Shortly thereafter, the dean appointed a steering committee consisting of three librarians, two support staff, a graduate student, and an undergraduate student.3 Most of the committee members had been leaders or recorders in the joint meeting. The chairman was a bibliographic instruc- tion librarian who had worked at Mander- ino Library for only one year. Among other qualities, she could contribute a fresh outlook and thirteen years as a head cataloger elsewhere. She was pre- pared to guide the self-study process with attention to both public and technical services viewpoints. Moreover, she was known for her exceptional organizational, interpersonal, and communications skills- which would result ina reliable management style to guide the self-study process. . The dean charged the Self-Study Steer- ing Committee (SSC) to structure a process that would address the library's weaknesses and problems, assess the strengths, and develop a framework so that the study could involve all the staff. Almost immediately, the SSC decided to use Kania's model as our model for self- study.4 The SSC met weekly during the spring semester in 1988. Each SSC member researched one di- vision of Kania's five-point outline: goals and objectives standards; collec- tion standards; access/use standards; staff standards; and administration standards. Guided by Kania's standards and assuming the role of "investigative reporter," each sse member asked and reasked questions until, as a group, we had talked to every person on the library staff. This method of cross-checking, ex- amining, and confirming facts revealed some interesting things about current operations and library history. We learned that although our library ex- celled in many areas, we needed to ex- amine some areas more closely and perhaps change them. No one is to feel threatened in this process of examining everything .... This process is not a cover-up for a secret agenda to eliminate or downgrade positions. Here is an example of how SSC mem- bers operated. Kania's outline includes the following collection standard: "While the institution should support its own es- sentially self-contained library, coopera- tive relationships with other libraries and agencies may also be developed to supplement the library's own re- sources.''5 The sse member responsible for this area interviewed the interlibrary loan librarian and the public services coordinator. Supported by extensive documentation, the sse member noted that our library participates in three major types of cooperative arrange- ments: interlibrary loan, reciprocal bor- rowing, and consortia efforts. This Sse member uncovered another example of resource sharing, the recent edition of Process and Value of Self-study 153 Access Pennsylvania on CD-ROM. It was easy to determine that we fulfilled this standard. A second SSC member investigated administration standards such as this one: ''The library administrator(s) must have the appropriate authority and re- sponsibility for the development and management of the library as well as the opportunity to participate in campus- wide planning and governance."6 This was also easy to confirm after the sse member interviewed the dean of library services and reviewed his job descrip- tion and numerous extracurricular ac- tivities on campus. Although committee members gathered their preliminary information within two months, complex library work schedules complicated the availability of common meeting times. To keep the project moving within the time constraints, the sse made a preliminary report at the close of the spring semester. In a memorandum to the dean of library services, it recommended that Manderino Library use Kania's model as a basis for self-study, and that fourteen activities related to topics in that model be studied further by (new) subcommittees and individuals. THESSC~SFOurnaEEN RECOMMENDATIONS Among the fourteen recommenda- tions, the sse gave precedence to t standards we did not then fulfill. use of italics and emphasis ~R- e~erbs must, should, and m9-y correspon "ttY Kania's outline.7 < 1. "The library must develop and communicate goals and objectives for its own program that are com- patible with those of the institution."8 The library's general mission state- ment must be updated and rewritten in harmony with the newly revised university mission statement. A new library committee should be formed for this purpose. 2. ''The development and review of the [aforementioned] goals and ob- jectives should be conducted by the library staff working in concert with the administration, faculty, 154 College & Research Libraries and students."9 After the new li- brary mission statement is written and adopted, each department within the library should determine and write goals and objectives and de- cide how to achieve them. Annual review of these goals and objectives will help ascertain their status and value. 3. A "collection standards com- mittee" must be formed, and it must immediately address the following standard: ''The library collection must support the instructional pro- gram of the institution." 1° First, this committee must choose an appro- priate measurement tool for evalu- ating and improving the vitality of our collection. Also, the collections standards committee should develop a means for increasing faculty in- volvement in the book and periodi- cal selection process; reestablish a "representative faculty advisory committee"; and review I revise our materials-weeding policy. 4. The library should form a standing "advisory automation committee" to assist the systems analyst in planning for ongoing technological innovations in automated systems within the library. 11 The Public and Technical Services Departments should be adequately represented and should have input in determin- ing goals and objectives for providing adequate, consistent, and integrated bibliographic · access to audiovisual equipment, maps, pamphlets, the Special Collections Room, periodi- cals, archival materials, realia, and loose-leaf publications such as the Readers Advisory Service. This com- mittee should disseminate informa- tion to the entire library staff, and when appropriate, suggest training and continuing education oppor- tunities for the staff. 5. The library must form an ad hoc "serials c;ommittee" to study and analyze the library's current treat- ment of serial publications. 12 First, the committee should define this li- brary's use of the term serials, then March 1992 they may develop a flow chart of all aspects of serials procedures (ac- quisitions, cataloging, circulation, binding, etc.). Further, they should consider this library's need for a serials cataloger or librarian. 6. The Technical Services Department should develop a statement setting a time limit on items awaiting cata- loging and classification.13 7. The Reference Department should develop a valid tool to determine whether the library is providing patrons with adequate assistance and accurate information. Currently, the Reference Department has quan- titative data but no method to assess the quality of services. They should compare notes with the "library user survey committee" to avoid duplicating efforts.14 8. The library should form an ad hoc "media services committee." First, this committee should define the role of "media services" in our li- brary, then assess how adequately our equipment serves faculty and students in their course-related work. The media services committee should also determine how well our audio- visual collection supports the in- structional program of the university.15 This committee may consider this guideline from Kania: "Depending on the organizational structure of the institution, the library may develop services other than those associated with traditional library functions, i.e., instructional materi- als, learning laboratories, etc."16 This committee may wish to develop a flow- chart of all aspects of media services procedures (from acquisitions to cat- aloging to circulation of audiovisual materials and equipment) for visual clarification and consolidation. Fi- nally, this committee may also re- view Media Services' personnel needs. 9. The bibliographic instruction librarian should provide voluntary, in-service training for the library staff (such as library orientation for new employees).17 10. The library should form an ad hoc "library user survey committee." Extensive student and faculty sur- veys were conducted in 1979 and 1983; another campuswide poll of faculty and students would serve us well now. The ad hoc committee should begin to compile survey questions, determine how to dis- tribute the survey, and be prepared to conduct it and study the results in the 1988 fall semester. The sur- vey should focus on, but not be limited to: library hours, reference desk hours, analysis of library users, awareness and use of library services, and the types of services the library should provide.18 11. An ad hoc "communication com- mittee" should be formed to en- courage the improvement of library communication (in-house and cam- puswide). At the very first self- study meeting (with the entire staff), all agreed that lack of com- munication is a weakness that can undermine everyone's hard work. Good communication is a must for effective operations and coopera- tion among us. However, effective ongoing com- munication among individuals and groups can be difficult to achieve. Thus a most important task for this committee is to determine how to keep the channels open and work- ing in everyone's mind. Already, many suggestions have been made. We must tell each other what we need to know, or our overall progress will be thwarted.19 12. An ad hoc "in-service training com- mittee" should be formed to identify educational sources and programs of possible use and relevance to li- brary staff members. However ex- tensive our formal education, we all want to keep up to date with new information and technological innovations, and to know more about intralibrary operations. This com- mittee would. look at voluntary, in- service training both internally and externally. Teaching each other and Process and Value of Self-study 155 learning together will help us become stronger, equal members of a team.20 13. The dean of library services must revise the library organization chart and communicate any revi- sions to the entire library staff. Per- haps an ad hoc committee (with adequate representation from the Public and Technical Services De- partments) could be formed to as- sist the dean. 21 14. The dean of library services may want to investigate the creation of a position of assistant to the dean of library services. The SSC came to this conclusion after interviewing the dean for over twenty hours about library policies, procedures, and history. We were pleased to note that Mander- ino Library excelled in many of Kania's standards. However, we noted with some bemusement that we excelled pri- marily in the standards labelled should and may. Now that we could look at our overall performance objectively, we sud- denly saw it in black and white: we were conscientiously doing most of the shoulds and all of the mays. We had unin- tentionally neglected many of the musts. As for the needs-to-improve list, the dean agreed with the SSC' s fourteen rec- ommendations. Immediately, he and the sse chair appointed nine specialized subcommittees to study specific topics and recommendations. The subcom- mittee titles are: • The Goals and Objectives Subcommittee • The Collection Standards Subcommittee • The Automation Subcommittee • The Serials Subcommittee • The Media Services Subcommittee • The User Survey Subcommittee • The Communication Subcommittee • The In-Service Training Subcommittee • The Organization Chart Subcommittee In addition, the public and technical services coordinators, bibliographic in- struction librarian, and the dean of li- brary services agreed to study the recommendations directed to them. All of these subcommittees worked in- dependently of the sse and the dean of library services. To enforce our commit- 156 College & Research Libraries ment to communication among ourselves, though, all subcommittees distributed copies of their minutes from meetings to the sse chairman, the dean, and the staff lounge bulletin board. The subcommittees frequently sought advice or clarification of points from the sse, and when re- quested, the sse chairman attended a sub- committee meeting. When necessary, the dean prodded slow-moving subcommittees and individuals. Here are two examples of what happened when subcommittees' dis- cussions were acted upon. The results of the first example were most typical. The work of the Goals and Objectives Subcommittee led to fruitful action and the successful completion of decisions and plans. At the beginning of the self-study process, Manderino Library did not fulfill Kania's first standard to "develop and communicate goals and objectives for its own program that are compatible with those of the institu- tion." The SSC determined that Mander- ino Library's previous written general mission statement was in need of revi- sion, and this subcommittee rewrote it as follows: The mission of the Louis L. Mander- ino Library is to support the goals and objectives of California University of Pennsylvania through effective or- . ganization of materials and techno- logical resources. The Library's role is to provide resources, instruction, and services to meet the educational, recre- ational, and research needs of faculty, students, alumni, and community pa- trons within the region. This subcommittee also generated a list of six · goals for Manderino Library. All were communicated to and ap- proved by the entire library staff. The second example, fortunately, was one of a kind. The newly established In-Service Training Subcommittee had used a for- mal questionnaire to survey the wants and needs of all library staff members, especially concerning established and new uses for automated systems and related innovations. Replies reaffirmed that the majority did want ongoing programs for internal orientation and training as well as outside speakers to expand their horizons. March 1992 The In-Service Subcommittee developed these ideas and suggested other means of continuing education in the hope of creat- ing a sense of unity of purpose and ~on­ tinued amiability among all library employees. In early 1989 and 1990, they sponsored two programs on stress man- agement, a first-aid workshop, a presen- tation by the university's grants director, and a slide show about Malawi, Africa. Unfortunately, enthusiasm ebbed quickly. Would-be participants dropped out, and several programs were poorly attended or canceled. Informal surveys indicated that perhaps the appeal of these voluntary continuing education sessions was not equal to the energy and time required or the disruption of established personal rituals, such as family plans. What had sounded interesting in discussion and on paper was ultimately rejected. At this point, it should be evident to the reader that we took Kania's model and applied it to our own institution, making minor modifications as the need for them arose. It worked for us. We omitted none of Kania's points because we believed that all were necessary to comply with the various sets of require- ments in outside evaluations we had to satisfy. Moreover, we added weeks of caution- ary planning to maximize the effective- ness of Kania's outline, and we added two conditions (musts) of our own: com- munication and training. In retrospect, we can see how essential communica- tion was and still is. Fortunately, we had perceived that the process would not work unless we added crucial com- munication before and during all steps. Even as communication became exces- sive-and people complained of reading minutes-they worried if they missed something. We grew weary of telling everyone everything, yet found it ad- dicting and beneficial. So many sets of different meeting minutes appeared on the staff bulletin board that other notices would not fit. Everyone was typing, making photocopies, and stuffing mail- boxes. Eleven groups of people were pro- ducing and distributing different sets of minutes regularly. Still, all that paper didn't mean that people actually read everything. Like most organizations, we suffered from the uni- versal problem of getting people to read things. Oddly enough, during the self- study this problem almost disappeared. People were personally involved enough to stay curious about new developments as time went on. Peer pressure may have helped as well. Individuals could no longer use the excuse "I didn't know" because open, consistent, and overwhelm- ing communiques appeared everywhere, and everyone knew it. FINISHING TOUCHES After all subcommittees and individu- als had submitted their final reports to the sse, the sse chair wrote a 300-page progress report (with the necessary as- sistance of a word processor and a secretary). This progress report would later be reviewed by our external and internal consultants, whom the sse chose during the fall 1988 semester. Agreeing to be our external consultant was the person whose research and self- study model had provided so much of our structure: Antoinette Kania. Our un- animous choice for internal consultant was JoAnn Nelson, a full professor in the Educational Studies Department at CUP, who also holds an M.L.S. The self-study process forced us to conduct studies and surveys to ana- lyze our performance, services, and interactions with clients. Prior to spending two days in Mander- ino Library during the spring semester of 1989, each consultant had read the SSC's 300-page progress report. Both con- sultants' written reports were included as appendices in the final sse report, which, at their suggestion, was greatly condensed to sixty-one pages. Both Kania and Nelson reaffirmed Manderino Library's many strengths and three major weaknesses (col- lection development, serials, and media services) that had already been identified by the SSC. We were pleased that the Process and Value of Self-study 157 consultants found our self-study to be so productive and so precisely on target. In her external consultation report, Kania suggested that we undertake a "review of the library's strategic plan in the light of [departmental objectives]." The dean agreed and asked that the SSC reconvene at the close of the self-study process to review the library's five-year strategic plan. Weary of months of self- examination, members of the sse were not immediately receptive to this idea. In short, we did not wish to embrace the new burdens of strategic planning. To help us rejuvenate and refocus our- selves, the dean suggested that we look at a book by Donald E. Riggs. In Strategic Planning for Library Managers, Riggs summarized where we had been and where we were now: Strategic planning begins with an objective analysis of the library's cur- rent strengths and weaknesses and how these weaknesses can be corrected. The appraisal must cover every functional area of the library. The results of this self-analysis can then provide a base for pursuing the strategic planning process.22 Back on track, the Self-Study Steering Committee found, to our surprise, that producing a new five-year strategic plan for the library was relatively effortless because of the logic and completeness of our self-study review. Quickly finishing this new task, the sse recommended that the following objectives be included in the dean's next revision of Manderino Library's strategic plan. With his ap- proval, the sse further suggested that the appropriate library department, committee, or individuals provide ac- tivities, budget requirements, local cri- teria levels, and a time frame for the completion of these objectives. Goal I: Collection Development and Evaluation • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the quality and vitality of the library's book collection. • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the quality and vi- tality of the library's serials collection. 158 College & Research Libraries • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the quality and vitality of the library's curriculum collection. • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the quality and vitality of the library's U.S. govern- ment documents collection. • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the quality and vitality of the library's Pennsyl- vania collection. • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the quality and vitality of the library's pamphlet collection. • To incorporate the aforementioned collection development procedures in the Acquisitions Policy Manual. • To try, once again, to include more faculty in the collection development and evaluation process. • To allocate funds for the organization and physical processing of archives and special collections. Goal II: Library Services • To establish a schedule for conducting library user and reference surveys, and performance studies. • To suggest solutions for the problem areas highlighted by the library user survey, reference department survey, and performance studies; i.e., the li- brary's hours, library noise and con- gestion, lack of awareness of certain library services by faculty and stu- dents (such as availability of typing rooms, telephone directories on mi- crofiche, photocopiers, and audio- visual materials and equipment). • To provide library orientation activi- ties for new faculty; included in this objective should be the in-service train- ing needs of faculty (old and new) in the use of automated retrieval systems. • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the quality and vitality of the library's reference collection. Goal III: Library Automation • To establish a standing advisory auto- mation committee. March 1992 • To ask the aforementioned committee to develop a preventive maintenance plan for the library's computer hard- ware and software. • To evaluate DIALOG services and CD- ROM indexes. • To automate the serials circulation procedures. Goal IV: Staff Development • To develop a continuing program of systematic instruction and practice to aid in staff development. • To encourage the improvement of li- brary communication (in-house and campuswide). • To request that all staff members par- ticipate in strategic planning at the de- partmental level. Goal V: Media Services • To develop and initiate a long-range plan for the evaluation of the library's audiovisual collection. • To investigate further the library's media services. A good starting point might be the Media Services Subcommittee re- port requesting that the university look at the role of media services on campus. THE IMMEDIATE RESULTS From an administrative and manage- rial standpoint, the entire self-study process and its results have proven it one of the most worthwhile projects ever un- dertaken in the Manderino Library. We recognized the following points as im- mediate benefits: 1. Meaningful Strategic Planning. After such an in-depth analysis, we were certain of the strengths, weak- nesses, and problems in our library system. As a result, strategic plan- ning took on a new dimension, making the development of a five- year plan relevant and important to more of the library staff. De- partmental and individual goals and objectives of the professional librarians have subsequently been tailored to act upon the SSC's final recommendations. For example, a newly formed automation advisory standing committee is already eval- uating our existing automated sys- tems as they work on a five-year plan for Manderino Library's fu- ture automation. Everyone now thinks of future directions instead of only the current semester. 2. Improved Communication. Be- cause so many people were in- volved, had input, and received constant updates, they automati- cally knew most of what was hap- pening as it happened. The process had an inherent check-and-balance system, and no one felt threatened. The self-study process and there- vised strategic plan are still actively representing how well people are communicating, both within the li- brary and between the library and other university departments. The final report was distributed widely, thus becoming a good public rela- tions tool as well as a source of information about the library and its programs. Internally, employees have a better understanding of the various jobs and duties of all staff members. 3. Orderly Collection Evaluation and Development. The entire process of evaluating and building the library's collection of both monographs and serials has been fine-tuned. A com- mittee of library faculty, library staff, and teaching faculty mem- bers has implemented an effective means of addressing and eliminat- ing deficiencies. Also, the com- mittee will enhance the collection over the next three years, earmark- ing a part of the materials budget specifically for this project. The committee is reviewing Books for College Libraries 3; recommend- ing bibliographies, and outstanding books and serials lists by discipline; analyzing circulation and usage fac- tors of materials presently owned by the library; and formulating the plan to address the outcomes of this process. The collection evaluation project is being handled by individual col- leges. The College of Science and Process and Value of Self-study 159 Technology completed the process in 1989-90, and the College of Edu- cation and Human Services is cur- rently working on its portion. 4. Improved Budgetary Allocations. Having our reviews and plans documented in such detail has made it easier to justify to the uni- versity administration increases and shifts in the total library budget. Eighteen months of research, quali- tative details, and quantitative data in widely read reports have made presentations to the university presi- dent and the cabinet more credible than usual. Our specific requests for money to support specific self-study recommendations are much easier to justify by referring to data than by simply claiming "the library needs more money." In 1990-91, were- ceived a 10 percent increase in the library's budget allocation over 1989-90. 5. Useful Assessments of Library Resources. The Kania model and the self-study process forced us to conduct studies and surveys to an- alyze our performance, services, and interactions with clients. Some pre- vious informal assessments about our effectiveness were certainly supported, and we now had clearer ideas about specific areas that would benefit from changes. For example, more than 90 percent of faculty and students who evaluated the reference librarians' services were more than satisfied with the quality and depth of the library's public services. Those surveyed also offered several suggestions for im- provements. 6. Compliance with ALA Standards. As we followed Kania's model, and afterward, it was easy to determine whether or not our library com- plied with the 1986 Standards for College Libraries. We now had docu- mentation to conduct an objective assessment of the application of performance and usage criteria that were so crucial to regional ac- creditation standards. The outcome 160 College & Research Libraries of our assessments matched those of our consultants. Anyone who cared to review the data would find no hidden secrets, self-congratula- tory conclusions, or misjudgments. Other university constituencies can easily understand how well we meet some of the standards' criteria and how we plan to achieve others. 7. Enhanced Atmosphere and Timing for Change. It is like spring clean- ing and garage sales. After you have decided to do one, the other one follows, and before you can think about procrastinating, you have done both, and you feel better. The endless interviews, research, and examinations that are insepa- rable from self-study open the way for redesigns, changes, additions, deletions, and improvements. In- dividuals directly involved with these changes are already participat- ing in the entire self-study process. Sometimes it is their idea to "go ahead and do this while we're at it." Or sometimes, the need for an ad- ditional employee changes from a perceived fantasy to an absolute re- ality; as supporting reasons accu- mulate, you wonder how you could have ever managed without this much-needed person. For example, one of the major rec- ommendations as a result of the self- study was to consolidate everything pertaining to serials within one de- partment and hire a serials librar- ian. Our new serials librarian joined us six months after the self-study process ended. This change was nat- ural; it was made as part of a total project and not done in isolation. 8. Total Staff Involvement. All twenty-eight members of the li- brary staff participated in the self- study in some way or another. This is crucial in achieving positive out- comes. Everyone stated his or her opinions, and could complain and be heard. In many cases, individu- als who had not previously inter- acted formally got a chance to do so, and we all benefited from the March 1992 equality. This concept may sound a bit elementary, but it is a factor not to be overlooked in organizational group dynamics or library politics. It was important and rewarding in our case, especially in our relation- ship to organized labor. What evolved into a policy of "com- munication without irritation" required attention to as well as honest, open ac- ceptance of each person's contribution and each detail of each meeting. As a balance to this civility, within the groups people were encouraged to vent frustra- tions. Complaints usually began, "He's driving me crazy!" or "I can't stand the way she does this!" The group then pro- vided suggestions to solve the day-to- day problems and restore harmony to the project. The endless interviews, research, and examinations that are inseparable from self-study open the way for rede- signs, changes, additions, deletions, and improvements. In all cases, all such decisions were made openly and aboveboard. Most people learned quickly that everything would be handled fairly, no matter who was involved, and they gained confi- dence as they saw that all contributions had an equal chance, no matter who offered them. As a last resort, the deci- sion moved up the chain of command to the dean, who acted from an administra- tive viewpoint. The cooperation and outstanding ef- forts of the entire faculty and staff con- tinue to be absolutely essential to our success. They took on the self-study process as part of, and in addition to, their respective job assignments with no release given, or expected. The entire study was accomplished with no reduc- tion of library services. CONCLUSION The dean of library services and the chairman of the sse (the authors of this article) have become firm believers in a process about which we were initially very skeptical. We thought it would take a great deal of work and a good deal of time, and it did. We were worried that all of our painstaking effort would be put on a shelf and never read. We were cer- tainly wrong about that. We were rewarded with unexpected praise and recognition. Beyond the list of benefits previously noted, we received a glowing evaluation, both written and verbal, from SSHE. The California Uni- versity of Pennsylvania administrators praised our program and the value of the ongoing results to the university. Kania was very pleased to see how well our manifestation of her published model worked. We were asked to talk about our self-study program at an ACRL regional meeting, and after our presentations over half the audience requested copies of our final report. 23 A WORD TO THE SKEPTICAL Did the Manderino Library really do what is described in this article? Yes, it did, and overall it was a positive ex- perience. Because a few colleagues who work at other libraries expressed doubts about the degree of our success, we have reexamined factors in our process to pin- point why we neither failed nor achieved only mediocre success. We discovered several things: existing conditions at other institutions that would predestine failure and certain established conditions and practices at CUP that were (and are) pivotal to our success. One colleague said, ''This would never work at my library. We lack sup- port from university administrators, in- cluding inadequate funds and staffing." Another complained that his school had weak library management, comple- mented by lazy employees. "I don't know how we would get them to do any of the self-study tasks. No one knows what's going on at the different job levels, and everyone's always suspicious of being given more work without more pay. It's us against them." At CUP, credit must go to positive preexisting conditions, an excellent libra:ry administration, and communication. Our Process and Value of Self-study 161 university is proud of our libra:ry; people throughout the system support us. Did we have problems? Yes, we did, and we dealt with them-immediately. Problems included passive/ aggressive behavior, union worries, long-term illness and re- covery, missed deadlines, and just plain dead ends. We recognize that we were well pre- pared to take on the self-study process in ways that other libraries may not be. Because our employees are unionized, we had to get the most value from them in accordance with their defined job posi- tions. By definition, we simply could not infringe upon their established job re- sponsibilities. While our employees needed to feel comfortable, interested, and unstressed, all of them had an im- portant role in the self-study process. The self-study process and its results have proven it one of the most worth- while projects ever undertaken in the Manderino Library. We now realize how well the demands of our self-study process blended with the Manderino Library's established work environment. Life went on. The reference librarian still had to work a full schedule, while squeezing in frequent meetings of the Communications Com- mittee and the SSC. As recording secretary of the sse, she took detailed notes, and then quickly edited, wrote, and produced minutes that were immedi- ately distributed to all libra:ry employees. In less than a day, eve:ryone knew eve:ry- thing that had just been discussed. And throughout that day, questions that con- tinued to pour into the reference desk were answered satisfactorily. It is important to remember that uni- versity libraries differ greatly. Other in- stitutions (especially those without unions) may be more unstructured, more spontaneous. Situations there may be handled as they occur, ih a variety of ways, rather than in strict accordance with a collective bargaining agreement. Some administrators may rule more au- 162 College & Research Libraries tocratically and be unfamiliar with the needs and concerns of their staff. If this is the case, we strongly recommend that this type of environment be modified before attempting our example of self- study process. We found that a "giveand take" attitude among all participants and the same kind of management style were basic to our process. Although "we" wrote this article, the March 1992 spirit behind the "we" encompasses all of us at Manderino Library. We are still in it together. The self-study process was not a wasted academic exercise but the basis for a motivational document that has continued to produce growth and changes at Manderino Library. People quote from the report daily. ''Why should we do this?" "This is a 'must'." "Oh ... right. No problem." No more need be said. REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. State System of Higher Education, "Academic Policies," a policy statement from the chancellor's office of SSHE, 1989, p.[6-7] [actually unpaged]. 2. Antoinette M. Kania, "Academic Library Standards and Performance Measures," College & Research Libraries 49:16-23 (Jan. 1988). This is how one library adapted an outline to suit a necessary self-study program. It is an application, and this article is not intended as a critical evaluation of Kania's model. 3. Placing students on the steering committee was a good idea that unfortunately did not work out. Students were busy with classes and studying; it was difficult for them to attend meetings. Their participation was voluntary and brought no monetary reward. 4. Kania, "Academic Library Standards," p.22-23. 5. Ibid., p.22. 6. Ibid., p.23. 7. Kania writes: "The primary standards are those statements that utilize the verb must to indicate that the achievement of these standards . . . ought to be considered mandatory for academic library regional accreditation .... [Secondary standards] utilize either the verb should to indicate a professional obligation to achieve, or may to indicate that achievement is optional and, therefore, only advisable." Ibid., p.22. 8. Ibid. 9. Ibid. 10. Ibid. 11. Ibid. 12. Ibid. 13. Ibid. 14. Ibid., p.23. 15. Ibid., p.22. 16. Ibid., p.23. 17. Ibid., p.22. 18. Ibid., p.23. 19. Kania did not cite ongoing communication as a specific, individual activity. We added it to her outline under IV. Staff Standards. Ibid. 20. Kania, "Academic Library Standards," p.23. 21. Ibid. 22. Donald E. Riggs, Strategic Planning for Library Managers (Phoenix, Ariz.: Oryx, 1984), p.20. 23. Presentation occurred at the Delaware Valley Chapter ACRL fall program, Nov. 2, 1990 (Philadelphia). This sixty-one-page spiral-bound report, Marsha L. Nolf, "Louis L. Manderino Library Self-Study Final Report," May 19, 1989 (California, Pa.: California University of Pennsylvania), is available to readers free of charge. Send $4.00 to cover photocopying and postage to MarshaL. Nolf, Manderino Library, California Univer- sity of Pennsylvania, California, PA 15419.