College and Research Libraries Making Academic Reference Services Work David W. Lewis Recent discussion of reference service in academic libraries has considered alternative approaches to service and has called on academic reference librarians to play new roles. Absent from most of the discussion is an understanding that organizational changes are required if reference librarians are to accomplish what is being asked of them. Without these· organizational changes these new roles and responsibilities will be impossible. To make reference service in academic libraries effective Jive changes are required: (1) reference librarians must be given clear budgetary and programmatic authority; (2) the hierarchy must be flattened and reference librarians placed closer to the top of the organization; (3) support services ·must be provided so that reference librarians are not encumbered by nonprofessional tasks; ( 4) reference librarians should be brought together and not isolated in small departments; and (5) public services planning and priority setting should be done by reference librarians. II he number of articles discuss- ing reference librarians and their roles and functions seems to have increased in the last several years. The topics range from new techniques and styles of reference to the confrontation with technology and staff burnout.1 I believe this recent discussion is more than the usual navel gazing. Its urgency reflects an under- standing that change is required, even if the problems being addressed are not yet clearly defined, and the answers are often platitudes. Such a response is not surprising considering the radical changes that have taken place in library and information technology over the past two decades. As Virginia Massey- Burzio states in explaining the justifica- tion for a major shift in approach to reference services at Brandeis Univer- sity, "Since the mid-1970s, we had been adding more and more services like on- line searching and bibliographic instruc- tion with little increase in staffing. The introduction of CD-ROM technology caused a bad situation to reach crisis pro- portions."2 The past twenty years have seen the introduction of online searching and OCLC, then OPACs and CD-ROMs. Now reference librarians have cheap ac- cess to full-text online databases, same- day document delivery, and the Internet. For many of us, the technological futures we imagined only a few years ago have already come and gone. Missing from most of this discussion is an understanding that unless organ- izational structures in academic libraries change, the reference librarians who are being asked to change their behaviors and roles understandably will balk. In many cases, the roles reference librari- ans are asked to play are incompatible with the way their work lives and their organizations are structured. Too often David W. Lewis is Head of Public Services at the University Libraries, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis, 755 West Michigan Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202-5195. E-mail address: dlewis@ind ycms.iupui.edu 445 446 College & Research Libraries reference librarians lack the incentives to cooperate, to change, and to excel. Sadly, the organizational structures of most academic libraries discourage pro- fessionalism. Academic libraries are bu- reaucratic and top heavy. They stifle initiative. After describing the over- whelming response to a request for pro- posals for the initial "Apple Library of Tomorrow" grants, Susan Martin com- ments, "If this response is an indication of thinking and planning, then the fault in the system [the failure to provide innova- tive services] does not lie with lack of imagination or creativity among librari- ans."3 It certainly does not. The fault lies with our organizations. What is remark- able is that so many talented and dedicated people battle against these odds to provide good service. In this article I will review the expectations that appropriately are be- ing placed on reference librarians and will look at the organizational changes that are required if reference librarians are to meet these expectations. BACKGROUND The recent discussion of reference may be traced back to Thomas Surprenant and Claudia Perry-Holmes' 1985 RQ article "The Reference Librarian of the Future: A Scenario."4 Unfortunately, but prob- ably not surprisingly, like much of the subsequent literature the Surprenant and Perry-Holmes article contains more exhortations and generalities than con- crete suggestions. Their concluding words, "What is most needed at this criti- cal juncture for librarians is an acceptance of innovation, a willingness to experi- ment, self-confidence in our abilities and potential, and most of all, a conviction to lead," are typical.5 Jerry Campbell con- cludes his widely discussed article, "Shaking the Conceptual Foundations of Reference: A Perspective," with a similarly sweeping challenge: I have outlined this new role for what are now our reference colleagues because they are uniquely qualified and situated to assume the role .... Yet, it is a stronger role than they pres- ently play. If they accept it, it will place upon them a large share of the burden September 1994 for creating a viable twenty-first-cen- tury library.6 Jennifer Cargill's more recent "The Electronic Reference Desk: Reference Service in an Electronic World" contin- ues in the same vein: Underlying this is the need to know our clients, our constituencies, better; Similarly, we must organize our li- braries for the user, not for the librar- ian. We must organize services to meet the actual information needs, habits, and preferences of patrons-not what librarians think is wanted. We must create the situation whereby librari- ans can provide the in-depth assis- tance and knowledge for which they are trained.7 Shelia Creth's "The Organization of Collection Development: A Shift in the Organization Paradigm" addresses simi- lar issues.8 The authors of the last three articles are directors at ARL libraries, and as such their views may be seen as representing the contemporary adminis- trative view of the role of reference li- brarians in academic libraries today. Although each approaches the prob- lem from a different perspective, all three authors stress the need for change. They all are looking for a different way to do reference - a way that is client- based and effectively applies the new electronic tools to increase quality and productivity. Campbell asks that we find a new "economic model."9 Cargill sug- gests that we must "focus and personal- ize our reference services to meet the needs of our various constituencies more effectively." 10 To do so she suggests that we must "redirect our energies from collection building and bibliographic control to concentration on information management and access." 11 Creth sug- gests that collection development, be- cause it combines concerns for both the user and the sources, "should provide the bridge or link to establish an integra- tive link in the research library."12 Perhaps the most intriguing specula- tion results from yet another perspec- tive. Michel Bauwens proposes that reference librarians must become both organizationally and technologically Making Academic Reference Services Work 447 networked. He says, "The proposed model of a strategic network of cybrari- ans is a way forward for integrating li- brarians into a network of experts. It requires from us a new attitude, centered on serving our clients, and an openness both to technology and to people, as ex- pressed in the concept of networking."13 Unfortunately, Bauwens' proposals are vague and are focused on librarians in industrial and research settings, but his concept is challenging, and his new job title, cybrarian is certainly more pleasing than Campbell's access engineer.t 4 A common theme of the work cited above is that the new role of the refer- ence librarian will be professionally ex- · citing and empowering, but as Tom Peters says at the beginning of his latest book, Liberation Management, "I've come to real- ize that, in this madcap world, turned-on and theoretically empowered people ... will never amount to a hill of beans in the vertically oriented, staff-driven, thick headquarters corporate structures that still do most of the world's business."15 Unfortunately, in the library world this truth has generally not been grasped. For instance, in concluding an article on man- aging emerging technologies, Susan Mar- tin states: "Technological activities will not in themselves require reorganization in the immediate future. After all, thus far, only those applications are being dis- cussed which are direct translations of functions which take place in a traditional structure."16 Sadly, academic libraries are in general as stifling as the business or- ganizations that Peters studies. What is missing in the exhortations cited above is an understanding that unless the structure of academic libraries changes, the roles that reference librarians need to play will be impossible to achieve. ASSUMPTIONS AND EXPECTATIONS I will use the terms reference services and reference librarian in a broad sense. My concepts include traditional refer- ence desk services, selection and liaison activities, and assume involvement in bibliographic instruction and the imple- mentation of a broad range of electronic products. Other nomenclature may be more descriptive, but I see no need, at this point, to depart from terms which are widely understood in the profession and the academic community at large. I would rather enhance the meaning of librarian and have it take on new mean- ing than abandon the term. In considering the roles and organiza- tional structures that must evolve if ref- erence services are to be successful over the next decade, I make the following assumptions: • Reference librarians will need to bal- ( ance a broad range of tasks--desk services, consultations, instruction, collection development, and involve- ment in implementing new technolo- gies.17 This list of assignments reflects the need to maintain traditional desk and instructional services as well as to add consulting serviCes and program and project development activities, especially with electronic products and services. • Reference librarians will require a broad generalist's background to deal · with a wide range of clients. At the same time subject expertise will be- come more important. It will be the basis for specialized reference work and liaison relationships with depart- ments, schools, ·and faculties. Subject expertise and liaison with a client base will become the unifying thread of ref- erence librarian's work. 18 • There will be no significant influxes of new resources. Staffing levels will, at best, remain constant. Increased pro- ductivity will be expected and required. • Library and information technologies will continue to change and evolve. This will require continued investment in equipment and a constant renewal of skills. These investments will, when wisely made, produce powerful and ef- fective information tools.19 • Campus networks will expand and many significant information re- sources will be made available over these networks. These resources will be developed locally and purchased from vendors. They will be available on machines in the library, elsewhere 448 College & Research Libraries on campus, and at other locations around the world. An important task for reference librarians will be inte- grating these resources and making them useful and convenient for client groups. • Despite the presence of expanding networks, the level of use and demand for materials and services in the li- brary building will continue at current levels, at minimum. • Library users will be more diverse in the experience, expertise, and back- ground. Reference librarians can be expected to be anxious and ambivalent when considering their future prospects. • There will be continued attempts to automate the reference desk func- tion-Campbell calls for 75 percent of all questions to be answered through the use of technology-and to · de- velop ways of using less highly trained staff.20.21 The desk function will be modified and supplemented, but the provision of assistance to users in the library will remain an important part of what reference librarians do. 22 • The constant change in technologies ~ will mean that demand for instruction in the use of the library's resources and services will continue to grow. Faculty expectations of the library will be outdated or unrealistic in many cases. Thus, meshing the library's ca- pabilities with the curriculum will be a continuing challenge.23 The combined effect of these forces will be demanding, if not overwhelm- ing, and while technology will offer some relief, achieving the possible bene- fits will require short-term investments of time, energy, and money that may prove difficult to generate. In addition, there are easy to imagine and widely heralded futures in which the library and the librarian are absent, replaced with smiling machines and software agents. Reference librarians can be expected to be anxious and am- September 1994 bivalent when considering their future prospects. In 1980 Brian Nielsen docu- mented similar concerns in his article "Online Bibliographic Searching and the Deprofessionalization of Librarian- ship," so at least this situation is familiar.24 Despite legitimate preoccupations about the future and expanding demands, ref- erence librarians will be more produc- tive. Using new tools, they will be able quickly to provide library users with in- formation that only a few years ago would have taken hours or even day(fo ferret out. They may feel fatigued, ~ut will be satisfied professionally as they speculate about whether or not they have a future. EXISTING ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES Too often, when librarians, especially library administrators, think about the organizational structures of libraries, they agree with Beverly Lynch: Libraries are Bureaucracies. The bu- reaucratic elements which critics iden- tify have their sources, not in the red tape or pettiness of officials, but in the attempt of the library to control its environment. The elements of bu- reaucracy emerge from its attempt to ensure its efficiency and its compe- tency and from its attempt to mini- mize the impact of outside influences. Although variations will exist in the bureaucratic conditions, libraries will remain bureaucratic in form. 25 In an article on conflict in academic libraries, William Pettas and Steven Gil- liland cite arguments similar to Lynch's and laud the stability and continuity provided by bureaucracies: "The impli- cation of bureaucratic efficiency, how- ever, is not that there is a lack of conflict in reaching desired objectives; rather, the implication is that methods of re- solving or lessening conflict are inherent in the bureaucratic structure. [Italics in the origina1.]"26 In other words, the bu- reaucratic structures in libraries will work if they are used correctly. While many have been slow to recog- nize the full implications, circumstances have changed and the advantages of bu- \ Making Academic Reference Services Work 449 reaucratic structures are no longer so compelling. Lewis Perelman, in his cri- tique of American education, states the case boldly: The decontrol of knowledge there- fore inevitably must drain the life- blood from bureaucracy. Information technology that diffuses and disperses the creation and communication of knowledge assaults the genetic pro- gram, the very DNA of bureaucracy, in a way that is ultimately indefensi- ble .... The more an organization or institution attempts to join the informa- tion revolution, the more the technology itself will break down the internal bu- reaucracy until the organization either becomes ungovernable, and breaks apart, or flips into a new, viable, but nonbureaucratic form of governance.27 What has become increasingly clear is how deeply the prevailing hierarchical and bureaucratic structures are entrenched in academic libraries. If we believe our own propaganda, academic libraries are in the vanguard of the information revolution. As such, we should not expect to escape the organ- izational changes predicted by Perel- man. Most academic libraries have automated their record structures and can now relax the tight controls neces- sary when standardized manual tasks were used to manage huge paper files. For many years the failure of bureau- cratic structures to integrate and coordi- nate across functions has led to task forces and committees in such numbers that committee participation is a signifi- cant part of most academic librarians' jobs. This is an overhead academic li- braries can no longer afford. To date, there have been some small modifications in the established ways academic libraries do business, but de- spite calls for more radical approaches, such as the use of matrix organizations, parallel structures, quality circles, or teams, little has changed. 28.29 Most aca- demic libraries remain hierarchical and bureaucratic, discretion and authority are closely held by administrators, and front-line librarians mix high-level pro- fessional work with routine tasks. Un- fortunately, as Charles Martell points out, "In libraries, the desire to protect power and control within the organiza- tion may lead some major stakeholders to ignore or minimize the needs of ex- ternal constituencies."30 He goes on, "Changes in the design of academic libraries are probably necessary if sig- nificant improvements are to occur in the organizational/ environmental fit. These changes would quite naturally in- clude the organizational structure."31 ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURES In response to the bureaucratic reality, the concept of a client-centered aca- demic library was developed some years agoY The most lucid expression of this model is Martell's Client-Centered Aca- demic Library.33 He proposed teams of three to five librarians with several sup- port staff, and suggested that these groups would provide advanced refer- ence, collection development, instruc- tion, and original cataloging in a specific area or discipline. Martell's organiza- tional chart shows these groups report- ing through a governing council to the library director.34 As Martell notes, his proposals are organizationally similar to those made by Booz, Allen & Hamil ton, Inc. for the Columbia University Library in the early 1970s.35 This model was not generally applied for several good reasons. First, the overwhelm- ing day-to-day demands of under- graduate students in the library and at the reference desk were difficult to rec- oncile with the less numerous, but more sophisticated and politically significant, demands of faculty. The client-centered model's implicit assumption-which I believe to be incorrect-was that the level of the individual making a query and the skills required to respond to it were directly related. Expert librarians would address the needs of faculty and advanced researchers and less skilled 450 College & Research Libraries staff would deal with freshmen. Sec- ondly, it generally has not been possible to coordinate the subject specific tasks in technical and public services, probably because the functional skills required to do advanced reference and to do origi- nal cataloging have both been changing rapidly. Some years ago I suggested an organ- izational paradigm for academic librar- ies.36 At that time I suggested that academic libraries should become pro- fessional bureaucracies. A professional bureaucracy, as I described it: relies for coordination on the stand- ardization and high level skills of its operators [librarians], and many deci- sions, both operational and strategic~ are made by these operators. Profes- sional bureaucracies tend to be decen- tralized and democratic for the professionals in the operating core. Be- cause of this decentralization there is a small middle line and large spans of con- trol. The technostructure is also small because many of its tasks are performed by the professional operators. The sup- port staff, on the other hand, tends to be large in order to give the professionals as much aid as possible. The strategic apex often does not so inuch supervise the operating core as provide a link to the broader environment.37 The central issue, as I saw it then, was to create an organization that could bal- ance the autonomy and discretion re- quired to innovate and the coordination and commonality of purpose required to focus thi~ innovation on a shared goal. The theory laid out in this article seems to remain sound. What has become in- creasingly clear is how deeply the pre- vailing hierarchical and bureaucratic structures are entrenched in academic libraries. Despite well-intentioned calls, like those cited above, for changes in the roles of reference librarians, I am firmly convinced that no fundamental change will come about until we transform the organizational structure of academic li- braries. Lynch identifies the need for li- braries to coordinate and to control tasks to ensure efficiency and competency. What we neglect when we heed this call is the September 1994 stifling effect of the controlling and co- ordinating mechanisms on our service goals. Service organizations must be reactive and · responsive to their clients. For }i:.. braries to become effective service or- ganizations they should create a climate in which professionalism, especially among reference librarians, can flourish. If reference librarians are going to in- novate and apply technology effec- tively, if they are going to restructure the library so that it meets its clients needs, and if they are going to be the library's representatives to significant portions of the academic community, then they must occupy a new place in the ·library's organizational structure. Academic libraries must move away from a concern for control and must place a strong emphasis on the need to allow truly professional practice and innovation. When in doubt, reference librarians should be set free to do what they think must be done. The organiza- tional structures of most libraries are not effective in today's environment. In the environment they will face to- morrow, they will fail completely. WHAT MUST HAPPEN An effective academic library should look like a law firm or an advertising agency. It should become a professional bureaucracy. Peters paints a picture of the effective organization as a lean, flex- ible, client-based, team-centered organi- zation responsive both to its customers and to changes in technology. These or- ganizations, Peters argues, must get close to markets and be small enough to shift focus quickly. He discusses the "four ephemerals"-"ephemeral 'or- ganizations' ... joined in ephemeral combinations ... producing ephemeral products ... for ephemeral markets ... FAST."38 Does this sound like your li- brary? These are our circumstances. They require a focus on serving users and on quickly developing user-based services and programs, and then chang- ing them when the sources or the client groups change. If academic libraries are to become client-centered, they must de- Making Academic Reference Services Work 451 velop a variety of services and ways of delivering them. There are, after all, many clients, and the whole point of focusing their needs is to provide serv- ices to them in a way they find useful and convenient. We need to change our way of thinking. Rather than trying to find the one way of doing business that serves most people well, we need to pro- vide mechanisms that allow us to de- velop many different ways to serve many niche groups. Reference librarians can and should do this work and as such are quickly becoming the library's most valuable re- source. This central truth needs to be recognized. To maximize the effective- ness of reference librarians, five things must happen: 1. Reference librarians must be given clear budgetary and programmatic authority. 2. The hierarchy must be flattened and reference librarians placed closer to the top of the organization. 3. Support services must be provided so that reference librarians are not encumbered by nonprofessional tasks. 4. Reference librarians should be brought together and not isolated in small departments. 5. Public services planning and prior- ity setting should be done by refer~ ence librarians. Give Reference Librarians Authority Reference librarians need to become the library's customer service repre- sentatives and product developers. To play this role they will need to have authority and autonomy. This is the key issue: authority does not mean consult- ation; authority means the ability to make decisions. There are two important authorities. The first is the authority to speak for the library. Reference librarians must be able to commit to the development or modi- fication of programs to meet the specific needs of a client group. To do this, refer- ence librarians need to be knowledge- able about the library's affairs. They need to be kept fully aware of budget and policy decisions. A second authority is also essential- the authority to spend money. While the authority to select books is common, this is the limit of financial discretion that is allowed most reference librarians. In many cases, especially in response to es- calating prices and budget constraints, even journal subscription decisions are made at a higher level. Equipment and software are generally requested by de- partment heads and allocated annually by senior administrators. Coordination, continuity, and budget control, espe- cially in these times of declining re- sources, are used to justify these practices. These values are no longer the most im- portant. More important is the need to match an ever-changing client group to an ever changing set of information services and products. A centrally administered budget with tightly held fiscal discretion is not capable of this. This approach cre- ates disincentives and encourages be- haviors that make doing more with less impossible. Individual librarians and departments need to be given budget allocations, and they need to be able to spend the money as they see fit. Only at this level is it possible to determine what is actually needed and what can be eliminated. This does not imply that there would be no accountability; rather, it means that both discretion and ac- countability should be passed down. Flatten the Hierarchy The need to flatten the hierarchy in academic libraries goes beyond the com- monly cited issue of communication. Pettas and Gilliland state the usual argu- ment, "The multiple layers of manage- ment within a large library may hinder communication of organizational objec- tives and the intent of policies and pro- cedures."39 But after explaining that most libraries are relatively small or- g.anizations that have hierarchies com- parable to much larger organizations, they go on to justify the hierarchy by suggesting that the coordination will be difficult and that managers will experi- ence greater demands and stress if their 452 College & Research Libraries span of control is too large.40 Though common, this view is mistaken. Flattening the hierarchy is essential if reference librarians are to be effec- tive. Regardless of how much responsibil- ity has been assigned theoretically, if a reference librarian reports to someone who reports to someone who reports to the direc- tor, that librarian cannot make important decisions. 41 That librarian cannot authorita- tively represent the library to faculty who have an open door to the director three levels up in the organization. In this situ- ation faculty, who know where the power lies, will take their concerns to a higher level and leave the reference librarian to deal with trivial concerns. Whatever support services the library director enjoys should be available to all reference librarians. It is my view that reference librarians should have no more than one manager between them and the library director. This should be possible in even large ARL libraries. This manager should serve as a managing partner rather than as a super- visor, and as such should be concerned with managing decision-making proc- esses and communication, coordinating resource allocations, and coordinating of support services. Management of major reference programs such as instruction and desk services should be shared or rotated. Task teams should be used to establish new programs or services. Spans of con- trol should be six to ten people. Provide Support Services There is a simple test. Whatever sup- port services the library director enjoys should be available to all reference li- brarians. They should have full secretar- ial support, their telephones should be answered, their mail screened, and rou- tine correspondence and reports should be handled by support staff. In addition, special services, such as desk top pub- lishing, should be available and there should be support for maintaining and developing technologies. September 1994 I suspect that there is little theoretical disagreement with this position; rather, financial constraints will be cited as an excuse for not providing these levels of support. What should be under- stood is that reference departments are better off, if there is no other choice, trading a reference librarian for an ad- ministrative assistant. Seven reference librarians and an administrative assis- tant will be more productive than eight reference librarians who do their own clerical work. A related issue is training. Reference librarians will need new skills, and li- braries should expect to provide incen- · tives and support for training. This will be different from the usual professional development support that consists of at- tending conferences and one-day work- shops. Something more substantial is required. Ubraries should provide support for courses and degrees. The aim must be the acquisition of new technical proficiencies. This will require additional continued in- vestment in human resources. Bring Reference Librarians Together Bringing reference librarians together physically may seem at odds with the notion of putting them in touch with their clients who are spread out all over cam- pus, but this is not so.42 Bringing reference staff together provides several benefits. First, the provision of support services is easier and more efficient if staff are clus- tered together. Second, proximity pro- vides for the informal interactions that lead to a common sense of purpose and make working cooperatively easier. Fi- nally, by creating large departments, the organization is flattened. The consolidation of service points into larger operations makes it possible to use staff more efficiently. As noted above, there is and will continue to be a tension between the need to meet the day-to-day demands of large numbers of undergraduates and the need to de- velop and implement new sophisticated services. A tension between the general and process skill required to deal with beginning students and the subject ex- pertise required to assist faculty andre- Making Academic Reference Services Work 453 searchers will remain. The resources needed to provide high-level, sophisti- cated, and individualized assistance to everyone who walks in the door do not exist. Bringing reference staff together and consolidating service points makes it easier to mix staff and to maximize the effectiveness of available resources. The easiest consolidation is to integrate in- formation desks and documents service points ·with general reference desks. Special or subject services points, espe- cially inside a central building, should be eliminated. Planning While the need to develop and maintain the professional discretion of reference librarians should remain paramount, there is a legitimate concern that unbri- dled and uncoordinated professional discretion will lead to chaos and people working at cross-purposes. To assure that the authority reference librarians should have is channelled toward a com- mon goal will require a formal and seri- ous planning process. This process ought to decide issues such as the bal- ance between desk services and instruc- tion or consultation services. It should formulate strategies for pursuing all as- pects of the library's public services pro- gram. It should decide what the electronic product mix will be for the coming year- which new services will be developed and which will be dropped. In my experience, this is a several-day process requiring the active participation of all of the reference librarians. It also requires preparation and follow-through. It is a time-consum- ing but essential activity. The important difference between what needs to happen and most library planning is that the decisions taken will be implemented and substantial re- sources, both dollars and staff, will be put on the table. The result must be im- plementable plans, not recommenda- . tions to the library's administration. If such planning is to be effective, all ref- erence librarians will need to develop analytic and group process skills. Over time an effective planning process should encourage a sense of common purpose and trust between individual professionals. When this happens, the library will begin to become an effective organization. IMPLEMENTATION As libraries adapt to the revolution in information technology and develop or- ganizational structures to take advan- tage of these changes, reference services will become the primary function of the academic library, and reference librari- ans, if they are effective, will become the libraries' most valuable resource, more valuable even than the collection. This is a revolutionary change. The library will become an institution centered on its hu- man resources. To assure that the authority reference librarians should have is channelled toward a common goal will require a formal and serious planning process. This revolution will require a radical departure from the generally accepted view that public and technical services are equally important and should re- ceive roughly equal levels of support. I suggest that this apparently balanced view will lead to a misallocation of re- sources. Library administrators should be doing everything in their power to push the inevitable trend of streamlin- ing and outsourcing technical services operations. It is clear that large external organizations can be significantly more efficient than most libraries in providing technical services. It is useful to compare the average cost of cataloging, easily in excess of $30 per title in most libraries, with costs available from outside ven- dors such as OCLC."3 Funds saved by streamlining technical services should be put into reference staff and the sup- port they need to operate effectively. It also will be critical for reference li- brarians to accept the challenge that this model presents. If they are comfortable waiting behind a desk for the world to come to them, if they are not willing to change their ways of working so that 454 College & Research Libraries they become more productive, then they will deserve their fate. Reference librari- ans will need to develop new roles be- cause the functional skills that might have given them professional status a few years ago, such as online searching skills, are now taught to junior high school students. Reference librarians need to see them- selves as technology transfer agents, as the catalysts of the information revolution. They sit at the locus between stude~ts and faculty and the rapidly changing informa- tion technology. It is a unique position that combines a knowledge of what is possible and what is required. This is not a role for the comfortable and the contented. Those reference li- brarians who do not accept the challenge will be left behind. A decade ago Brian Nielsen considered the conflict between the reference librarian as teacher and the September 1994 reference librarian as intermediary. He suggested that neither model was ade- quate and urged that reference librarians move away from the classic professional model that places users in a dependency relationship.44 A key assumption of the above analysis is that creating client-based services requires reference librarians to do as Nielsen asked. The current informa- tion technology allows, and even en- courages, individuals to use the tools without intermediaries. What is re- quired is someone to shape the tools to the particular needs of user groups. I be- lieve reference librarians have an oppor- tunity to achieve the new role Nielsen envisioned. But they can do so only if academic libraries are structured appropriately. Without organizational changes exhortations, no matter how challenging, will have little effect. REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. The most interesting discussions of techniques and styles of reference are found in a series of Journal of Academic Librarianship symposiums. See "Reference Encounters of a Different Kind: ASymposium," Journal of Academic Librarianship 18 (Nov.1992): 276-86·"Do Library Patrons Know What's G~ for Them?: A Symposium," Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (May 1990): 76-85, or "Replacing the Fast Fact Drop-In with Gourmet Information Service: A Symposium," Journal of Academic Librarianship 11 (May 1985): 68-78 Also see Rethinking Reference in Academic Libraries: The Proceedings and Process of Library Sol~tjons Institute No. 2, ed. Anne Grodzins Lipow, Berkeley, Calif.: Library Solutions Press, 199¥ and Adeane Bregman and Barbara Mento, "Reference Roving at Boston College," C&RL News 53 (Nov. 1992): 634-37/lfor discussions of the impact of technology, see Jerry D. Campbell, "Shaking the Conceptual Foundations of Reference: A Perspective," RSR Reference Services Review 20 (Wmter 1992): 29-36 Jennifer Cargill, "The Electronic Reference Desk: Reference Service in an Electronic World," Library Administration & Management6 (Spring 1992): 82-85/ Charles R. Hixson III, "CD-ROM and the Undergraduate: Reference and Instruction at Risk," RSR Reference Services Review 21 (Fall1993): 31-34,42, 6r Ilene F. Rockman, ed., "Reference Librarian of the Future: A Symposium," RSR Reference Services Review 19 (Spring 1991): 71-80 Recent discussions of burnout include Karen A. Becker, "The Charac- teristics of Bibliographic lnst~ction in Relation to the Causes and Symptoms of Burnout," RQ 32 (Spring 1993): 346-57, Ron Blazek and Darlene Ann Parrish, "Burnout and Public Services: The Periodical LiteratureofLibrarianship in the Eighties," RQ 31 (Fal11992): 48-59/ or John Kupersmith, "Technostress( and the Reference Librarian," RSR Reference Services Review 20 (Summer 1992): 7-14,50. 2. Virginia Massey-Burzio, "Reference Encounters of a Different Kind: A Symposium," Journal of Academic Librarianship 18 (Nov.1992): 276. 3. Susan K. Martin, "Information Technology and Libraries: Toward the Year 2000," College & Research Libraries 50 ijuly 1989): 400. 4. Thomas T. Surprenant and Claudia Perry-Holmes, "The Reference Librarian of the Future: A Scenario," RQ 25 (Winter 1985): 234-38. 5. Ibid., 238. 6. Campbell, "Shaking the Conceptual Foundations of Reference: A Perspective," 35. 7. Cargill, "The Electronic Reference Desk: Reference Service in an Electronic World," 82. Making Academic Reference Services Work 455 8. Shelia D. Creth, "The Organization of Collection Development: A Shift in the Organization Paradigm," Journal of Library Administration 14 (1991): 67-85. 9. Campbell, "Shaking the Conceptual Foundations of Reference: A Perspective," 33. 10. Cargill, "The Electronic Reference Desk: Reference Service in an Electronic World," 85. 11. Ibid. 12. Creth, "The Organization of Collection Development: A Shift in the Organization Para- digm,"77. 13. Michel Bauwens, "The Emergence of the 'Cybrarian': A New Organizational Model for Corporate Libraries," Business Information Review 9 (Apr. 1993): 67. 14. Campbell, "Shaking the Conceptual Foundations of Reference: A Perspective," 32. 15. Tom Peters, Liberation Management: Necessary Disorganization for the Nanosecond Nineties (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1992), 13. 16. Susan K. Martin, "Library Management and Emerging Technology: The Immovable Force and the Irresistible Object," Library Trends 37 (Winter 1989): 382. 17. The combination of reference and collection development responsibilities while not univer- sal, is the generally accepted practice and can be expected to continue. See Cre~, "The Organization of Collection Development: A Shift in the Organization Paradigm" pr David G. Null, "Robbing Peter ... Balancing Collection Development and Reference Responsibili- ties," College & Research Libraries 49 (Sept. 1988): 448-52. 18. An interesting example of the possibilities is provided in Lori Arp and Gerald ijay) Schafer, "Connecting Bibliographic Instruction and Collection Development: A Management Plan," RQ 81 (Spring 1992): 398-406. 19. This is clearly the case for OPACs; see David W. Lewis, "Research on the Use of Online Catalogs and Its Implications for Library Practice," Journal of Academic Librarians/zip 13 ijuly 1987): 152-57. It is also true of general periodical indexes on CD-ROM; see Douglas J. Ernest and Holley R. Lange, "INFOTRAC and WILSONDISC: A Comparison of New Technologies," RSR Reference Services Review 17 (Summer 1989): 67-75, or Lawrence E. Compton "A Study of the Use of CD-ROM Systems and Print Indexes at the University of Georgia Main Library," ERIC Document ED333892, 1991. An example of a further possibility is the Gateway project at Ohio State University; see Fred Roecker, "The Gateway: User Education in a Changing Environ- ment," Research Strategies 10 (Summer 1992): 111-14, or Philip J. Smith and Virginia liefel, "The Information Gateway: Designing a Front-End Interface to Enhance Library Instruction," RSR Reference Services Review 20 (Wmter 1992): 37-48. 20. Campbell, "Shaking the Conceptual Foundations of Reference: A Perspective," 32. 21. See, for example, Massey-Burzio, "Reference Encounters of a Different Kind: A Sympo- sium," or Beth S. Woodward, "The Effectiveness of an Information Desk Staffed by Graduate Students and Nonprofessionals," College & Research Libraries 50 ijuly 1989): 455-67. While the successful use of nonprofessional staff at reference desks has been reported, so have failures; see John 0. Christensen and others, "An Evaluation of Reference Desk Service," College & Research Libraries 50 ijuly 1989): 468-83. 22. Despite the Brandeis experiment described by Massey-Burzio, "Reference Encounters of a Different Kind: A Symposium," and calls like those from Barbara Ford, "Reference beyond (and without) the Reference Desk," College & Research Libraries 47 (Sept. 1986): 491-94, I contend that a reference desk will remain in most academic libraries for some time to come. The problems with the typical reference environment documented by Joan C. Durrance, "Reference Success: Does the 55 Percent Rule Tell t}l.e Whole Story?" Library Journa/114 (Apr. 15, 1989): 31-36 does, however, indicate the need for modification of today's typical reference envi- ronment. 23. See, for example, Caroline Blumenthal, Mary Jo Howard, and William R. Kinyon, "The Impact of CD-ROM Technology on a Bibliographic Instruction Program," College & Research Libraries 54 ijan. 1993): ll-1~{Stephen K. Stone, "Research and Information Retrieval among Academic Researchers: Implications for Library Instruction," Library Trends 39 (Winter 1991): 238-58( or Emily L. Werrell and Threasa L. Wesley, "Promoting Information Literacy through a Faculty Workshop," Research Strategies 8 (Fall1990): 172-80. 24. Brian Nielsen, "Online Searching and the Deprofessionalization of Librarianship," Online Review 4 (Sept. 1980): 215-24. 25. Beverly P. Lynch, "Libraries as Bureaucracies," Library Trends 27 (Winter 1979): 267. 456 College & Research Libraries September 1994 26. William Pettas and Steven L. Gilliland, "Conflict in the Large Academic Library: Friend or Foe?" Journal of Academic Librarianship 18 (Mar. 1992): 27. 27. Lewis J. Perelman, School's Out: Hyper/earning, the New Technology, and the End of Educa- tion (New York: Morrow, 1992), 118. 28. See, for example, Peggy Johnson, "Matrix Management: An Organj zational Alternative for Libraries," Journal of Academic Librarianship 16 (Sept.1990): 222-29; William Fisher and Beth L. Brin, "Parallel Organization: A Structure Change Theory," Journal of Library Administra- tion 14 (1991): 51-66/ Charles Martell and John Tyson, "QWL Strategies: Quality Circles," Journal of Academic Librarianship 9 (Nov. 1983): 285-87., Joan S. Segal and Tamiye Trejo-Mee- han "Quality Circles: Some Thepry and Two Experiences," Library Administration & Man- agement 4 (Winter 1989): 16-19; Katherine W. Hawkins, "Implementing Team Management in the Modern Library," Library Administration & Management 4 (Winter 1989): 11-15 or Gerald R. Lowell and Maureen Sullivan, "Self-Management in Technical Services: The Yale Experience," Library Administration & Management 4 (Winter 1989): 20-23. 29. See Barbara B. Moran, "The Unintended Revolution in Academic Libraries 1939 to 1989 and Beyond," College & Research Libraries 50 {Jan. 1989): 25-41, especially the sections on "Organizational Patterns" and "Staff," for a good review of the history and current state of academic libraries. 30. Charles Martell, "The Nature of Authority and Employee Participation in the Management of Academic Libraries," College & Research Libraries 48 (Mar. 1987): 110-22. 31. Ibid., 112. 32. See Gardner Hanks and C. James Schmidt, "An Alternative Model of a Profession for Librarians," College & Research Libraries 36 (May 1975): 175-87. Hanks and Schmidt's primary focus is professional rather than organizational, but they lay important groundwork. 33. Charles R. Martell, Jr., The Client-Centered Academic Library: An Organizational Model, (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood, 1983). 34. Ibid., 74. 35. Organization and Staffing of the Libraries of Columbia University: A Case Study, prepared by Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc., (Westport, Conn.: Redgrave Information Resources Corp., 1973). Martell's client-centered groups have the same responsibilities as those of the Re- sources Group proposed by Booz, Allen & Hamilton. 36. David W. Lewis, "An Organizational Paradigm for Effective Academic Libraries," College & Research Libraries 47 {July 1986): 337-53. 37. Ibid., 339. The theoretical structure underlying this argument comes from Henry Mintzberg- see Henry Mintzberg, The Structure of Organizations, (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1979). 38. Peters, Liberation Management, 18. . 39. Pettas and Gilliland, "Conflict in the Large Academic Library: Friend or Foe?" 27. 40. Ibid., 28. 41. When stated this way it may seen odd, but this is the usual circumstance for academic reference librarians. See the organizational charts in Organizational Charts in ARL Libraries: SPEC Kit 170 (Washington, D.C.: Office of Management Studies, Association of Research Libraries, January 1991). Nearly thirty ARL libraries supplied their organizational charts and in almost all cases there were at least two managers between the typical reference librarian and the library director, in some cases there were three layers. 42. Patricia Suozzi and Sandra Kerbel argue this point and contend that branch libraries should be considered as models rather than as "misfits." See Partricia A. Suozzi and Sandra S. Kerbel, "The Organizational Misfits," College & Research Libraries 53 (Nov. 1992): 513-22. An interesting example of the centralize I decentralize arguments can be found in "Centrali- zation or Decentralization of Library Collection.s: A Symposium," Journal of Academic Librarianship 9 (Sept. 1983): 196-202. 43. See George Harris, "Historic Cataloging Costs, Issues, and Trends," Library Quarterly 59 {Jan.1989): 1-21 or Dilys E. Morris, "Staff Time and Costs for Cataloging," Library Resources & Technical Services 36 {Jan. 1992): 79-95. 44. Brian Nielsen, "Teacher or Intermediary: Alternative Professional Models in the Information Age," College & Research Libraries 43 (May 1982): 188.