College and Research Libraries Centralization and Decentralization In Academic Libraries: A Symposium These papers were presented at the forty-sixth annual Con- ference of Eastern College Librarians at Columbia University, November 26, 1960. The papers are by Douglas W. Bryant, As- sociate Librarian, Harvard University; Stephen A. McCarthy, Director of Libraries, Cornell University; and Donald T. Smith, Administrative Assistant to the Director of Libraries, Boston University. Maurice F. Tauber, Melvil Dewey Professor of Li- brary Service, Columbia University, prepared the Introduction. Introduction c r / C E N T R A L I Z A T I O N " is a term that has v_>< been used in library nonmencla- ture to mean several things, depending upon the adjective used to qualify it. For example, we have "administrative cen- tralization," which generally has meant control of a number of library units by a central officer. Or, we may have "physi- cal centralization" of a system of li- braries, in which all units are located ei- ther in a single building or a restricted number of locations. Or, we may have "operational centralization," in that cer- tain operations are performed in a single place by a single personnel for the vari- ous units of a system. As in any opera- tion that includes many built-in rela- tionships and peculiar aspects developing from local conditions, there are various combinations of these types of centraliza- tion, depending again upon such factors as historical conditions, personality strengths or weaknesses, types of library quarters, and the nature of library oper- ations. One library may well have admin- istrative centralization but not physical nor operational centralization. Why is this question of centralization important enough for so many librarians to come to a meeting and listen to a panel discuss it? Is it not a question that is so dependent upon local conditions (people, buildings, services, etc.) that such discussion can only be academic and not solve the basic problem of cen- tralized or decentralized library service— to provide the best service in the most economical and elfective ways possible. Because it is an issue that has received constant attention in the literature of li- brarianship, and because it represents a basic problem that besets academic ad- ministrative officials and librarians, it has the character of a significant topic for pe- riodic re-examination. Moreover, at this period in the development of academic libraries in the United States, it is be- coming more and more a matter of spe- cific concern to librarians. T h e follow- ing conditions or activities, for example, may be cited in connection with this con- cern: 1. The constantly rising costs of aca- demic library operation. 2. The development of new libraries on various campuses in academic in- stitutions. 3. The absorption of academic units and their libraries in expanding university developments. 4. T h e development of entirely new campuses of part of state univer- sity library systems. 5. T h e expansion of small college li- braries into university library sys- tems. 6. T h e re-examination of the values of centralized control for professional school libraries as compared to de- partmental libraries. 7. T h e relation of an individual insti- tution to the library system of a re- gion—that is, the relation of a li- brary to an interlibrary facility, which is designed to provide aspects of centralized services. 8. T h e relation of an individual insti- tution to a national library service, whether it is a centralized acquisi- tion operation (Farmington Plan), a card service (Library of Congress), or a bibliographical undertaking (Union List of Serials). It is obvious that developments in the latter areas are of direct importance to all units of a particular library system, and the extent to which regional or na- tional library centers or services provide aid may well have a bearing on the op- erations of individual departmental or professional units. Obviously, there must be a program in the direction of using regional and national services and re- sources to the maximum. T h e discussion that follows has been planned deliberately around various pos- sibilities in centralized services. Douglas Bryant will describe the characteristics of the Harvard library system and the fac- tors which have given rise to it. At Cor- nell, Stephen McCarthy has been work- ing with a problem of integrating a state university library program with that of a private library program. At both Har- vard and Cornell, the problem of cen- tralization of services has been a major one for many years. T h e inclusion of Donald Smith on the program was deliberate, because of his association with a university that is mov- ing toward greater centralization than it has had in its previous history. Boston University has been growing in enroll- ment, faculty, curricular diversification, schools, and library problems. T h e pros- pect of a centralized library service for Boston University involves administra- tive, physical, and operational decisions. How Boston will decide is of interest to all librarians in this period of enlarge- ment of library programs. This problem of centralization is one that will not be settled by this panel. However, by exhaustively studying indi- vidual situations we may be able to ar- rive at generalizations that will be of value to the profession at large.—Man- rice F. Tauber. Centralization and Decentralization at Harvard HAVING B E E N in Cambridge eight years, I am now willing to attempt a de- scription of the organization of the Har- vard University Library. It is no small task to work one's way through the intri- cacies of this large and complex library system, but I hope this morning to con- duct you through the maze in such a way as to give you some idea of the struc- ture of this library, of why this struc- ture seems to be satisfactory for Harvard, and of how it helps to make the library a singularly effective instrument for teaching and research. Harvard University as a whole is a rel- atively decentralized institution; its many units enjoy perhaps more autonomy and carry more responsibility than is gen- 328 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S erally the custom in American universi- ties. The ten faculties and the dozens of departments and research institutions that comprise the university are held to- gether with a minimum of formal organ- ization and red tape. Their policies and programs are coordinated through the various relationships among the presi- dent and governing boards, the deans of faculties, department chairmen, and di- rectors of institutions. There is a much honored maxim at Harvard that "every tub stands on its own bottom." This is an accurate description of the adminis- trative freedom and financial responsi- bility individually carried by the many units within the university. U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R Y C O M P O N E N T S T h e Harvard University Library re- flects this decentralization in the univer- sity's organization. T h e university stat- utes provide that, " T h e University Library consists of all the collections of books in the possession of the Univer- sity." T h e director of the university li- brary, who holds the Carl H. Pforz- heimer University Professorship, is also ex-officio Librarian of the Harvard Col- lege Library. T h e university library is composed of ninety units, including the Harvard College Library, which, though existing for the general use of the whole university, is in a special sense the li- brary of the faculty of arts and sciences and is a department within that faculty. With the college library, to quote the statutes again, "are included for admin- istrative purposes the special libraries be- longing to the Departments of the Fac- ulty of Arts and Sciences as well as the libraries of the various institutions for advanced study and research" that are affiliated with the faculty of arts and sciences. The Harvard College Library (containing about one half of the ninety units in the entire system) con- sists of: 1. The central collection, housed in the Widener, Houghton, and Lamont buildings and administered directly by the librarian of Harvard College. 2. The nine house libraries (generally of eleven thousand to fifteen thousand volumes) of the upper-class dormitories, administered by the house masters with the collaboration of the librarian of the Lamont Library. 3. The thirty-two departmental librar- ies within the faculty of arts and sciences, administered primarily by the depart- ment chairmen and the heads of the li- braries, all of whom work in varying ways and degrees with the librarian of Harvard College. Closely associated with the college li- brary are the twenty libraries of the in- stitutions for advanced study and re- search that are affiliated with the faculty of arts and sciences. Typical of these are the William Hayes Fogg Art Museum, the Museum of Comparative Zoology, the Harvard-Yenching Institute, the Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection in Washington, and I Tatti at Florence. Several of the principal libraries at Harvard are among those that belong to the nine graduate schools other than arts and sciences. These include such,major collections as the law, business adminis- tration, medical, and divinity libraries. Finally, there are the university archives located in the Widener building, about fifteen office and small special collections, and the Harvard books in the New Eng- land Deposit Library. " C O O R D I N A T E D D E C E N T R A L I Z A T I O N " How is this congeries of libraries held together and integrated sufficiently to form a library system? What are the means for attaining the "coordinated de- centralization" that characterizes the or- ganization of these collections with such varied administrative and financial bases? For the ninety units of the university li- brary do form a whole and work together in supporting the teaching and research programs of the uiversity and its scholars. S E P T E M B E R 1 9 6 1 329 A brief historical note may be of in- terest. Departmental libraries have ex- isted at Harvard since the establishment of the law library in 1817, and until 1880 these libraries were virtually independ- ent. In that year the corporation voted to unite them (except law) by several de- vices, including the creation of the union catalog to record the library resources of the whole university. T h i s process of coordination was advanced in 1910 by the creation of the office of director of the university library. T h e p r i n c i p a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for achieving coordination among the ad- ministratively and geographically decen- tralized libraries rests with the director of the university library. While he di- rectly administers the Harvard College Library, it is important to bear in mind that his relation to the other libraries in the university is that of influential coun- selor rather than direct administrator. T h e librarians of these libraries main- tain relations of varying degrees of close- ness with the director and his immediate staff, but their primary line of authority is to the deans, the department chair- men, and the directors of institutions, who head the units to which their li- braries belong. T h e director of the uni- versity library, who is ex-officio the chair- man of the committee on the library of the faculty of arts and sciences, is also a member of all the administrative com- mittees of other libraries in the univer- sity. T h i s arrangement provides for ef- fective participation in the affairs of those libraries that have faculty commit- tees. Continuing informal contact with the librarians and heads of the many parts of the university also enables the director to see that personnel and salary standards are maintained throughout the university library insofar as local finan- cial and other limitations will permit. Further, these contacts enable him to make sure that book selection policies throughout the system provide for no un- wanted or indiscriminate duplication and for coverage of all subject fields rele- vant to the university's programs of teaching and research. T h e members of the staff of the director's office and the department heads and other senior li- brarians in the college library form a kind of pool of experts who are con- sulted in all aspects of library policy and operation by the heads of university de- partments and their librarians. At the present time, for example, as the result of requests from two department chair- men in the faculty of arts and sciences and the director of a research institution, a librarian in the college library is sur- veying three libraries in order to make recommendations for administrative, or- ganizational, and fiscal improvements in their individual arrangements and their interrelationships. A major step in the coordination of book collections throughout the univer- sity library has been the creation of a new position, counselor to the director on the collections in the Harvard Uni- versity Library, to which a senior librar- ian in the college library has been as- signed. As his responsibility is to work toward the most effective deployment of total library resources and toward the development of an over-all policy for col- lection building, his work will signifi- cantly increase the degree of coordina- tion among the libraries. T h e r e are frequent conferences, conducted by the associate librarian for resources and ac- quisitions in the college library, in which faculty members and librarians from all parts of the university participate. T h e major result of these conferences is an increasingly coordinated book selection policy that will insure no unplanned du- plication and no inadvertent slighting of materials in any field. Further, the col- lege library's specialist in book selection in the social sciences is in daily contact with those who select books for the grad- uate schools of business administration, law, and public administration—fields in which overlapping calls for attention. 330 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S A major role in holding the libraries together is taken by the union catalog maintained in the Widener building. This catalog contains main entries for the titles of nearly all books in the univer- sity library. In addition to its obvious value for reference work and location of materials, it is a primary instrument in the book selection process in all the li- braries. Increasingly, officials in the director's office are called upon by deans, depart- ment chairmen, and directors of research institutions in matters relating to the financial support and the budgets for their libraries, as well as other adminis- trative questions. Further, the personnel officer in the college library is playing a broader role in personnel advice and re- cruitment for all the libraries; one re- sult of this has recently been an increase in the number of promotional transfers of librarians and other staff members among the units of the university li- brary, leading of course to closer under- standing and better communication throughout. In the last several years a series of standing conferences has been established with marked improvement in the coordi- nation of the policies and the practices of the libraries in the university and widi notable effect on the morale and esprit de corps among the librarians themselves. T h e first of these is a monthly luncheon meeting attended by the heads of some twenty of the major libraries in the university. Similar monthly luncheon conferences are held with the chief catalogers in these large libraries and with the heads of public services. As an example of the accom- plishments of these groups, I shall simply cite the recent publication of a guide for department libraries concerning the re- lationship of their cataloging to the cen- tral library. This guide, prepared at the specific request of a number of depart- mental library catalogers, contains infor- mation on the preparation of entries for the union catalog, consultation of the union catalog, cataloging services avail- able from the catalog department in Widener, a number of basic cataloging instructions intended for the very small libraries, information on the National Union Catalog and other union lists, rules for counting books, etc. Though the Harvard Library does not classify and catalog its books according to a single classification scheme and catalog- ing code, this kind of effort toward stand- ardization on basic points is particularly effective. T h e most important single means of communication among all units of the library is the Harvard Librarian, pub- lished monthly throughout the academic year. T h i s newsletter, prepared in the director's office, provides all members of the university library staff with informa- tion on personnel, additions to the col- lections, specific libraries, and other mat- ters of common interest. Many libraries are issuing guides to their collections and services, and these form a series of guides to the university library, the publication of which is co- ordinated in the director's office. Finally, there is the Harvard Library Club to which all members of the university library staff may belong. Throughout the years, this has been a reasonably effective means of bringing together members of the widely dis- persed library staff and of promoting friendship and understanding among them. T o emphasize the increase in coordi- nation among the libraries in the univer- sity, I should like to mention three fairly recent developments. It has become ap- parent to the governing boards, the dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, and the director of the university library that the limited endowments of a number of the research institutions are insufficient to provide for library collections and services on a level with traditional com- mitments and in accordance with per- S E P T E M B E R 1 9 6 1 331 sonnel and salary standards generally prevailing elsewhere in the university li- brary. T h e r e is a growing recognition of the fact that some general, unrestricted money must be assigned for the support of these libraries. T h e interesting point to note is that such support will be chan- neled through the college library, with the inevitable and desirable result that the standards of these libraries will be maintained through the fiscal and ad- ministrative interest of the college li- brary. T h e increasing number and regularity of the book selection conferences cited in the previous section, together with the appointment of the counselor to the di- rector on the collections, is having an im- portant influence on the quality of book selection and the degree of selectivity through the university library. T h e i m p o r t a n c e of c o o r d i n a t i o n within the Harvard University Library was emphasized by the corporation when, in 1959, it voted that in the faculty of arts and sciences and related areas, " 'Be- fore any significant new library opera- tion is begun, whether it is for purposes of instruction or research, the matter should be discussed with the Director of the University Library and approved by the Director and the Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences', and that ' T h e co- ordination of any new library with the total structure of the University Library system will be the responsibility of the Director of the University Library, in cooperation with the Dean of the Fac- ulty of Arts and Sciences.' T h e vote also specified that there be adequate budge- tary provision on a continuing basis, and provided that, when discontinuation of any library collection is proposed, 'noti- fication should be sent to the Director of the University Library, who will decide, subject to the terms and conditions un- der which the library was established, whether it should be continued, assimi- lated into the University Library, or otherwise disposed of as seems appropri- a t e . ' " 1 T h e vote further provided that these principles should apply to all parts of the university library. T h i s action of the corporation is sure to increase mark- edly the coordination within the univer- sity library. C O M P L I C A T I N G F A C T O R S IN D E C E N T R A L I Z A T I O N Even with the most effective measures for coordination, a number of complicat- ing factors are inescapable in such a de- centralized organization. For one thing, communication is not as direct as when there is a clearly defined and centralized administrative structure. T o offset this, it is necessary to communicate through a wide variety of techniques that in turn require continuing innovation and im- agination to be useful in differing situa- tions and relationships. In a decentralized library of many units depending on separate financial re- sources there is always the possibility that in periods of strong leadership and relative prosperity some libraries will as- sume commitments for collection build- ing, bibliographic activity or other serv- ices that it cannot keep up in subsequent periods. T h i s then leads to dislocation of standards and imbalance in the total fi- nancing of the university department to which the library belongs. In times of reduced support, research and instruc- tional work can sometimes be curtailed without permanent damage. T h e cumu- lative nature of library commitments and decisions, however, makes such reac- tion to circumstance difficult and often impossible without serious risk of per- manent damage. Varying levels of financial support also mean varying adherence to salary and other personnel standards set by the col- lege library and the other major units of the university library system. One of the principal aims of the new personnel pro- gram instituted in the Harvard Library 1 Harvard University Library Annual Report for the Year 1958-59, ( 1 9 5 9 ) , Cambridge: 7. 332 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S two years ago was to reduce dispari- ties of this kind.2 T h e results so far have been significant and improvement con- tinues. Another factor in this type of organiza- tion is the expense involved in duplica- tion of library materials and the mainte- n a n c e o f s o m e s p a c e t h a t w o u l d otherwise not be necessary. Provided this expense can be kept to a thoughtful minimum—and the process of coordina- tion is the chief force in this regard— the advantages of local libraries tailored to the specific needs of a special depart- ment or institution would seem to war- rant the relatively small price paid. As there is no single classification scheme and no unified cataloging code common to all the libraries at Harvard, there is of course some inconvenience for those who use more than one of the library's units. Furthermore, the inclu- sion of departmental library cards in the university library union catalog also re- quires the adapting of some main entry headings to the college library code which prevails in this central catalog. Here again, it is generally agreed among librarians, scholars, and students that the advantages of having special needs and circumstances reflected in local cata- loging practices probably outweigh the relatively minor disadvantages. Finally, there are fairly wide differ- ences among the libraries in such matters as hours of opening, regulations for cir- culation and interlibrary loan, and use of the libraries by non-Harvard readers. T h i s is not a simple matter for library users to understand, and coordination it- self will not eliminate the inconvenience. By and large, local needs are satisfac- torily met by the provisions of individual libraries, and university-wide needs can be filled by accommodation to the vari- ous patterns of use. 3 Paul H . Buck. " A New Personnel Program for Har- vard Librarians," Harvard Library Bulletin X I I ( 1 9 5 8 ) , 289-296. (Also reprinted as Appendix I I in Harvard University Library. Annual Report for the Year 1957- 58.) (Cambridge: 1 9 5 8 ) . A D V A N T A G E S O F T H I S O R G A N I Z A T I O N A T H A R V A R D I t has been said that a library organi- zation based on "coordinated decentral- ization" is desirable and workable at Harvard, and some of its advantages have been suggested. I should like in closing to recapitulate these and mention a few others. I n considering these points it is necessary to recall that we are thinking of a research library of nearly seven mil- lion volumes which is over three cen- turies old and which is an amalgam of collections that have been developed to meet differing needs. In the first place, geographic dispersal of the library facilities places books and study areas near their users, making the library more easily accessible to more people. Also, the smaller collections typi- cal of departmental and institutional li- braries (even if they reach a million vol- umes as the law library soon will) are more conveniently usable than the single gigantic collection would be if the li- brary resources were physically central- ized. • T h e dispersal of primary intellectual and financial responsibility for libraries is a potent force in creating and main- taining a sense of identity of faculty members with that part of the university library that is their basic source for re- search. T h e close bond makes for enthu- siastic participation in the building of the collections. And it leads to more re- fined sensitivity and greater effectiveness in the librarians' anticipation of, and re- sponse to, the research and instructional needs of faculty and students. Another advantage of this local iden- tity and responsibility is that the devel- opment of library endowment funds and the solicitation of gifts of money and books is thereby facilitated. Medical sci- entists and medical librarians presum- ably know better than general library administrators the potentially most prom- ising sources of support for medical re- S E P T E M B E R 1 9 6 1 333 search libraries. While the committee of the overseers to visit the library is con- cerned with the over-all affairs of the uni- versity library, the many visiting commit- tees of departments and research institutions have particularly informed insight into the special needs and oppor- tunities of these parts of the university, including, of course, their libraries. With the basic responsibility for book selections resting with the departmental and institutional libraries, it is at once possible to pursue policies of the highest degree of selectivity (both in acquisition and in weeding) and to acquire for spe- cial use certain materials regarded as expendable. Such practices, it is hoped, provide over the years collections that are as effective as possible for the scholars and students using them. In the Harvard Library it is usual for the various units to apply special-library theory and practice where these are use- ful. Notable instances are the city plan- ning analytical catalog in the library of the school of design, the index of anthro- pology in the Peabody Museum library, and the vertical files of several types maintained in several libraries. These devices, plus classification schemes and subject headings adapted to local and special situations, contribute to the con- venience and productivity of the scholars using the libraries. A further benefit of decentralization is that the books added to the university library as a whole (about 180,000 a year) can probably be acquired and cataloged more speedily in many relatively small libraries than would be possible in one central processing operation. C O N C L U S I O N A policy of coordinated decentraliza- tion, like walking a tightrope, requires alertness; there must be continuous ad- justments if balance is to be maintained. At present, as will have been evident from what has been said, coordination is being emphasized in a number of areas. T h e need for it is clear, and it is wel- comed by the special and departmental libraries; it is not being forced upon them. T h e developments in question are by no means an attack on the policy of coor- dinated decentralization; rather, they are adjustments calculated to make it work more effectively.—Douglas W. Bryant. Centralization and Decentralization at Cornell IDO N O T T H I N K that physical centraliza-tion of library collections and services on a large university campus is possible or desirable; degrees of centralization, on the other hand, may be and fre- quently are desirable; but, although physical centralization is not possible, it is my view that unified or centralized ad- ministration is desirable, if it can be achieved without loss of library support or vital interest. I shall try to make these points clear by drawing on my experience at Cor- nell. Cornell is a private university made up of twelve colleges and schools, some of which—four to be exact—are oper- ated as contract colleges of the state Uni- versity of New York. All the colleges of Cornell have a high degree of independ- ence in determining their programs, standards of performance, selection of staff, admission of students, development of resources and sources of support, etc., within the broad policies of the univer- sity. T o a certain degree at least such in- dependence is fostered by the university administration. T h e end result is an in- stitution drawing its support from a va- riety of sources through the efforts of a large group of individuals whose sus- tained interest is essential to the well- being of the entire enterprise. I suggest 334 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S that if the library system of the institu- tion is supported through these same means, this very fact will have or should have an effect on the administration of the libraries. I will direct my remarks principally to the problems arising from the dual sources of support—private funds and state appropriations—upon which Cor- nell depends. I have mentioned that the state-supported colleges at Cornell are contract colleges, i.e. through legislation the state has in effect contracted with the trustees of Cornell University to op- erate these colleges on its behalf. T h i s contractual arrangement provides that the college programs of teaching and re- search are carried on in buildings owned or leased by the state, and that the in- struction, research, and attendant serv- ices are given by personnel whose salaries are paid from funds appropriated by the state using materials and equipment pro- vided by the state. T h e students of these colleges are Cornell students; they are awarded Cornell degrees; the faculty are Cornell professors, selected and pro- moted in accordance with policies formu- lated and adopted by Cornell University; they have all the privileges of Cor- nell faculty members, and they serve the university as a whole in various capaci- ties; many of the higher administrative posts of the university are filled from their ranks. T h e contractual relationship involving the use of appropriated funds makes necessary the observance of many, but not all, of the detailed state regula- tions regarding the expenditure of such funds for materials, equipment, and sal- aries. Salary levels, for example, are de- termined by a state salary scale and new buildings are constructed under the supervision of the State Department of Public Works, but supplies and equip- ment are purchased through the Cornell purchasing department. State appropria- tions in support of these colleges are made to Cornell University for the op- eration of the respective colleges. In ad- dition to the College appropriations there is an appropriation for general services, but this is a relatively minor part of the whole. With this as a sketchy description of the general background, what are some of the possibilities and problems con- nected with centralized administration of the libraries? It seems to me that this matter can best be presented in terms of several rather specific items or questions, namely, budget, personnel, and services and collections. I shall discuss each of these topics in turn. B U D G E T At Cornell there has not been, in the past sixty years at least, any such docu- ment as a library budget for the univer- sity as a whole. Rather there have been (1) a budget covering the central univer- sity library and, at different times, some or most of the departmental and college libraries in the endowed part of the uni- versity; (2) separate budgets for the in- dependent departmental and college li- braries as part of the budgets of the respective departments and colleges; and (3) budgets for the libraries of the state- supported colleges as part of the appro- priations made by the state legislature. As Cornell has moved toward central- ized administration of the libraries, one of the efforts has been to consolidate in one budget the library support for all of the endowed divisions of the university. With the exception of the medical school, located in New York City and operated as a completely separate divi- sion, this consolidation has been devel- oped gradually over the past ten or twelve years and is now expected to be complete in the next year. T h e problem presented by the state- supported college libraries is different and more complex. First, the fiscal year is different and second the entire budge- tary process is different. Once you have adjusted mentally to two different and only partially concurrent years, each with S E P T E M B E R 1 9 6 1 335 its own deadlines, procedures, etc., this part of it is relatively unimportant. T h e other aspects of it present greater prob- lems. Library support is of necessity tied to or included in support of the several colleges, that is, the library budgets of these colleges are part of the college budgets. T h e college budgets in turn, although presented to the State Univer- sity and other authorities in Albany by Cornell University as a unit, are, in ef- fect, considered in terms of the individ- ual colleges and their roles in the educa- tional program of the state. T h i s tends to make the dean of the college the key figure in developing support for the col- lege budget. In the past the dean has also been the officer to whom the college librarian has reported. Centralized ad- ministration of the libraries effects a change here, but it is considered impor- tant that this change should not operate in such a way as to diminish the dean's interest in securing the best possible li- brary support. T h e possibility of having a single li- brary budget for all state-supported col- lege libraries has been considered and rejected because it would remove library support from the concern of the several deans and would probably affect such support adversely. As a method of making centralized li- brary administration feasible and mean- ingful and yet retaining the advantages of the present budgetary arrangement, the following procedures have been adopted; 1. T h e college librarians and the direc- tor of libraries present budget recom- mendations to the respective deans. 2. These recommendations are reviewed and budget hearings, participated in by the director of libraries and the respective college librarians, are held by the deans and the university con- troller. At the conclusion of these hearings decisions are made as to the final form of the budget requests. 3. When the budgetary process has been completed and the university informed of the appropriations made, the col- lege business officers transmit to the director of libraries the approved budgets of the respective college li- braries. 4. T h e library administration compiles these several college library budgets into a single document which consti- tutes the state-supported part of the library budget. 5. Combining the library budget of the endowed part of the university and the state-supported college libraries produces the total university library budget. T h i s has never happened yet, but we expect to try it in the course of the next six months. T h i s is the first part of the procedure. From this point on, it is a matter of management, control and observance of the requirements for the proper expendi- ture of the funds provided. T h e presumed advantages of central- izing the library budget, as outlined, are to make possible better over-all appraisal of library support, better planning and more coordination of library budgets and more balanced control of library devel- opment and operation. It is admittedly a cumbersome procedure, but it appears not only to be necessary but to have some inherent advantages. P E R S O N N E L Just as the dean has a vital interest in library support and just as it is desirable to safeguard and develop that interest, so also does he have an interest in library personnel, at least at certain levels. In the past the college librarian has been responsible to the dean of his college for the proper discharge of his duties. I f centralized administration is to have sig- nificance, responsibility to the director of libraries must also be provided. It is pro- posed that this will be secured by mak- ing the college librarian jointly respon- sible to the director and the dean. In 336 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S practice, it is expected that this will mean that in the normal operation of the col- lege library the college librarian will be responsible and will report to the direc- tor of libraries. Annual reports will be addressed to the dean and the director. W i t h respect to appointments, the col- lege librarian will be appointed only on the joint recommendation of the dean and director. Presumably recruiting will be done by the library administration. J o i n t recommendations will also be made for all professional positions and promo- tions. T o what extent the deans may wish to interest themselves in such ap- pointments remains to be seen. Similarly, recommendations for setting up new po- sitions are a matter of joint recommen- dation, with the power of initiating such recommendations to rest with the library administration. Under these conditions the library ad- ministration will continue the practice adopted several years ago of using a single recruiting officer. W e hope to extend this to include all general personnel work. T h i s presents some problems because of variations in salary scales and fringe ben- efits, but we have now had some experi- ence in coping with these problems and we think we know how to do it. O P E R A T I O N S Within approved budgetary and per- sonnel provisions, the operation of the libraries, both endowed and state-sup- ported, is the responsibility of the library administration with the assistance on matters of policy of the university library board. As a means of implementing the pro- gram of centralized administration, two new assistant directorships were created and the librarians of two of the state- supported college libraries were ap- pointed to these posts. In one case, the college librarian retains his present re- sponsibilities and has certain added su- pervisory responsibilities for libraries in allied fields; in the other case, the college librarian retains the title and some of the responsibilities of his college library post, but he assumes half-time duties in the central administration as principal budget and personnel officer. An administrative council has been es- tablished consisting of four assistant di- rectors, the curator of rare books, the law librarian, and the director. I t is this group that is concerned with the policies, problems, and procedures involved in de- veloping and operating the unified ad- ministration of the libraries. What appear to be the prospects? As of the present, after only a few months, it would appear that a higher degree of coordination and unification can be achieved, that certain general services can be advantageously centralized, that some others may best remain decentralized but operate under common policies, and that in time a better balance of collections in relation to teaching and research pro- grams can be achieved. As examples of some of the above, it would appear that we can go farther than we have yet done in unifying recruitment and personnel policies, orientation and in-service training of new staff members, and amount and quality of service avail- able in the several libraries. Not immediately, but in the not too distant future, we expect to centralize the lending of materials on inter-library loan and the supply of photocopies. This, if it is achieved efficiently, should prove a boon to some of you who may have been bewildered by the results of your efforts to borrow material from Cornell. You might consider this a simple matter and one which could be done quickly. But it is well to remember that personnel, handling, postage, and copying costs are involved. Funds to cover these costs come from different sources and they must be used equitably. T h e r e are legitimate ways of doing this, but they are not all simple and easy. An example of a centralized service is offered by our library messen- ger service: the present university library S E P T E M B E R 1 9 6 1 337 carries budget items for the truck and driver, and provides the service to the state-supported college libraries for a monthly fee. An example of decentralization that will certainly continue for some time and may continue indefinitely is the acquisi- tion and cataloging of books, periodicals, and documents. At present, divisions per- forming these functions exist in several of the college libraries. They occupy space, use equipment, and are staffed by personnel provided by state appropria- tions. Theoretically they could be cen- tralized; actually there might be financial disadvantages in so doing, as well as a possible loss in speed of processing and convenience to users. These possible dis- advantages may offset the economies that would result from assembly-line process- ing. However, we do hope before too long to achieve a situation in which no book will be cataloged twice at Cornell. W e think one cataloging job should be enough and after that we should use a camera and a multilith; rather than a cataloger. An area in which we expect in time to benefit from centralization is that of better balance of our collections. We hope that it may be possible to relocate blocks of material to place them in bet- ter relationship to their current use. T h i s can be done as a matter of administration without raising any questions of owner- ship. We believe also that centralization affords a better basis than we have had heretofore for planning the development of the collections. This, optimistically, should assist in keeping duplication to the minimum and at the same time avoid the inadvertent occurrence of serious gaps in the collections. In conclusion: in my view, a simple/* unified library administration may not be possible in a complex institution, but a more flexible approach to centralize administration may offer real opportuni- ties in such situations.—Stephen A. Mc- Carthy. Centralization and Decentralization at Boston To U N D E R S T A N D the Boston University library system a very brief outline of the history of this system is needed. T h e university was incorporated in 1869, al- though the school which became the school of theology in Boston University was founded thirty years earlier. Within five years after its incorporation, the uni- versity adopted or established seven col- leges and schools of which only five remain. Today Boston University is com- posed of five graduate schools and ten undergraduate colleges and professional schools, of which six have been estab- lished since the end of World War II. T h e r e is also a summer term, and a divi- sion of continuing education offering evening and extension courses. Until a year ago these fifteen schools had among them fourteen libraries, the main library serving both the graduate school and the college of liberal arts. These fourteen libraries mostly grew up independently of one another, because the schools to which they belonged were isolated, scattered all over Boston, even with one in Cambridge. It is only now when twelve of the fifteen schools are on the main campus that it has been geo- graphically possible to have any sort of physical centralization of libraries. Two of the three off-campus libraries are due to move to the main campus within two or three years. T h a t leaves only the med- ical library across town, where it is likely always to stay. 338 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S What does all this mean to the stu- dents, the chief users of the libraries of the university? It means that until re- cently the library of the school in which they are enrolled has tried to be a com- plete library. T h i s is still the case in too many instances. T h e libraries have con- sidered themselves to be, and in fact many still are, libraries of the schools they serve, rather than subject collections within the greater system of university library service. Recently for the first time we were able to take a complete library, the college of business administration li- brary, which had 40 per cent of its col- lection in the liberal arts, and alter its collection to include only business and economics; specifically, only the H B through H J , and some T portions of the Library of Congress classification system plus reference materials in A and Z. W e renamed it the Business and Economics Library to emphasize that it was a sub- ject collection rather than a library of a school. I might interject here that the cancella- tion of subscriptions to liberal arts peri- odicals in this business library all of which duplicated titles received in the main library, permitted the entry of sub- scriptions to thirty-five business and eco- nomics periodical titles not previously found in the university. T h i s experience portends a greatly enlarged and enriched periodical subscription list for the Uni- versity as other libraries become subject collections. T h i s is only a start in the move to make the school libraries branches in a university library system, and to make them subject collections rather than complete libraries. It should be emphasized that as "complete" li- braries they are all inadequate, falling far short of completeness. But joined to- gether as strong, dissimilar parts of a whole, emphasizing the chief subject of each, they will nicely complement each other to form an adequate university col- lection. In the meantime, the student cannot go to one place to find out the library holdings of the university. T h e union catalog in the main library contains for the other libraries, only main entry cards and then only for entries since 1951. At that, one library started reporting only last year. Similarly with periodicals; there is no one source that will tell the student what periodicals the university's libraries have or subscribe to. We have started to solve this problem by putting all periodical titles onto I B M cards, from which lists can be run off to be distributed to all the libraries. A year has passed and no list has been distributed. W e are currently waiting for the preliminary I B M list to be checked by each library for accuracy in reporting their current subscriptions before we run off the final list. T h i s editing by the various libraries is taking longer than we had expected. As Boston University moves toward physical centralization of most of its li- braries, what are the difficulties that pre- sent themselves? First, there is classifica- tion. Four of the thirteen collections are in LC, three are partially in LC and are being reclassified from Dewey, four are wholly in Dewey, the medical library is in the Boston Medical Library classifica- tion (and shall remain so), while the law library is unclassified. T h i s is the present situation, but it has not always been so. All of those now in L C were either non- existent in 1948 or were in Dewey. It was in 1948 that the reclassification of the main collection started, from Dewey to LC, and while this was completed last year, eleven years after it began, there are still those three collections in the midst of reclassification. Reclassification means inconvenience for the public in catalog use and in use of the collections. Reclassification means intergration of copy numbers and other, seemingly end- less, changes in records. Each book must be re-marked; each book card (for those libraries still using them) must be cor- rected. T h e only satisfaction those in- S E P T E M B E R 1 9 6 1 339 timately involved in the process have when another collection is finally re- classified is that of a j o b well done, for no sooner do they finish one than they begin on another, or more accurately, on several at once. T h e whole purpose of re- classification is to permit the shelving of these now separate collections into one collection in the stacks of our proposed central library, which is about four or five years away from reality. Second, there is the question of physi- cal location of the present collections. With two more schools moving to the campus within two years, bringing their libraries with them, we are confronted with an increase of this multiplicity of on-campus libraries. In the case of the law library, when it arrives on campus, it shall move into new, separate quarters, but in the case of the library of the Col- lege of Basic Studies (which is a junior college) it will most likely become a part of a new unit to be comprised of three libraries now on-campus. T w o of these three are classified in LC and one is being reclassified from Dewey to LC. T h a t still leaves the College of Basic Studies library to be reclassified before it can be inter- filed on the shelves. Centralization of the physical location of collections does not necessarily mean that the collections themselves can be in- tegrated. Diversity of classifications can necessitate decentralization of collections on the shelves that are physically cen- tralized in one stack area. W e have been fortunate in having the classification and copy numbering of our LC-classified collections integrated so as to permit interfiling of the books. It would not be possible to interfile the four collections still in Dewey, even if we wanted to, because each was classified in isolation. Third, there is circulation. T h e vari- ous libraries, having grown up as auton- omous units, have had varying circula- tion procedures and policies. We have not come too far in standardizing these yet, except to establish uniform fines in all on-campus libraries. Fourth, there is the problem of in- terlibrary loans. T h e r e is still no central service for this, so that requests received by the main library which it cannot fill are forwarded to the library of the uni- versity which is most likely to be able to fill the request. I emphasize "likely" re- minding you of the shortcomings of our union catalog, our yet-to-be published list of periodicals, and our lack of a cen- tral serials record. I might also say that while two of our libraries are themselves checking and re- porting to the third edition of the Union list of serials, the others check and report back to the main library which must then compile these reports for forwarding to the Union list of serials. How helpful a centralized serials record would be! Lastly, there is the question of budgets. As each library in the past has been a library of a school, the staff of each has been directly responsible to the dean of each school. Inevitably each library has been treated differently in regard to its budget. Inequities in salaries and in book funds have developed. As these various libraries are brought under central ad- ministration; that is, as their budgets be- come the responsibility of the director of libraries rather than the dean of a school, the task of bringing equity into the budgets presents itself. It is a thank- less task, albeit essential. T h e r e are certain principles in regard to centralization and decentralization which become clear after examining a li- brary system that is in flux, such as Bos- ton University's: 1. T h e r e are three aspects of library serv- ice which can be either centralized or decentralized. T h e y are first, adminis- tration; second, technical services; and third, collections and the public serv- ice of these collections. 2. We are not faced with an all-or-none situation. It is possible, for example, (Continued on page 398) 340 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S Bowdoin College. Mr. Harwell made the following remarks: "I should simply like to thank you as representatives of all of A C R L for the privilege and pleasure, and even the perplexities, of working with you. I have en- joyed it, really. I think I've enjoyed it most because Elaine Mitchell has been here as secretary. You'd be much worse off if she were leaving instead of me. Most of us are old enough to remember 1936, but I can as- sure you that Maine is not really a foreign country and I will still be part of ACRL. But it's a real pleasure at this point to wel- come Mark Gormley formally to this job." Centralization and Decentralization (Continued from page 340) to have centralized technical services and decentralized public services, and even decentralized administration. T h i s approximates Boston University's current situation. O r it is possible to have central administration with de- centralized technical and public serv- ices. 3. T h e determining factor in whether a library organization shall be central- ized or decentralized should be the ex- tent of service that is feasible. Until very recently the administration of the Boston University libraries has been completely decentralized. T h e first centralization of administration came on July 1, 1959 when the budgets of four li- braries came directly under the aegis of the director of libraries. I might empha- size that you do not have administrative control unless you have budgetary con- trol. W i t h o u t budgetary control you have administrative control in name only. Yet in spite of this lack of administrative cen- tralization there existed limited central- ization in technical services. T h e main Library as a service agency ordered and cataloged for five other libraries. T h e timetable of development at Bos- ton University seems to be for complete administrative centralization fairly soon, gradually increased centralization of technical services until complete, or al- most complete, centralization results, and a system of decentralized public services and collections until the new central building is constructed. I n t o the central building will be assimilated most of the present scattered collections. If, as I have said, the determining prin- ciple, as to whether or not a library or- ganization shall be centralized or decen- tralized, should be the extent of service that is feasible, then why has Boston Uni- versity chosen almost complete central- ization in all asj^ects of library service? T h e answer is easy. T h e type of library service that would be most desirable would be for each student and faculty member to have his own complete, per- sonal library. It might be practical, but not feasible. Why not? Because of the limitation placed on this solution by the amount of money available to implement it. T h e limitation placed on implementa- tion of solutions by the amount of money available approaches the equivalency of a scientific constant: the more m o n e y — the more service. Boston University has limited resources; therefore, it must have limited library services. It cannot afford the luxury of excessive decentralization. It must choose between decentralized mediocrity and centralized excellence. It has chosen the latter and in time shall achieve i t . — D o n a l d T. Smith. 398 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S