Classics
McClure and Samuels’ Study on Information Sources Used
for Decision Making and the Connection to Organizational Climate Still
Resonates Today
A
Review of:
McClure, C. R., & Samuels,
A. R. (1985). Factors affecting the use of information for academic library
decision making. College & Research
Libraries, 46(6), 483-498.
Reviewed
by:
Denise
Koufogiannakis
Collections
and Acquisitions Coordinator
University
of Alberta Libraries
Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada
Email:
denise.koufogiannakis@ualberta.ca
Received: 1 Aug. 2014 Accepted: 28 Nov. 2014
2014 Koufogiannakis. This is an Open Access article distributed under the
terms of the Creative Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share
Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the
resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one.
Abstract
Objective - To
investigate the use of information sources for decision making within academic
libraries; specifically looking at what sources of information are used,
whether information use is related to organizational climate, and what
organizational factors lead to optimal information use in decision making.
Design -
Cross-sectional survey on a random sample of libraries.
Setting - 18
medium to moderately large academic libraries from across the United States.
Subjects -
356 academic librarians holding a variety of positions and levels of
responsibility within their organizations.
Methods - A questionnaire
was mailed to participants in order to measure relationships between four main
variables: information acquisition, information dissemination, information
evaluation, and library climate. All instruments were validated and tested for
reliability. Participants were given 10 library decision situations to
consider, together with a list of potential information sources to inform the
decision, and then choose which information source they would use primarily in
each situation. Participants’ perception of their library climate was measured
with five scales covering innovation, support, freedom, democratic governance,
and esprit.
Main Results -
The study found that academic librarians prefer internal sources of
information, such as interpersonal communication with library staff, and
library committees, for making decisions. However, paraprofessional staff
members were not seen as meaningful sources of information within this
grouping. The participants rarely chose to consult external information sources,
such as other professionals outside of the library, or library users.
Information sources such as conducting research, continuing education, past
experience, or personal opinion were not found to be important to the
participants’ decision making. Written documents such as articles, books, and
brochures were also seldom used. Democratic governance was the organizational
climate dimension found to be most closely linked to information dissemination.
Conclusion -
The authors conclude that the study suggests that academic librarians are not
using a full complement of information sources to assist with their decision
making, and that the “information that is used tends to be ‘opinion-based’
rather than empirically based” (p. 495).
Proximity of information plays a role, with information that is closer
and easier to obtain being used more frequently. The authors strongly stress,
with concern, that, “current academic library decision-making processes encourage ineffective activities since
they preclude or limit clientele input, empirical research, and additional
environmental input” (p. 495).
Commentary
This
study by McClure and Samuels, while 30 years old, examines some of the same issues
that the academic library community is struggling with today in terms of
evidence as part of decision making, and how organizational climate impacts
librarians’ use of evidence in practice. This study deserves to be read and
recognised as a “classic” by anyone who is interested in these issues within
our profession, and to be recognised by the EBLIP community in particular, as
its insights, based on a well-designed, large scale, and broadly based study
that used validated tools, were precursors to the EBLIP movement that began 15
years later. Unfortunately, the body of research related to decision making
theory and organizational behaviour within libraries is still scant today.
The
specific study summarized here is but one piece of a wider body of work by
McClure and Samuels. McClure led several studies that examined the use of
information and data in decision making within libraries. He first reviewed the
literature relating to management of organizational information and how
information is used for decision making and concluded that when people who are
information rich are included in decision making, the organization will be more
productive in meeting its goals (McClure, 1978). Later, McClure worked with
Samuels to study the utilization of information for decision making in both
public (Samuels & McClure, 1983) and academic (McClure & Samuels, 1985)
libraries, the academic portion of which is summarized above. Both papers,
stemming from the same large study, found that librarians preferred internal sources
of information, such as personal communication and internal documents. Patron
involvement in decision making was practically non-existent, and very few
decisions used information from empirical research.
Samuels
and McClure also found that organizations where decision making is shared and
the environment is more open with its communication facilitate greater use of
information in decision making. McClure (1986) went on to recommend
professional and organizational strategies to increase the use of data in
decision-making:
1.
Review existing management styles and
organizational climates within the academic library.
2.
Increase the knowledge level of the
importance and potential applications of cost and performance measurement data.
3.
Develop administrative systems that
support the identification, collection, organization, analysis, and reporting
of cost and performance measure data.
4.
Establish reward structures for
librarians who use cost and performance measurement methodologies for library
decision-making. (p. 332–333)
The
factors raised by McClure and Samuels in the 1980s have come to light again in
the 21st century, with evidence based practice and assessment have emerging as
topics of interest within library and information studies. Authors have written
about the importance of research and data in decision making within libraries,
and that such use requires an environment where openness, integrity, and trust
are enabled (Lakos & Phipps, 2004; Hiller, Kyrillidou & Self, 2008). Involvement of staff in
decision making and developing clear communication systems help to facilitate
this type of organizational change where evidence can become part of the
culture of the organization (Davies, 2007). Davies also stresses the importance
that “evidence is used honestly and that data is acquired and presented in as
transparent a fashion as possible” (2007, p.6). Such transparency and honesty
allow for staff to participate more fully and contributes to the integrity of
the decision making process. Hiller, Kyrillidou and Self
(2008) determined that evidence alone is not enough to create a research
culture where decisions are grounded in data. Ultimately, organizational
culture and leadership within the organization are crucial to the integration
of evidence as a normal part of decision making within academic libraries. The
issues raised by McClure and Samuels still resonate today and much can be
learned by looking back to their impressive research.
References
Davies, J. E.
(2007, Aug.). Culture, capability and
character in applying evidence to service enhancement and development: An
exploration. World Library and Information Congress: 73rd IFLA General
Conference and Council, Durban, South Africa. Retrieved from http://archive.ifla.org/IV/ifla73/papers/154-Davies-en.pdf
Hiller, S., Kyrillidou, M., & Self, J. (2008). When the evidence is
not enough: Organizational factors that influence effective and successful
library assessment. Performance Measurement
and Metrics, 9(3), 223-230.
Lakos, A.,
& Phipps, S. E. (2004). Creating a culture of assessment: A catalyst for
organizational change. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 4(3),
345-361.
McClure, C. R. (1978).
The information rich employee and information for decision making: Review and
comments. Information Processing &
Management, 14(6), 381-394.
McClure, C. R.
(1986). A view from the trenches: Costing and performance measures for academic
library public services. College &
Research Libraries, 47(4),
323–336.
McClure, C. R.,
& Samuels, A. R. (1985). Factors affecting the use of information for
academic library decision making. College
& Research Libraries, 46(6), 483-498.
Samuels, A. R.,
& McClure, C. R. (1983). Utilization of information for decision making
under varying organizational climate conditions in public libraries. Journal of Library Administration, 4(3),
1-20.