ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 620 / C&RL News Bibliographer, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602; Thomas D. Kilton, Assistant Modern Languages and Linguis tics Librarian, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801. Member-at-Large: Helga Borck, Assistant for Resources, Collection Management & Develop ment Division, New York Public Library, New York, NY 10018; Barbara L. Walden, History Bib liographer, University of Minnesota Libraries, Minneapolis, MN 55455. ■ ■ M an agin g a lib ra ry p u b lica tio n s p ro g ra m By Jon Eldredge Chief of Collections and Information Resources University of New Mexico Medical Center Library The University of California, Irvine, wins the John Cotton Dana A w ard for its unique approach. T h e University of California, Irvine Library has won a Special Award in the 1985 John Cotton Dana Library Public Relations Award contest for its unique and effective administration of a library publications program. The UC Library was one of 15 winners selected from the 173 entrants that p ar ticipated in this year’s contest. This annual contest has recognized the achievements of outstanding li brary public relations programs since its inception in 1946. Three university libraries and one commu nity college library participated in the contest this year. The UC Irvine Library provided clear evidence that it has been managing a superb publications program. This award-winning publications pro gram has produced an exemplary assortment of brochures, guides, maps, bibliographies, and newsletters which all share a coordinated graphic arts format. A standard masthead scheme inte grated into all items produced in this program, plus a combination of complementary colors have contributed to the pleasant visual effect produced by these publications. This unified design has been en hanced by the placement of these publications on handsome display racks located at service areas throughout the library system. The most remarkable aspect of this program ac tually pertains to its method of administration. This large-scale publications program, capable of producing numerous printed items each year, has been managed by a small committee of profes sional librarians who work within the UC Irvine li brary. This committee has relied greatly upon the widespread participation and high level of cooper ation of librarians within the Library to make this program a success. In the opinion of this judge the publications themselves must possess such a high degree of quality that the UC Irvine library entry would have won an award on the basis of this ac complishment alone. The program has acquired additional distinction though, on the merits of its unique method of administering with a committee. D ecember 1985 / 621 UC Irvin e’s library brochure display. This unusual approach to th e p lan n in g and p ro duction of high-quality publications has proven to be a very effective m eans of adm inistration. T he success of this p ro g ram runs counter to conven tional wisdom su rro u n d in g th e m a n a g e m e n t of a m ajor public relations p ro g ra m .1 Since its in itia l p h a se , this p r o g r a m has ex p a n d e d from a to tal n u m b er of 17 types of p u b lica tions to its present size of 60 separate publication titles. These varied publications p ro m o te m ajor service areas, branches, and collections located in the UC Irvine library. Uses for these publications range from cam pus orientation activities by the D ean of Students Office to the conducting of li b rary instruction sessions in th e classroom. T he p ro g ram publishes 33 different reference guides, 16 d e p a rtm e n t brochures, num erous special collec tion descriptions, separate newsletters for internal a n d external audiences, and a faculty awareness bulletin. T h e texts of th e publications contain only the most essential inform ation about any p a rtic u lar topic. This economy of language used in these publications contributes to their simple, u n c lu t tered appearance. A lth o u g h all U C Ir v in e lib r a r y p u b lic a tio n s 1T h e au th o r knows of only th ree academ ic li braries w hich utilize th e com m ittee approach to public relations. N orm ally, an individual located at a fairly high level in the lib rary adm inistrative s tru c tu re assumes responsibility for p u b lic re la tions. have an easily recognized, stan d ard m asthead, v a r ious publication series featu re their ow n distinctive th e m a tic elem ents a n d fo rm ats. These distinct characteristics aid the user in identifying p articu lar types of publications. F or example, Biomedical L i b rary an d M edical C en ter L ib rary publications display a logo w hich identifies them as being rele vant to those branches in the UC Irvine library. These b ran ch library publications also are p rin ted on a slightly different, m etallic-shaded p a p e r so they can be m ore easily identified by interested us ers. T he M ain L ib ra ry ’s reference guides feature a sta n d a rd fo rm at th a t sets them a p a rt from other publications as well. T h e series of publications de scribing th e service areas of the M ain L ib rary dis play a v ariety of q u a in t, slightly a rc h a ic styled pieces of artw o rk on their different covers. T he I n te rlib r a r y L o an Services’ b ro c h u re p o rtra y s an early-era h o t air balloon, the C opy Service b ro chure shows an old p rin tin g press, an d th e M edia C e n te r presents an old p r in t of a g ram o p h o n e. T h ro u g h th e use of com m on and distinctive ele m ents integ rated into a com patible color scheme these publications visually represent th e unity and diversity of resources found in th e UC Irvine li b ra ry system. T he present Publications C om m ittee and its im pressive series of lib rary publications developed from a m odest origin. Several years ago, the li b r a r y ’s P u b lic Services C o m m itte e co n d u cted a needs assessment survey of all professional lib ra rians 622 / C&RL News in the UC Irvine library. Survey respondents cited the need for improved publications as a high- priority library project. To fill this need, the Public Services Committee organized a Task Force on Publications. This Task Force eventually became a perm anent Publications Committee. The Task Force carefully followed a clearly articulated set of goals and objectives derived from the library’s mis sion and basic goals. One contest judge reviewing the entry described its program goals and objec tives statement as a “model document.” The state ment explicitly defines and distinguishes between goals and objectives to avoid the common pitfall of confusing these two elements of a Public Relations program . D ocum entation for this entry reveals that the Task Force never strayed from its purpose by closely adhering to this lucidly written state ment. The Task Force on Publications began its pro gram by performing an inventory and appraisal of the library’s then existing 17 publications. The Task Force instituted guidelines concerning a com mon thematic format, editorial standards, and lev els of acceptable quality for materials used for graphic artwork to be included in all new library publications. The lib ra ry ’s adm in istration ex tended its support to the Task Force in this in stance, as on numerous other occasions, by grant ing it final editorial authority on the publications. The Campus Publications Office frequently con tributed its expert assistance to the Task Force on many instances as well. The Task Force attained its goals and objectives by efficiently harnessing avail able on-campus resources rather than by soliciting special funding elsewhere from sources such as foundations or the state legislature. The Task Force instituted further efficiency to the process of pub lishing these items by reorganizing existing prac tices and procedures. Most of these management guidelines have remained in effect to the present. Task Force members revised existing publica tions, or initiated the production of new ones, by seeking the assistance of librarians who were signif icantly involved with the featured resource or ser vice. These librarians drafted the texts of these publications. The Task Force reasoned that these librarians were the most qualified individuals to describe the specific service or resource for prospec tive users. Although the Task Force potentially wielded final editorial authority on the content of these texts, its members found they typically had only to coordinate and advise these librarians’ work. The Task Force mainly concerned itself with design, typesetting, and format matters related to these publications. Practical experience soon taught Task Force members to supervise personally the actual pro duction process at the print shop to ensure that de sired results of the items would be obtained. Expe rience also convinced Task Force members that this group operated optimally with only three mem bers. This small size allowed for maximum flexibility, accountability and efficiency for the group. When the Task Force later became a permanent Publications Committee it retained this particular feature. In spite of its small size, the Task Force al ways worked in close cooperation with other li brarians engaged in composing the texts of these publications. Joan Ariel, the current chair of the Publications Committee, believes the success of this unique pro gram can be explained by the nature of the activity itself. Ariel reports that unlike the abstract sense of satisfaction that one derives from public services li brarianship, the efforts expended toward the crea tion of these library publications has yielded a “tangible” product for those persons involved. This tangible characteristic of the program has filled Ariel and her colleagues in the UC Irvine Library with w hat she terms “a sense of accomplishment and pride.” A winning formula The UC Irvine L ibrary won a JCD Special Award on the basis of the innovativeness and suc cess of its publications program .2 The program earned the praise of contest judges for its conscien tious effort to relate the library’s mission to its goals, objectives, and activities. The program had clearly defined target audiences (that is, not just “everybody”) with which it sought to establish and m aintain communication. The judges were im pressed with the UC Irvine Library’s wise utiliza tion of available resources rather than by any large amounts of money expended on the publications program. The contest judges also favorably noted the eval uation documentation provided by the entry scrap book. Whenever possible, the entrants presented measurable indicators of the program ’s success. For instance, the UC Irvine Library’s evaluation methods carefully avoided commonplace reliance upon vague, anecdotal indicators of supposed suc cess characterized with statements like, “lots of fa vorable com m ents.” The en tran ts instead p re sented more dependable forms of evaluation such as statistics on the distribution, circulation cycles, and forms of usage for their publications. The UC Irvine Library scrapbook also supplied qualitative forms of evaluation. In this regard, the scrapbook provides samples of the original printed items and contrasts them with the new, vastly improved se ries of publications. The scrapbook entry submitted by the UC Irvine Library has a number of laudable features which help explain why it won an award. First, it has a logical organization to its various sections. Second, 2Readers interested in learning more about the history of academic library involvement in the con test or in obtaining advice on how to enter should consult the June 1983 and July/August 1984 issues of C&RL News, or the Summer 1985 issue of Spe cial Libraries. D ecem ber 1985 / 623 it offers th e re a d e r a very clear idea of how th e p u b lications p ro g ra m has been ad m in istered an d eval uated . T h e re a d e r does n o t have to d ecipher the scrapbook m erely to u n d e rsta n d w h a t th e p ro g ra m has acco m p lish ed . T h e scrap b o o k still provides judges w ith all p e rtin e n t inform atio n. Most im p o r ta n tly , th e scrapbook is concise. A judge can read it entirely in less th a n fifteen m inutes. It m ust be re m e m b e re d th a t contest judges have only five w o rk ing days to ev alu ate num erous submissions. T h e re fore, concise an d easily-understood entries have a far g reater chance of success in w in n in g an a w a rd . Prospective e n tra n ts m ay benefit from review ing th e scrapbook or audio-visual entries of w in ners from past contests. These entries are available via in te rlib ra ry loan from th e ALA H e a d q u a rte rs L ib rary . W inners in recen t years have in d icated th a t th e o p p o rtu n ity to exam ine personally these examples of w in n in g entries aided th em in p r e p a r ing th eir ow n contest submissions. E ntries th a t con ta in a p p ro p ria te form s of d o c u m e n ta tio n to su p p o rt claims of h av in g h a d a successful PR p ro g ra m fa re b e tte r in th e ju d ging process. T h e judges this year w ere im pressed by an en try from th e N ational G eo g rap h ic Society L ib ra ry , for exam ple, w h ich co n tain ed unit-cost a n d distribution statistics. In ad d itio n , entries th a t include lib ra ry use statistics from m o re th a n a one or tw o -y ear period norm ally receive high m arks in th e ju d g in g process. This in fo rm a tio n helps judges to assess w h e th e r a rise in use statistics can be a ttr ib u te d to th e PR p ro g ra m , r a th e r th a n m erely signifying an irreg u la rity in user activity. T h e contest co-sponsor, th e H . W . W ilson C o m p a n y , provides interested libraries w ith a free in fo rm atio n pack et a b o u t th e Joh n C o tto n D a n a Li- TABLE 1: General D ata Aca as er Number of Academic T ts Library Entrants demic Libraries a Percentage of Judging Total Numb otal Number Year of Entran of Entrants 1980 174 10 5.7% 1981 166 N/A N/A 1982 145 5 3.4% 1983 155 4 2.6% 1984 144 9 6.3% 1985 173 4 2.3% TABLE 2: Performance of All Library Category Entrants Rate of Success: Judging Number of Number of Total Number of Awards Year JCD Awards Special Awards as Percentage of Entries 1980 3 20 13% 1981 4 21 15% 1982 4 15 13% 1983 7 16 15% 1984 6 16 15% 1985 1 15 9% TABLE 3: Academic Library Performance Rate of Success: Judging Number of Number of Awards as a Percentage Year JCD Awards Special Awards of Entries 1980 0 0 0 1981 0 0 0 1982 0 1 20% 1983 1 0 25% 1984* 0 2 22% 1985 0 1 25% *Does no t include an a c ad em ic lib ra ry th a t e n te re d a n d w on an a w a rd in th e Special L ib ra ry C ategory. 624 / C &R L News b r a r y PR A w ard . Prospective e n tra n ts shoul know th a t contest winners this year such as the U Irvine L ibrary and the N ational Geographic Soci ety L ibrary m entioned th a t they found this packe to be most useful in p reparing their entries. Th contest guidelines and rules described in this packe are intended to steer entrants tow ard w inning a a w a r d . An ideal public relations program includes th essential elements of healthy staff relations, a com m itm ent to serving the public, m arketing, public ity and creativity. Yet, successful public relations i involved even more in the som ew hat intangibl realm of having a genuinely positive attitude to w ard the public and in the dom ain of having an in novative concept of m anagem ent. All libraries lit erally have some sort of “relations” w ith the public Public relations in the context of this discussio though, means having a deliberate, systematic an planned approach to m aintaining or im proving th relationship betw een the library and specificall d C t e t n e s e . n d e y identified groups. The UC Irvine L ibrary serves as a notew orthy example of how well academic libraries can do in this contest w ith th e creative m an ag e m en t of a seemingly com m onplace library activity like p u b lishing brochures, guides and newsletters. Only a small num ber of the estim ated 5,443 academ ic li braries in the U.S. and C a n a d a have entered the contest since 1980.3 As the accom panying tables in dicate, however, academic libraries entering the contest perform far better th a n the typical contest entry in other categories. Although the contest em ploys no quota systems for different categories of entrants, academic libraries experience an above- averag e c h an ce of w in n in g a w a rd s in this PR aw ard contest. ■ ■ 3American L ibrary Association, L ib rary A dm in istration and M anagem ent Association. A Market Overview of the John Cotton Dana Library Public Relations A w a rd Contest. Unpublished, internal docum ent. Chicago: ALA, 1984. RESEARCH FORUM Overlapping viewpoints B y P a u l M osher D eputy Director o f Libraries Stanford University T he point th a t Jeffry Larson makes about the de sirability of overlap am ong smaller instructional collections is well taken (C&R L News, O ctober 1985, p p .486-87). It seems obvious to m e th a t the smaller the collection the greater the probability, and even the desirability, of overlap—particularly in instructional com ponents—of the collection. B ut m y p o in t w as n o t t h a t sm aller lib raries should reduce the levels of duplication in their in structional collections. I w ould argue quite the re verse. My point was to emphasize the benefits of collaboration and resource sharing am ong libraries in the support of their research, not their curricular, efforts. W e all realize th a t th e research compo nents of our universities require us to develop re search collections of lesser or little used materials in m any fields. These m aterials m ay not need to be duplicated as heavily if w e are better aw are both of the patterns of acquisition and the strengths of ex isting holdings of other libraries in some of these a r eas w here we are pressed continually to expand our research holdings. It behooves large libraries to examine this issue carefully and determ ine th e degree to w hich over lap in collecting m ay be desirable, and hopefully to arrange patterns of collecting w hich tend to take advantage of the strength of other libraries’ collec tions. So I think Larson has misconstrued my point, w ithout it in any w ay dam aging the substance of the points he makes about instructional collections in smaller libraries. His conclusion th a t the finding of less-than-expected overlap am ong instructional collections should give collection developers pause a b o u t w h a t d ir e c t i o n th e y s h o u ld p u r s u e in strengthening these libraries is an excellent one and should be m ade. ■ ■