ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries J a n u a ry 1993 / 1 1 Compact shelving of circulating collections By Sherrie Sam and Jean A. Major Space savers please library users I n the process of planning a building addi­ tion and renovation at the University of Mis­ sissippi, library personnel began to consider selective use of compact shelving to maximize the available funding for the project. The p ub­ lished record of exploration and use of com­ pact shelving is nearly unanimous in identify­ ing one significant limitation: while some kinds of materials are well suited to storage in com­ pact shelving, heavily used parts of the collec­ tion are thought to be less appropriate because compact shelving limits their accessibility. Us­ ers have difficulty browsing and sometimes must wait for access to the specific range in w hich they are interested.1 Nonetheless, indications are that such use is growing. In a 1987 survey of academic li­ braries using compact shelving in public ac­ cess areas, 17 of the 21 respondents had in­ stalled the shelving w ithin the previous five years—that is, since 1982.2 In the summer of 1989 the library at the University of Mississippi (UM) installed com­ pact shelving as a stopgap to house 60,000- 70,000 volumes of circulating books, and the installation is regarded as successful by librar­ ians and users. This apparent success provided encouragem ent for the library to plan for in­ creased use of compact shelving after the con­ struction project. The present study resulted from the anticipation of additional and, possi­ bly, a w ider variety of uses. Specifically, two fundamental questions needed exploration: can circulating books be housed in compact shelv­ ing? and w hat level of use constitutes “heavily used” or “high-use” materials which would not be suitable? Secondarily, the existing shelving offered a chance to experiment with several kinds of data collection and analysis to sup­ port this particular decision. To investigate these questions, data were gathered to make a de­ tailed description of the specific characteristics of the library’s present use of compact shelv­ ing housing a circulating collection. The p re se n t m echanical-assist com pact shelving installation at UM consists of 24 30- foot ranges with four aisles. The collection is made up of circulating books in a group of classifications considered to be low-use in this library: A, C, G, L, M, S, and Z. Of these, the greatest num ber are Ls (about 20,000 volumes), with substantial collections of Gs and Zs (about 7,500 volumes each). Other parts of this col­ lection are very small. The following kinds of data were examined for this investigation: Circulation Statistics. Loans of books in each classification w ere tabulated for the month of April for four years— 1988 and 1989 (before installation of com pact shelving) contrasted with 1990 and 1991 (after installation). Within these tabulations, totals by class, grand to­ tals, daily averages, and hourly averages w ere com puted. User Responses. From April 23 through May 14,1991, brief survey forms were made avail­ able for users to communicate their experiences with the compact shelving. They w ere asked to indicate th e classification letter sought, w hether they had to wait to get into the appro­ priate aisle, and if the shelves w ere easy to use. Totals and percentages w ere reported. Shelvers’Notes. Shelvers filled out tally sheets for each hour of shelving in the compact sec­ tion during the period from April 22 through Sherrie Sam is head o f Access Services a n d Jean A . Major is director o f libraries at the University o f Mississippi 12 / C&RL News May 2, 1991. Each shelver indicated the num­ ber o f books shelved, the number and dura­ tion of interruptions to permit user access, and any observations they wished to make. Findings Circulation for the collection included in this study comprised from six to eight percent of the library’s total circulation for the years in question, and the share fluctuated insignificantly within that range over time. The affected col­ lection did not show a noticeable fall-off in cir­ culation after the installation of compact shelv­ ing, nor did its use increase dramatically. The Morris study categorized high use as an installation with more than 100 uses per week. Only five respondents in that survey had in­ stallations of more than 100 double-faced sec­ tions, used more than 100 times per w eek.3 UM’s installation has 240 double-faced sections. In April of the last four years average weekly circulation ranged from 210 to 630—clearly high use. During the busiest year in the study (1990), the collection housed in compact shelving had circulations at the average rate of seven per hour. For perspective, these data were collected during the last month of the spring semester, the busiest time of the year. Users w ho elected to fill out surveys—only 25 during a three-week period—were using all parts of the collection. A notable majority (76%) did not have to wait for an aisle to become available, and the same percentage reported finding the shelves easy to use. For those w ho had to wait for access to an aisle, the reported wait averaged less than one minute. The traffic in the compact shelving section is low, according to the data sheets submitted by 13 shelvers. Most shelvers experienced no more than one or two interruptions per hour. The shelvers estimated their interruptions to be about five minutes each, while the users felt that they had to wait less then a minute for access to an aisle. Conclusions The two questions which inspired this study are, “Can circulating books be housed in com­ pact shelving?” and “What level of use consti­ tutes ‘heavily used’ or ‘high-use’ materials which would not be suitable?” The data collected in this brief investigation provide positive answers to both questions. • A large shelving installation with seven circulations per hour or more than 600 per week is not too heavily used for satisfactory public access. • Most users are quite satisfied with the shelving, as the following remarks illustrate: “I love moving ± e shelves around to fit in the row I need. More of the library should be like this.” “I like them,” and “It’s pretty cool.” “Very useful, spacesaving, and efficient. Bravo!!’’ The dissenters also responded, though: “I got stuck betw een the shelves” and “I was almost squeezed between shelves.” “Do not expand this form of shelving up­ stairs. Disaster will ensue. Patrons will not re­ spond favorably. Locating material will become much more time-consuming.” “There was an unsupervised child treating the shelves like toys!” • The perceived wait for a user’s access to an aisle was very brief; users reported waiting less than a minute. • Installation of compact shelving has no effect on the level of circulation of the collec­ tion housed within it. • Each shelver might work on two trucks o f books at a time so that one will be available if a user causes an interruption in shelving from the other. • Detailed circulation statistics make a sat­ isfactory way to identify parts of a library’s col­ lection which are suitable to be housed in com­ pact shelving because of the level of their use. Useful checks after installation are a brief user su rv ey a n d /o r co llectin g co m m en ts from shelvers. N otes 1See, for example, Evan I. Farber, “Compact shelving in smaller libraries” Library Issues 7, no. 5 (May 1987): 3; Keyes D. Metcalf, Plan­ ning Academic a n d Research Libra›y Buildings, 2 d ed., by Philip D. Leighton and David C. Weber (Chicago: American Library Association, 1986), p. 166; Michael Gorman, “Moveable compact shelving: The current answer,” Library Hi Tech 20 (Winter 1987): 26; and Franklyn F. Bright, Planning fo r a Movable Compact Shelving Sys­ tem, Library Administration and Management Association Occasional Papers Series, no. 1 (Chi­ cago: American Library Association, 1991), p. 5. 2Leslie R. Morris and Frank M. Webster, “Pub­ lic use of compact shelving,” Collection M an­ agement 10, nos. 1/2 (1988): 124-25. 3Ib id , 127. ■