ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries January 1988 / 5 lege Library, 231 W. Hancock St., Milledgeville, GA 31061. Proposals for programs at the National Confer­ ence are also welcome. Possible formats include panel presentations, discussion group sessions, idea briefs, or poster sessions. Programs may be either 30 or 60 minutes in length. Presenters must attend the conference at their own expense. Additional in­ formation will be sent upon the receipt of a pro­ gram proposal. Program proposals should include a 200-word description of the program , the tentative title, and nam e, mailing address, and work phone num ber of the contact person. The deadline for subm itting a program proposal is July 31, 1988. Send program proposals to: ACRL P rogram , c/o Jo rd an Sce- p an sk i, U niversity L ib ra ry an d L e a rn in g R e­ sources, California State University, Long Reach, 1250 B ellflow er B o u lev ard , L ong B each, CA 90840. ■ ■ In fo rm a tio n fo r a d m in istra to rs By P e ter G. W atson University Librarian Idaho State University Report of a test of library information support fo r a neglected user group. M o s t academic libraries possess well-developed services to support the teaching, learning, and re­ search functions of both students and faculty, yet offer no com parable support to the administrative function, which is obviously an activity highly cru­ cial to the health and well-being of any college or university. W ithout dwelling on the reasons why this gap has been allowed to exist, this report will present some findings from one library’s attem pt to determ ine through a practical test, w hether or not the library could in fact provide direct inform ation support for campus administrators. Picking up on the insights expressed by a lib rar­ ian who is now an academic adm inistrator (Re­ becca Kellogg, University of Arizona), the Meriam Library of California State University, Chico, last academic year decided to devote a small am ount of physical and personnel resources to seeing w hat would result if the Library offered the services of a librarian as an inform ation assistant to adm inistra­ tors, specifically to support the perform ance of their adm inistrative duties. Evidence exists th at li­ brarians will have to a) make an attem pt to under­ stand the dynamics of the adm iiiistrator’s work- life; and b) be flexible about modes of library service, if they are to be successful in serving this group.1 Strong adm inistrative support was given by CSU Chico’s university lib rarian Judith A. Sessions, who wrote an introductory letter to the six senior adm inistrators of the campus designating m e—I was then assistant university librarian (programs and services)—as the agent to carry out the test. I visited th e offices of those ad m in istrato rs, ex­ plained the concept and general procedures, and took copious notes. 1R ebecca Kellogg, “From the President,” RQ 25 (Fall 1985):9-10; and Rebecca Kellogg, “Beliefs a n d R e a litie s ,” C & R L N ew s 47 (S e p te m b e r 1986):492-96. 6 / C& RL News It is not my intention here to dwell on the proce­ d u ral aspects of th e operation, since th ere was nothing very rem arkable or innovative about the actual searching. I merely did for the requesters w h at I w ould have done for myself, had the ques­ tions been my own: find the inform ation. Using both com puterized and m anual tools, I searched through some secondary sources, identified some relevant-looking p rim ary sources, and obtained working copies thereof. Com puterized bibliogra­ phies, photocopies from paper or microform publi­ cations, and occasionally the telephone were the means used to respond to the adm inistrators. Not surprisingly, the requests concerned such topics as academic program planning and m anagem ent, de­ g ree s ta n d a r d s , a d m issio n of sp ecia l s tu d e n t groups, faculty salary comparisons, and recent af­ firm ative action rulings. At the end of the academic year a brief question­ naire was sent to the six individuals who had gener­ ated the 15 inform ation requests. Five people re­ sponded, accounting for 12 of the requests. Questions 1-3 employed a rating scale of 0-5 (least to m ost). Question 1 asked respondents how useful was the inform ation supplied; Question 2 asked for their assessment of the timeliness of the library’s response; and Question 3 asked, “How well did you feel the librarian understood your re­ quest?” The responses are shown in Table 1. Question 4 asked w hether there w ere any im ­ provements in this service th a t w ould increase its usefulness. The four comments received were: “a great job—no im provement needed,” “n o ,” “I feel th a t it is an excellent opportunity th a t should run on a request basis,” and “an outstanding service for the busy executive.” Question 5 inquired about their need for this type of service on a perm anent basis. Here the re­ sponses w ere less one-sided, w ith th re e people checking Yes a n d tw o ch eck in g No. All w ho checked Yes also answered Yes to the follow-up question: w ould they be willing to have their ac­ count charged for th e out-of-pocket costs? For those who checked No to Question 5, the follow-up question asked if there w ere some other kind of in­ dividually tailored inform ation service th a t they were using or w ould like to see the Library provide. TABLE 1 Responses to Questions 1-3 Score Frequency: Q .l Q.2 Q.3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 4 5 1 0 5 5 11 11 Average 4.1 4.9 4.7 The one response received was non-com m ittal: “Depends on the specific project—an ad hoc ap­ proach is probably best.” The last question was, “Are there other groups of adm inistrators for whom you would recommend this service?” Responses were: “All the Kendall Hall adm inistrators” (Kendall Hall is the campus adm inistration building). “I recom m end the service rem ain lim ited to avoid wasting precious resources on some projects th a t may fall into the make-work category.” “Any person in an executive position.” Costs for the test were relatively low. Of the four types of direct costs th a t could be identified in ad ­ vance (computer searching, photocopying, interli­ brary loan charges, and mail and long-distance telephone) only the first two m aterialized during the test. C om puter searching averaged $12.44, and photocopying averaged $3.00. Staff tim e p er question was a b o u t one h o u r (roughly estim ated as 45 minutes of librarian time, 15 minutes of support staff time). L ibrarian time was calculated from initial consultation to presen­ tation of results. The tim e taken to explain the p u r­ pose and scope of the test on the initial visit is not included in this, b u t would probably add about 15 minutes to th a t first visit. T here is not m uch likelihood of academ ic li­ braries passing salary costs along to their own ad ­ m inistrators, b u t if they did it would add $15-$20 to the transaction cost, at cu rren t rates for an upper-range librarian and a m iddle-range p a ra ­ professional. Costs for supplies and other miscellaneous oper­ ating needs were negligible. O verhead and oppor­ tu n ity costs w ere not com puted, b u t w ould be institution-specific. W ithin this fram ew ork the total identifiable cost of p ro v id in g th e service a p p e a rs to be a b o u t $30-$35 per question—probably very close to the cost of other types of in-depth library service of­ fered on a lim ited scale. On learning of this proposal to offer such a ser­ vice, even in test mode, all the adm inistrators p er­ sonally expressed much gratitude and support to th e L ib ra ry for b rin g in g it ab o u t. T he survey results show th a t, w ith possibly one exception, their enthusiasm was still high after they had re­ ceived the results. W e w ould recom mend th a t any academic library try such a service, using a small test like this one if necessary to assess the im pact on the library. The results will probably be surpris­ ingly positive in terms of the perceptions of the li­ brary by your institution’s most influential single group. A more detailed review and analysis of this type of service is the subject of a longer article cur­ rently in progress.2 ■ ■ 2Peter G. W atson and Rebecca Kellogg, “Infor­ m ation Support for Academic Administration: A New Role tor the L ibrary” (in progress).