College and Research Libraries LAURENCE MILLER The Role of Circulation Services In the Major University Library A survey of 103 major academic libraries examined the professional/ nonprofessional functions, staffing patterns, changes, and manage- ment attitudes towards circulation departments. Five tables present numerical data, and an extended summary discusses questions raised by conclusions from the data. AuTOMATION WITIITN THE CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT of the major university li- brary has received wide attention in re- cent years, as has the applicatio~ of sys- tems analysis to circulation routines. Yet concurrently, rationale governing the ~­ location of functions and staff to this area has received virtually no published attention. The library administrator looking for a body of accepted practice as a theoretical framework for plan- ning finds that none exists. Although as- sumptions are commonly made about the role of circulation services and its changes over the past few decades, these assumptions often bear little relation- ship with current practice. The issue is a major one in view of the importance of circulation to the logistics of library operation, and because of the substan- tial staff commitment involved. The present study was initiated to dis- cover ( 1 ) the role of the circulation department in the major university li- brary and the extent to which it has changed; ( 2) current staffing patterns and their relation to function; ( 3) the validity of some assumed factors as causal influences; and ( 4) management attitudes toward the role of this area. Dr. Miller is director of library services, California State College, California, Penn- sylvania. SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE An exhaustive survey of library liter- ature since 1900 was first conducted to discover past and present attitudes to- ward circulation services. This was ex- tended to the literature of library man- agement and then to classical manage- ment theory, from which much library management theory is derived. In addi- tion, a survey was conducted of circula- tion department function and staffing patterns in 126 university libraries, which ultimately led to an examination of the relationship between current function and staffing patterns with man- agement attitudes toward these factors. The professional literature during the past half century reveals no consen- sus on the role of the circulation depart- ment. The 1926 ALA Survey of Librar- ies in the United States reported a close relationship between the circulation and reference departments and noted that much circulation work concerned study and research functions. 1 The 1933 Cir- culation Work in College and Univer- sity Libraries by Brown and Bousfield, the classic and most comprehensive work to date on the circulation department, defined its role to include the technical function of collection control and cir- culation, as well as the location of in- formation and material by individual /463 464 I College & Research Libraries • November 1973 readers, library instruction, use of the card catalog, reader's advisory service, and instructional development. 2 Donald Coney, however, in his review of this comprehensive view of the circulation department, stated that it was "founded on a definition that extends college cir- culation work beyond the limits usually understood," and noted the disparate skills required for book delivery as com- pared to instructional functions. 8 Suc- cessive editions of standard library ad- ministration texts by Lyle and Wilson and Tauber reflect a narrowing of the circulation function, but do not indi- cate evolution to a completely technical status. The July 1957 issue of Library Trends served to emphasize the lack of consensus on the circulation function, whereas Wasserman and Bundy indicat- ed that technical assistants frequently serve as library department heads, pri- marily in circulation.4 Many detailed library position classi- fications have been developed. Although those preceding and including the 1947 statement of the ALA Board on Sal- aries, Staff, and Tenure did not embrace the comprehensive Brown and Bousfield concept of circulation work, they did recommend widespread employment of professionals in head and subordinate positions. Yet the 1948 ALA Descriptive List of Professional Duties in Libraries, concluded that " ... registration and cir- culation is non-professional in nature, requiring first of all, familiarity with good clerical procedures''; the work would be conducted by clerical staffs in larger libraries with intermittent profes- sional supervision. 5 Current statements, although shifting substantially from the pre-1948 era, are not as detailed nor as influential as earlier pronouncements, nor do they relate function to staff. In general, the library literature has reflected the classic management school (with early appreciation for the writ- ings of Fayol). Such literature, together with general management publications, has emphasized the separation and ra- tionalization of unrelated functions calling for different skills, and the grouping within departments and posi- tions of functions homogeneous in na- ture and consistent in staff require- ments. Writers such as Coney and How- ard within librarianship, and within management, Fayol, Mooney and Rei- ley, and Ralph C. Davis, by implication argue for a department specializing in technical functions as a single-purpose organization. 6 The literature survey left unanswered the following questions: ( 1) What functions are most commonly allocated to the circulation department? ( 2) What is the level of staff commonly as- signed? ( 3) Specifically, to what extent are professionals employed? ( 4) Do staffing patterns appear to be appropri- ately related to functions? ( 5) What is management's conception of the circu- lation department role? ( 6) What, if any, patterns emerge in comparing pres- ent functions in individual libraries and the use of computerized routines and/ or systems analysis in the circulation department? SURVEY METHODS To help answer these questions, a sur- vey was made of 126 major university libraries, selected from those institu- tions in Earned Degrees Conferred graduating more than thirty Ph.D.'s per year. 7 These libraries had an average of 1,173,203 volumes and served institu- tions with a mean of 15,903 students. Thus these libraries were presumably affording reasonably sophisticated infor- mation service combined with high cir- culation. The questionnaire was highly struc- tured, but with major provision for atypical responses. Of the 126 libraries included in the survey, replies were re- ceived from 114, a return of 91 percent. Of these, 11 were received from lib:t:ar- ies with decentralized circulation ser- Role of Circulation Services I 465 TABLE 1 QUICK INFORMATION SERVICE AS A CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT FUNCTION Group 1° Group2° Group 3° Group 4° Total Service rendered. 21 36 23 11 91 Not provided from within the circulation 1 3 4 3 11 department. Degree of Service Provided: Queries requiring professional knowledge 1 2 1 4 for solution referred elsewhere. Questions requiring extended time 1 2 3 referred elsewhere. Only directional and incidental 19 34 17 10 80 queries handled. No respons_e. 1 1 2 4 o Group !-libraries of less than 500,000 volumes; Group 2-500,000-999,999 volumes; Group 3-1,000,000- 1,999,999; Group 4-2,000,000 volumes and over. vice, which were eliminated from the study.8 Returns were analyzed in four dis- tinct categories in order to examine the effect of size on selected variables. The four categories were the following: Group 1. Libraries of less than 500,000 volumes . . . . . . . . . . . N = 25. Group 2. Over 500,000 but less than one million . . . . . . . . . . . . N = 42. Group 3. One million but less than two million . . . . . . . . . . . . . N = 30. Group 4. Over two million vol- umes ..................... N=17. The choice was an arbitrary one, but provided sufficient 'N' s in each category to yield meaningful tabulations. FUNCTION The presence or absence of various functions was studied, and, at the same time, the depth of departmental partici- pation and responsibility was examined. 1. Reserve Books. The majority of li- braries allocated some degree of respon- sibility for the reserve function to cir- culation, particularly in Group 1 librar- ies. Only in the largest libraries were re- serves generally administered separate- ly. If the department were accorded some role, it was usually given primary responsibility. Most reader service functions were formerly offered directly from the cir- culation desk. The present study shows that half of the Group 1 libraries of- fered reserve service from the circula- tion desk. This percentage uniformly decreased as the size of the library in- creased. 2. In-depth and/ or Quick Information Service. As expected, only four libraries offered in-depth information service from circulation. On the other hand, ninety-one respondents ( 89 percent) in- dicated that they provided one of three categories of ''quick information ser- vice" from the circulation desk. ( See Table 1.) Of ninety-one circulation depart- ments offering in-depth information, or quick information service, 88 percent indicated that directional and incidental queries were the only ones handled. It is evident that although the circulation desk is still a source of information ser- vice in most libraries, it is limited to handling largely ephemeral requests. 3. Interlibrary Loan. Many libraries ( 61 percent) have allocated the interli- brary loan function outside the circula- tion department. However, no clear pat- tern exists by size of library. Of those exercising some responsibility in this area, almost half provided this service from the circulation desk and 62 per- cent made the department administra- 466 I College & Research Libraries • November 1973 tively responsible for this function. 4. Library Instruction. Only about a third of the libraries entrusted to the circulation department some responsi- bility for library instruction or orienta- tion. When such responsibility was pres- ent, with two exceptions it was in a sup- portive rather than in a primary role. 5. Reader Assistance. Forty of the 103 libraries considered the assistance to readers in the use of the card catalog to be a function of the circulation depart- ment. In three cases the role was a pri- mary one, and in the case of an addi- tional three, the function was shared equally with the reference department. In all but four cases, this activity was performed from the circulation desk. 6. Inventory. Many circulation depart- ments ( 61 percent) were entrusted with some degree of responsibility for inven- tory. 7. Book Selection. A traditional role of the comprehensive circulation de- partment was book selection. The ra- tionale was that circulation personnel had the most direct contacts with the user community and therefore were in the best position to judge requirements. Some degree of activity in this area was retained by just over half of the librar- ies. Of these, roughly two-thirds shared this responsibility with all or virtually all departments. 8. Shelving. Shelving and stack main- tenance was a function of 85 percent of the circulation departments: 78 of 85 libraries indicated that circulation su- perintended this activity. 9. Policy Formation. To determine the degree of responsibility for formu- lation of circulation policy, a range of four responses was provided. In 81 li- braries ( 79 percent), one, or a combina- tion of both of the following state- ments desQribes the heavy responsibility that the department bears in policy for- mation: "Chief of circulation services recommends policies to immediate su- perior for review and adoption; Chief of Circulation Department participates in committee with representatives of other departments et al in policy forma- tion." This role might either reflect the widespread presence of professionals, or explain their placement in the circu- lation department. To summarize, the average circulation department included in this study would have primary responsibility for reserve books, although they would be circulated from a location separate from the circulation desk; would han- dle directional and incidental informa- tion queries but give no in-depth refer- ence service; and would have primary responsibility for inventory of the book collection, shelving, and stack mainte- nance. It would play a major role in the development of circulation policy. On the other hand, it would have no re- sponsibility for interlibrary loan, li- brary instruction/ orientation, assistance to readers at the card catalog, or in book selection other than that granted to oth- er departments. PRoFESSIONAL AND NoNPROFESSIONAL FUNCTIONS Not only is it important to determine what functions still rest with the circu- lation department, but also to establish the degree to which they are profession- al. The following functions are as- sumed to be essentially professional: in- depth reference service; quick informa- tion service where the only questions re- ferred elsewhere are those requiring ex- tended time to answer; primary respon- sibility for interlibrary loan; a primary role in instruction and/ or orientation in the use of the library; assisting read- ers in the use of the card catalog where the department has a major role or shares this equally with reference; book selection; and participation in policy formation. Subprofessional or clerical functions include: · ( Role of Circulation Services I 461 TABLE 2 PATTERNS IN Two TYPES oF PROFESSIONAL FUNCTioNs IN CmcuLATION SERVICES: AN ANALYSIS BY SIZE OF LmRARY ( N = 1W) Library Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group4 Total Number of Professional Functions Present Requiring Special Assignment of Professional Personnel 1 7 8 6 6 27 2 1 1 1 3 Total Professional Functions Present (Including Above) 1 8 19 15 6 48 2 6 14 8 2 30 3 7 3 2 6 18 4 1 2 3 5 1 1 • Three respondents did not provide sufficient information to be included in this analysis. 1. Reserve books (any degree of in- volvement) 2. Quick information service where queries requ1nng professional knowledge are referred elsewhere, or where directional and incidental queries (such as those involving li- brary rules) are the only ones han- dled 3. Supportive work with interlibrary loans 4. Supportive work in library instruc- tion where primary responsibility lies elsewhere and other profes- sional personnel are available to work with subprofessionals within the department 5. Inventory work 6. Shelving and stack maintenance Professional functions were further distinguished between ( a) those that would probably be performed within the circulation department primarily be- cause a professional was already avail- able there, and (b) those that would justify the special assignment of pro- fessional staff to this department. In the first category were placed: 1. Quick information service where only questions requiring extended time to answer are referred else- where. 2. Book selection where professionals of all departments participate equally (except for greater partici- pation by acquisitions and refer- ence). 3. Policy formation. In the second category were placed: 1. In-depth information service. 2. Primary responsibility for interli- brary loans. 3. Primary responsibility for library instruction and/ or orientation. Where professional functions re- quired specific professional staff assign- ment, only thirty ( 30 percent) of the circulation departments undertook even one of the prescribed services. Of this number, twenty-seven undertook only one service. A significant aspect of this functional pattern is that the average circulation department in the major university library undertakes no func- tions requiring the specific assignment of professional personnel. (See Table 2.) Considering all functions requiring professional personnel, 48 percent of the departments embraced only one such activity-that of policy formation. In addition, 30 percent of the departments embraced two, and 18 percent under- took three. As Mooney and Reiley im- ply in their Principle of Functionalism, 468 I College & Research Libraries • November 1973 policy-making is easily separable from other aspects of circulation work and need not be performed within the de- partment.9 STAFFING PA'ITERNS The purpose of the staff section of this study was to determine ( 1) the number and level of staff assigned to circulation services, and ( 2) the rela- tionship of staff assignments to func- tions allocated in this area. 1. General Staff Levels. Of the 75 li- braries providing complete responses, 58 had circulation departments headed by individuals with the master's degree or higher. Of these, 47 possessed the mas- ter's degree in library science. Suppor- tive staff ranged from those possessing the doctorate (one case) to those with no formal preparation. The over-all percentage of professionals with either a master's degree in library science or a higher degree in relation to all circula- tion staff averaged about 13 percent with only slight variations by library size. 2. Specialized Subordinate Levels. With regard to specialized subordinate positions within the department, of the 103 libraries with centralized circula- tion departments, 61 had the specialized position of assistant or associate direc- tor of circulation services. Most fre- quently, the position was occupied by a technical assistant, as in 27 of the li- braries with this position. In addition, one incumbent held the doctorate and 25 held the master's in library science. The circulation departments of 27 li- braries maintained the position of inter- library loan librarian. In 59 percent of these libraries, the occupant held the master's degree in library science. Other staff consisted of four subject-field mas- ter's holders, nineteen technical assist- ants, and thirty-two clerks. Forty libraries reported a subdepart- ment for reserves within circulation ser- vices. The 37 libraries reporting staff composition employed 11 professional librarians (master's in library science), supplemented by a total of 49 technical assistants and 87 clerks. 3. Staffing and Function. One of the most significant aspects of the study was the extent to which the presence of high-level staff coincided with high-level professional functions. Of 17 circula- tion departments employing four or more professionals in their staff, seven have no professional function requir- ing assignment of professionals; six em- brace only one professional function of any kind-that of policy formation. Of 43 departments employing two or TABLE3 PROFESSIONAL STAFF AssiGNMENTs IN RELATioN TO Two TYPES. OF PRoFESSIONAL FUNcTIONS ( N = 58°) SFOO GFOOO One Two None One Two Three or More Professionals In Department One Professional in Department 3 2 19 15 3 6 Two Professionals 5 1 11 7 6 3 Three Professionals 2 7 6 3 Four or More Professionals 8 2 7 6 6 5 No Professionals 3 13 10 4 3 o Seventeen responses insufficiently complete ·for inclusion. 00 'Special Function' -according to the criteria described above, these are the functions that specifically would in themselves justify and require the special assignment of professionals to the department. ooo General professional function. Although professional in nature, they are more · incidental than integral to the department function and would often be assigned to the department only because professionals were avail- able there. They would not in themselves normally justify the special assignment of professional personnel to the . circulation department. more professionals, 19 have been allo- cated only a single professional func- tion of any description, and 25 have no functions specifically requiring the as- signment of professionals. (See Table 3.) Apparently, a substantial number of professional staff . are being employed in less than professional work, particu- larly where multiple professionals are employed in the absence of any profes- sional functions justifying their assign- ment. CAUSES FOR CHANGE Many casual assumptions are made for the evolution of circulation ser- vices. Undoubtedly, increases in the vol- ume of circulation and greater sophisti- cation in the information service ren- dered by libraries in this group are ma- jor factors. Such pressures have made rationalization of functions formerly grouped around the circulation desk es- sential. At the same time, these pressures are said to have prompted other phe- nomena: the introduction of automa- tion and systems analysis, larger and more functional buildings, open stacks -thus giving the reader the opportuni- ty of bypassing the circulation desk in his search for information, and the rise of the reader service division, which col- lectively embraces the functions orig- inally grouped around the circulation desk. Systems analysis in particular, preced- ing automation in this area, is said to have prompted review of departmental objectives and reallocation of func- tions. Sixty-four libraries had under- taken some form of computerization and 31 had extended this to the circu- lation department. Forty-one libraries had undertaken some form of systems analysis, 8 had extended this to read- er services as a whole, and 40 had in- cluded circulation. Yet surprisingly, 13 libraries reported that ccas a result of computerization of routines, and/ or Role of Circulation Services I 469 systems analysis ... the range of func- tions allocated to the circulation depart- ment has been broadened." Two indicated that their scope had been narrowed, whereas in 43 libraries, the range had remained the same. Four libraries re- ported increases in the number of pro- fessionals, 6 reported reductions, and 47 institutions reported that the num- ber of professionals had remained the same. Architectural influences impose little or no restraint in the rationalization of circulation functions. Asked whether the scope of functions embraced in cir- culation would be diminished, in- creased, or remain the same were it not for architectural limitations, 2 reported the range would be diminished, 12 indi- cated that the scope would be increased, whereas the majority ( 87 percent) re .. ported that the scope would be substan- tially the same. This may be partially explained by the fact that 83 libraries have either occupied new buildings or have undergone refurbishing with re- positioning of the circulation depart- ment. There is no substantial difference in the num her of professional functions assigned to closed and open stack librar- ies. The same may be said of depart- ments within and outside of reader ser- vice divisions. MANAGEMENT ATIITUDES The final section of the study sur- veyed management attitudes toward the role of circulation services for which there exists a substantial community of thought. Fifty-seven percent indicated that although the circulation depart- ment is service-oriented, it is primarily concerned with technical functions; and that virtually all information service queries, other than those involving di- rectional and other information of sim- ilar complexity, should be referred else- where. A more detailed breakdown is given in Table 4, and an analysis of at- 470 I College & Research Libraries • November 1973 TABLE 4 MANAGEMENT ATTITUDES TOWARD INFORMATION SERVICE PROVIDED IN THE CmcuLATION DEPARTMENT ( N = 102) A A service department in which the principal objectives embrace both technical functions and information service. B A service department in which the technical functions are of primary importance. It also, however, has a significant information service role although in-depth queries are usually referred elsewhere. C The same as above, only the information ser- vice function although recognized is more in- cidental than described in the preceding op- tion. D Although service oriented, this department is primarily concerned with technical functions. Virtually all queries, other than those in- volving directional and other information of similar complexity, are referred elsewhere. Library Ill .-I a C'l C') ~ ..... & Po Po Po Po s:l ::l ::s ::l ::l 3 C) ~ 0 8 0 8 ~ "" 0 0 Q) ~ 0 0 0 E-< ~ A 1 1 5 2 9 8.2 B 5 7 2 1 15 14.7 c 3 9 6 2 20 19.6 D 13 23 13 9 58 56.9 titudes toward specific functions is given in Table 5. Administrators re- sponding to this study were generally opposed to including interlibrary loan, library instruction/ orientation, assist- ance to readers at the card catalog, and any special role in book selection with- in the circulation department. They fa- vored including the reserve function and inventory. There was no major dif- ference in attitude between libraries in which the circulation department had or had not been subjected to systems analysis. Thus, library administrators at the present time are clearly in favor of a restricted and largely technical role for the circulation department. In gen- eral their preference is parallel to and often stronger than the organizational reality in the libraries they administer. SUMMARY This study confirms that the circula- tion department has evolved into a unit primarily concerned with the technical functions of physical dissemination and control of library collections. Despite the lack of functions requiring the spe- cific assignment of professional librar- ians, such personnel are still widely em- ployed in this area. The widespread use of professional librarians in circulation work poses questions for the profession as well as for the individual library. The results of the study appear to leave only the following open as possible justification for such assignment: ( 1) the depart- mental role in policy-making, ( 2) the planning of routines and automation, and ( 3) supervisory reasons. Regarding the first, the importance of circulation policy far transcends both the depart- ment and often the library itself, and it is arguable that the formulation of such policy ought also to transcend the TABLE 5 MANAGEMENT ATTITUDES TOWARD THE APPROPRIATENESS OF INCLUDING VARIOUS FuNCTIONS WITHIN CmCULATION SERVICEs ( N = 103) Are the following appropriate functions for the central circulation department of a major university library No Yes No Opinion Function Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Interlibrary loan 52 50 38 37 13 13 Reserve books 14 14 83 81 6 6 Library instruction/ orientation 65 63 22 21 16 16 Assistance of readers at the 65 63 25 24 13 13 card catalog Taking of inventory 27 26 67 65 9 9 Special role in book selection 52 50 35 34 16 16 department and its myriad technical considerations. There is, in fact, no rea- son why such policy should originate within the circulation department. The planning of routines constitutes at best a temporary need and, once again, can be separated from the department with appropriate communication and consul- tation. Supervisory reasons, however, give rise to the most debate. Some intermittent supervision is re- quired for nonprofessionals engaged in circulation work. Yet these questions can still be raised: Can this just as readily be provided from outside the depart- ment through direct relationship with the director of reader services, assistant/ associate director, or other general su- pervisory position? If a professional is assigned to this department on a full- time basis, will most of the work en- gaged in be professional in nature? If this is initially the case, will the individ- ual continue to function on a profes- sional level over a period of years? In the absence of professional functions requiring specific assignment, is profes- Role of Circulation Services I 471 sional supportive staff ever 1 justified? Given well-codified circulation policy and written manuals of procedure, are the supervisory skills required more like- ly to be found in a professional librari- an than in an intelligent subprofession- al · with organizational ability? These de- cisions must rest with the individual li- brary, but they demand consideration. No longer, of course, is there a ques- tion of professionals being unavailable. Williams, writing in 1945, expressed fear that the use of professionals far less than professional work, quite aside from availability, tarnished the concept of librarians as professionals. It created a ''vicious circle or descending spirar' in which low grade work discouraged the recruitment of quality manpower which, in tum, helped to insure contin- ued low-grade work and low wages. 10 Li- brarianship as a profession is probably better off today in most respects than in 1945, but the concern is still a highly legitimate one, particularly when em- ployment in highly visible positions is involved. REFERENCES 1. American Library Association, Survey of Libraries in the United States (Chicago: American Library Association, 1926). 2. Charles Harvey Brown and H. G. Bous- field, Circulation Work in College and Uni- versity Libraries ( Chicago: American Li- brary Association, 1933), p.34. 3. Donald Coney, Library Journal 58:494-95 ( 1 June 1933 ) . 4. Mary Lee Bundy and Paul Wasserman, The Academic Library Administrator and His Situation (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Of- fice of Education, Bureau of Research, 1970, ED 050 796), p.49. 5. American Library Association, Board of Personnel Administration, Subcommittee on Analysis of Library Duties, Descriptive List of Professional and Non-Professional Duties in Libraries, Preliminary Draft (Chicago: American Library Association, 1948), p.52. 6. Donald Coney, "Scientific Management and University Libraries," in Management Problems, ed. by G. T. Schwenning (Chap- el Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1930), p.160-98; Paul Howard, "The Func- tions of Library Management," Library Quarterly 10:313--49 (July 1940); Henri Fayol, General and Industrial Management (London: Pitman, 1949) , p.20; James D. Mooney and Alan C. Reiley, The Principles of Organization (New York: Harper, 1939), chap. 4; Ralph C. Davis, Fundamentals of Top Management (New York: Harper, 1951)' p.213. 7. Earned Degrees Conferred: Higher Educa- tion, Part A: Summary Data, 1966/1967 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Educa- tion, 1969) . 8. These had other than reserves, periodicals, and special forms of materials circulated from positions physically and administra- tively separate from a central point. 9. Mooney and Reiley, Principles of Organi- zation, p.26. 10. Edwin E. Williams, "Who Does What: Un- professional Personnel Policies," CRL 6: 304 ( Sept. 1945 ) .