College and Research Libraries ' . ;· \ ~ . ·,_ MARTH·A J. BAILEY Some Effects · of . Faculty Status on Supervision in Academic Libraries Faculty status may ·have a disquieting effect on the management of academic libraries. In this paper some of the effects th¢ faculty stat- us and tenu.,re have on supervision are explored. These ·include the _amount of time that library faculty members devote to · ~pervision, the interaction of the library faculty and the library administration, and the role oft~ library faculty in· participative management. L~RARY ADMINISTRATORS BORROW MANY IDEAS from the business field. An exam- ination of library management litera- ture reveals ' articles on topics such as planning, programming, budgeting sys- tems ( PPBS), management by objec- tives ( MBO), and participative manage- ment. Although· ·library administrators use rntich , of ,the terminology of man- agement, the concepts may be modified when applied to the library. For exam- ple, although librarians use the ·terms ''supervisors" and ''middle managers," these may not be comparable to similar roles in business.1 Goode states that librarians assuine . administrative tasks much earlier in their careers than do other profession- als.2 Lowell indicates that a large num- ber of professional librarians have su- pervisory assignments: Most library school graduates be- come supervisors of clerks and pages as soon as they assume their first pro- fessional position and experienced li- brarians have even greater adminis- trative responsibilities.s Martha ] . Bailey is associate professor of library science and phymcs librarian, Phys- ics Library, Purdue University, West Lafay- ette, Indiana. 48/ Except in very large organizations, li- brarians are involved in · supervision whether they are _superVisors, middle managers, or top managers. · Several managerial problems are unique to the academic library. Among them are that faculty status sometimes creates stresses in various · aspects of management. In this paper we explore some of the effects that faculty status and tenure have on supervision in li- braries. Relevant background informa- tion may be found in the recent article, "Faculty Status and Library Gover- nance."4 For the purposes of this dis- cussion, we use the masculine noun and pronoun to indicate both men and wom- en librarians. The term faculty means the library faculty, unless otherwise specified. We use both the terms man- agement and administration fairly con- sistently to mean the library adminis- tration. We use the term organization to mean the library. THREE CoMMITMENTs The academic library professional is faced with several areas of responsibil- ity which must be fitted into a reason- able work week. Some of these area·s are: (a) personal expertise, .i.e., the per- son's specialty or major interest such as • cataloging· or .subject bibliography or systems; (b) the administrative .position, which might · range from supervising · a few student assistants to ' supervising a large unit . which includes professionals; and (c) professional status, which might include elements such as publish- ing papers, attending conferences, ·or conducting research. Two of · ''the :aspects-professional ac- tivities and ad:rriiniStration-often seem in opposition .to each other in the indi- vidual librarian's career . . For example, in university and public libraries units often are open .more than forty hours per week. If there is one professional supervising a unit, usually he schedules himself for . the peak use hours; and, recognizing· that it is impossible to pro- vide his personal attention ·for . all pa- trons, he must train his assistants to h~m­ dle routine questions from users. In or- der for the unit :to function, the librari- an must delegate tasks and must train his people to handle a 'portion of the work; both of these are elements of su- pervision. Bundy . and Wasserman say that librarians are much concerned with the need to transfer certain routine chores to others less qualified. However, often they do not realize that any time they . spend in administrative work is time spent in nonprofessional practice. 5 The professional responsibilities some- times conB.ict ·with assigned . adminis- trative responsibilities for supervising a unit. Many activities, such as conduct- ing research or attending professional meetings, involve being away from the work station. In order to handle all as- pects of his assignments, the person must either negleet his supervisory du- ties or become an efficient supervisor. · The "typical'' . d~y of a library facul- ty member . who supervises a depart- mental library might include all three areas of. responsibility. For example, it might involve discussing with a subject department representative the schedule Some Effects of Faculty Status Y 49 of vacation hours for the library; inter- viewing two students . applying for a vacancy; attending a meeting : to discuss revisions to the library . faculty constitu- tion; drafting a paper concerning· re- sults of a research inve$tigati.on; ~ssign­ ing . subject , headings , to .. analyti~:· · cards which are p~epared by the library. 'assist- antS; discussi.J}g a change in , a. :journal title with the serials cataloger; .. signing time cards; telephoning committee mem- bers long distance to ·discuss- plans for an AR~ regional w~~kshop to be held locaUy; 1 or ' discussing with · a teaching faculty_ . jnetnber the purch~$e . of a $75.00 reprint of Copem~cu·~ :. J~r class reserve. It is not easy to categorize :·all of these activities because the thr~ .. ,areas are both overlapping and confJicting. Al- ~though research is considered ; a ·profes- sior~al activity, if it involves · a topic such as the .extent to which abbrevi~tions and acronyms· are used in papers published in physics journals, it · ·might · be con- sidered an area of expertise. 'If it in- volves a topic such as the effect of fac- ulty status on supervision, it might be considered an area of ad~inistration. Attending workshops may be considered a .professional activity, _but a workshop could involve administration or faculty status or a subject specialty. Libraries · are not always conducive to professional development. 6 They tend to be bureaucratic organizations which operate in a highly structured environ- . ment such as a state university or a city government. In a study, "Professional- ism and Bureaucratization," librarians, when compared to professionals such as accountants, physicians, stock brokers, or nurses, were rated as working in highly structured organizations which placed great emphasis on the hierarchy of authority and the importance of rules and procedures.7 · The providing of professional . time may 'he ~ problem. A study by Plate in- 50 I College & Research Libraries • January 1976 dicates that middle managers, whom he defined as those supervising four or more professionals, often have a nega- tive or skeptical attitude toward re- search: Sixty-eight · percent of the subjects in- terviewed are not in favor of providing time and resources for librarians (at any level) to engage in research and writing. Research is viewed as an ave- nue for personal recognition at the ex- pense of "getting the job done" and the manager believes that ''librarians haven't sufficient time to do all they . must do now." Furthermore, he doubts that librarians are capable of conduct- ing research. s LmRARY ORGANIZATION Faculty status has an unsettling effect on the traditional bureaucracy of li- braries. Library faculty members tend to regard themselves in terms of their professorial rank rather than their ad- ministrative titles. For example, the as- sociate professors and professors may feel they should have more input into operating the library than the instruc- tors and assistant professors do. In some library organizations academ- ic rank may not correlate closely with administrative responsibility. Librari- ans may supervise people with ranks equal to or higher than their own. For example, a subject specialist or rare books librarian may have a professorial rank higher than his supervisor or mid- dle manager. These specialists may not care to assume additional administrative duties, and, therefore, may not accept administrative promotion. There may then be conflicts over how much · faculty input there should be to managerial decisions. For example, in a unit where only one professional at a time may take vacation leave, who would have precedence-the assistant professor who is the supervisor or the associate professor who is not? Or, should the faculty advise on a change in administrative assignments, which usually is an administrative prerogative? Or, should all library ·faculty members have input into the allocation of the li- brary budget although not all have ad- ministrative responsibilities? The pattern of academic rank, or what Tallau and Beede call the "col- legial body," is superimposed on the ad- ministrative hierarchy of the library.9 The library organization can thus be- come a jumble of conflicting authori- ties. The middle managers must inter- face between· the nonsupervisory librari- ans, the supervisors, and the library ad- ministrators. The library director, who is the chairperson of the library facul- ty, has the unenviable task of steering the organization through this maze of overlapping authority. Library faculty members ·are promot- ed in professorial rank by their peers, often based on specifled professional criteria. Promotion in administrative re- sponsibility within the library is based on criteria that are established by· the library administrators. Just as in any or- ganization, the supervisors and middle managers may recommend the discharg- ing of nontenured faculty members for poor performance, neglect of duties, and similar reasons. However, faculty status and tenure tend to erode the au- thority of supervisory people to hire, fire, and promote their professional staff. ADVANCEMENT As people advance in the administra- tive hierarchy, their expertise may dwindle in importance and they may concentrate only on tWo areas-admin- istration and professional activities. At the lower levels of the organization li- brarians must determine which of the three areas will be most likely to lead to professional and · administrative ad- ·vancement. If the young librarian wishes to re- j j I ,.. • tain his jol? and/ or advance, he does not know whether to work on his sub- ject specialty, take courses in supervi- sion and management, or work toward a doctorate in information science. All are legitimate pursuits, but a person can dissipate his energies if he attempts to pursue all three. His confusion is fur- ther confoooded when · the young pro- fessional views the current library fac- ulty. Some of the library associate pro- fessors and professors may have pro- fessorial ranks based on their adminis- trative titles; thus, all department heads may be associate professors. Some, per- haps, . were promoted under criteria in use five, ten, or · fifteen years before. Currently most faculties, due to limited budgets and the shortage of jobs, are forced to . select only the best-qu~lified people for promotion and tenure. If the organization requires that all people must have a second master's degree in order to obtain a promotion or be grant- ed tenure, the appropriate response is apparent. In the 1960s it was common practice for people to spend two to four years at several libraries in order to try different types of assignments be- fore deciding upon an area of major in- terest. One effect of faculty status is to stifle the young professionals who wish to gain varied experiences. They may specialize very early in their careers in order to be granted tenure, thus sacrific- ing their long-range career development. One problem in academic library su- pervision may be that the library facul- ty members attempt to model themselves on the teaching faculty whom they per- ceive do not have any supervisory re- sponsibilities. They may tell themselves that, in order to gain promotion, the teaching faculty need only concern themselves with teaching and research; they do not have to interview people, train personnel, or handle time cards. However, every day the librarians are surrounded by supervisory concerns, and Some Effects of Faculty Status I -51 librarians must supervise if the libraries are to continue to operate. pARTICIPATIVE MANAGEMENT ·In participative managem~nt peopl~ from all levels of the organization are involved in discussing problems and rec- ommending decisions creatively, thus re- ducing the authority of the supervisors and middle managers.10 A recent edi- torial suggests that the positions of mid.:. die managers be abolished in order to facilitate the implementation -of par- ticipative management.ll Since the library faculty attempts to superimpose its .academic hierarchy upon the library administration hier- archy, it may not permit nonprofession- al people to participate. As Wasserman states, In an organization characterized by centralization of authority and ·respon- sibility, latitude in decision processes is foreclosed to those in lower-level po- sitions.12 The library faculty might argue that the teaching faculty mem hers do not permit the departmental secretaries to make decisions on the courses that are taught, so why should the library facul- ty permit the support staff to have ·any input into the library administration. On the other hand, from the super- visory standpoint, involving subordi- nates in planning and decision making is a very good way to encourage their in- terest and enthusiasm. Participative management may be very difficult to implement in an aca- demic library where there is a library faculty. If participative management is restricted to library faculty and/ or pro- fessionals, it may be feasible. If it in- cludes support staff, there may be prob- lems. CONCLUSION We have examined some of the areas in which faculty status affects the super- vision and management of libraries. 52 I C.oUege ·,~· Research Libra~s·. · January 1976 These include the demands of profes- sional activities . which take time away from sup~rvision and the imposition of the library . "collegial body" on the li- brary administration hietarchy. Al- though · faculty status has ·many profes- sional benefits for the ·individual aca- demic librarian, it may have disturbing effects on vatious areas of academic ·Ji- brary management. REFERENcES 1. Martha J. Bailey, "Supervision in Libraries" (Dec. 1974), · p.l. (ERI~ document ED 102 958) . .. . · 2. William J. Goode, "1he Librarian: From Occupation to Profession," Library · Quar- terly 31:306-20 (·Oct. 1961). 3. Mildred H. Lowell, The Management of Libraries. and Information Centers, Vol. 4 (Metuchen, N.J:: Scarecrow, 1971), p.22. 4. Adeline Tallau and Benjamin R. Beede, "Faculty Status and Library Governance," Library ]oumal 99:1521-23 (June 1, 1974). 5. Mary Lee Bundy and Pat.Jl Wasserman, ·"Professionalism Reconsidered," College . & Research Libraries 29:18 (Jan. 1968). 6. David C. Weber, ''The Dynamics of the Li- brary Environment for Professional Staff Growth," College & Research Librar.ies 35: 259-67 (July 1974). . 7. R. H. Hall, "Professionalism ~nd Bureau- cratization," An:Jerican Sociological Review 33:92-104 (-1968). . . . 8. Kenneth Plate, Management Personnel in Libraries (Rockaway, N,J.": American Fac- ulty Press, 1970), p.33. 9. Tallau and Beede, . "Faculty . Status," p.1521. . 10. For recent reviews ·see Jane G. Flener, "Staff Particip,ation in Management in Large University Libraries," College & Re- search Libraries 34:275-79 (July 1973), and "New Approaches t~ Personnel Man- agement: · Personalizirig Management," Journal of Academic Librarian~hip 1: 17- 20 (March 1975). . 11. H. William Axford, "An Overlooked Cost of Achieving a Participatory Environment," College & Research Libraries 35:5-6 (Jan. 1974). · 12. Paul Wasserman, The New Librarianship: A Challenge for Change (New York: Bow- ker, 1972), p~50. · l i ~ I j I )- ~ I ~,