College and Research Libraries B y L O U I S R . W I L S O N and M A U R I C E F . T A U B E R Staff Manuals in College and University Libraries In this paper Dean Louis R. Wilson of the Graduate Library School of the Uni- versity of Chicago and his research as- sistant, Maurice F. Tauber, report their findings in a survey of 289 libraries. ADMINISTRATION and " m a n a g e m e n t " 1. are t w o dynamic terms which have replaced the passive " e c o n o m y " in library terminology, and have been occupying consistently prominent places in the dis- cussions of librarians. Heads of libraries have taken a cue from business and in- dustry, and have observed and tested the values of such elements as planning, or- ganizing, and staffing, and of such prin- ciples as departmentation, span of control, and delegation of duties. T h e y have been attracted not only to the elements and principles of administration and man- agement, however, but they have come to realize the utility of certain tools which have been successful as aids in the trans- ference of theory into practice. O n e such tool is the staff manual, which, according to R . C . W h i t e , 1 if c a r e f u l l y made, might present a picture of an organization in action, serve as a source for details of policies and procedures, offer a compact interpretation of the functions of the or- ganization to employees scattered in vari- ous departments, and promote uniform 1 W h i t e , R. C. Public Welfare Manuals. Ameri- can Public W e l f a r e Association, 1937, pp. 3-4. understanding and practice in the organi- zation. W i t h such potentialities as an instru- ment for improving the quality of staff activities and relationships, w i t h resultant benefits to the clientele, it is not unex- pected that librarians should join the movement to compile staff manuals for their particular institutions. M o r e o v e r , the staff manual has become a topic for consideration by students and teachers of administration. D . F . Deininger 2 and P a u l H o w a r d , 3 for example, have studied staff manuals minutely as administrative instruments in various types of libraries. Earlier, M a r g a r e t Hutchins 4 and C . B . Joeckel5 had discussed in briefer compass the advantages and various forms of staff manuals. L u c y E . F a y 6 also w r o t e of the staff manual as a managerial tool in col- lege libraries. A l l these students of the question of values in staff manuals reached the general conclusion that they are useful devices w i t h which to facilitate the man- agement of libraries. 2 D e i n i n g e r , Dorothy F. " C r i t e r i a and M e t h o d s f o r the Development of a College L i b r a r y Staff M a n u a l Applied to the Construction of a Staff M a n u a l f o r Columbia College." ( M . S . Essay, Co- lumbia U n i v e r s i t y , School of L i b r a r y Service, 1938.) 3 H o w a r d , P a u l . " L i b r a r y Staff M a n u a l s and a T h e o r y of L i b r a r y M a n a g e m e n t . " ( M . A . P a p e r , G r a d u a t e L i b r a r y School, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, I939-) 4 H u t c h i n s , M a r g a r e t . "Staff M a n u a l s . " Library Journal, 37:1039-42, Dec. 15, 1932. 6 Joeckel, Carleton B. Review of " E n o c h P r a t t Staff I n s t r u c t i o n Book." Library Quarterly, 6:436- 38, Oct. 1936. 6 Fay, Lucy E. "Staff M a n u a l f o r the College L i b r a r y . " A.L.A. Bulletin, 31:464-68, Aug. 1937. 126 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES Problem, Purpose, and Procedure T h e assumption, therefore, that staff manuals are helpful instruments of man- agement w a s made at the beginning of a survey of manuals in a group of college and university libraries. T h r e e points in relation to this assumption, however, were kept in mind. T h e s e w e r e : ( i ) to learn the extent to which staff manuals are prevalent in libraries of institutions of higher education, ( 2 ) to discover if there is a positive correlation between the opin- ions of librarians concerning the need and practical value of staff manuals and the theoretical conclusions students have reached regarding them, and ( 3 ) to as- semble as many copies of staff manuals as possible in order to build up a collection to be used in connection w i t h library school courses in college and university library administration. In the spring of 1940 a letter w a s sent to the librarians of the 33 member insti- tutions of the Association of A m e r i c a n Universities, and to the librarians of 235 colleges and universities and 21 techno- logical institutions on the A . A . U . ap- proved lists.7 T h e body of the letter was as f o l l o w s : T h e Graduate Library School of the University of Chicago is endeavoring to build up its collection of general and de- partmental staff manuals of libraries. W e should consider it a favor if you could sup- ply us with a copy of your manual if it is available for distribution. In the event that there is a charge, please note the amount in order that we may place a formal order for the publication. If your staff manual is not available for distribution, would it be possible for us to borrow and reproduce it? O r , if it cannot be sent to us, could arrangements be made for microfilming or otherwise reproducing it 7 T a k e n f r o m the 1938 Report of the Association of American Universities. in your library or in a nearby library? W h a t would be the probable cost? In case you do not have a staff manual, or if for any reason you are unable to sup- ply a copy, please indicate these facts for our information. T h e extent to which librarians re- sponded to this letter is shown in T a b l e I. T A B L E I R e s p o n s e b y L i b r a r i a n s t o R e q u e s t f o r M a n u a l s Libraries in Re-sponded No Re- sponse Total Per Cent Re- sponse A.A.U. institutions Approved A.A.U. colleges and uni- versities Approved techno- logical institutions 3° I9S 19 3 40 2 33 23S 21 88 83 90 Total 244 45 289 84 T h e reason for the large response doubt- less is found to some extent in the request in paragraph three of the letter. T h e r e is, of course, a wide disparity between the number of responses and the actual existence of staff manuals (see T a b l e I I ) . 1 T A B L E I I S t a f f M a n u a l s i n 2 4 4 C o l l e g e a n d U n i v e r s i t y ' L i b r a r i e s Types of Manuals A.A.U. Insti- tutions Approved Colleges and Uni- versities Techno- logical Insti- tutions To- tal General manual 10 28 3 41 Catalog dept. 2 S 1 8 Circulation dept. 3 9 2 14 Document dept. 0 I 0 X Order dept. 1 4 1 6 Periodical dept. 0 1 0 1 Reference dept. 1 2 1 4 Reserve Book dept.* 0 X 0 I Staff Meetings 0 4 0 4 Student assistants' manual 1 17 0 18 Total 18 72 8 98** * Reserve book routines are most frequently included in circulation manuals. ** The difference between this total and the number of manuals acquired in the survey indicates the number of manuals t h a t are not in suitable form for mailing or for reproduction. Extent and Nature of the Staff Manuals In his review of the Enoch P r a t t Staff Instruction Book, Joeckel suggested that MARC hi, 1941 127 the publication of manuals of this sort for libraries of v a r y i n g types should perhaps result in decreasing the need for intensive study of detailed routines and may permit greater concentration on the principles and objectives of library administration.8 Since many of the libraries have staff manuals in single typewritten copies, the distribution of these instruments to other libraries obviously is restricted. A l t h o u g h only 53 manuals of different types were acquired f r o m 45 libraries during the survey, these figures do not represent a true picture of the actual extent of staff manuals in the entire group of libraries considered. T h i s fact may be verified by consulting T a b l e I I , w h i c h shows the dis- tribution of manuals. A p p r o x i m a t e l y 40 per cent of the institutions have staff man- uals of one type or another. "Typical" General Manual W h i l e it is difficult to speak of either a " t y p i c a l " general manual or depart- mental manual, nevertheless, it is apparent that certain characteristics are common to all and the manuals differ only relatively. In his study of staff manuals, H o w a r d classified the arrangement of staff manuals into four types: alphabetic, arrangement by departments, functional arrangement, and a combination of any of the other three.9 A n examination of the general staff man- uals collected during the survey reveals that the second type, arrangement by de- partments, appears the most frequently. T h e O k l a h o m a A . and M . College, the University of Nebraska, and the U n i v e r - sity of C a l i f o r n i a manuals are examples of departmental arrangement. T h e content of the general and depart- mental staff manuals likewise v a r y con- 8 Op. tit., p. 438. 9 Op. cit., p. 82. siderably in both type and quantity of material included. G e n e r a l manuals, such as those of K e n y o n College, W h e a t o n C o l l e g e , F l o r a Stone M a t h e r C o l l e g e of W e s t e r n Reserve University, and A n t i o c h C o l l e g e , are examples of " t y p i c a l " man- uals. B y contrast, the manuals of the University of Nebraska and the O r e g o n State System of H i g h e r Education almost reach the proportions of the Enoch P r a t t Staff Instruction Book. T h e materials included in departmental manuals differ as the size of the libraries vary. C i r c u l a t i o n department manuals, which are relatively common ( T a b l e I I ) , range from the simple listing of desk routines to an almost complete descrip- tion of activities which w e r e treated by B r o w n and Bousfield.1 0 T h e manual of the U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin circulation department, entitled Our TVork, is an example of a highly detailed departmental manual. Manuals for Student Assistants T h e existence of a relatively large num- ber of manuals for student assistants is probably to be expected. In many of the smaller libraries, the staffs of which often consist of a single professional w o r k e r , such manuals are indispensable media of instruction for a constantly changing body of student workers. T h i s situation is not confined to small libraries, however, for large college and university libraries make considerable use of the efforts of govern- mentally aided students. T h e B o w d o i n College L i b r a r y Instructions for Student Assistants contains, in addition to local rules and regulations, material w h i c h is frequently found in student guides and handbooks to the library. T h e James- 10 Brown, Charles H . , and Bousfield, H . G. Cir- culation Work for College and University Libraries. American L i b r a r y Association, 1933. 128 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES town College L i b r a r y Notes to Library Assistants concentrates upon the actual duties and responsibilities of student w o r k - ers. General vs. Departmental Manuals W h e t h e r a library should have a gen- eral manual instead of a series of depart- mental manuals is a question w h i c h was raised by a number of librarians. I t is apparent that a combination of a group of departmental manuals, prefaced by gen- eral rules which apply to every person and all departments, w i l l result in a manual for the whole library system. B u t is such a manual necessary, if departmental man- uals exist ? T h i s question may be an- swered by saying that if the library is considered as a unit, the facts regarding activities and special tools of each depart- ment should be recorded and made easily accessible to staff members of every other department. T h e knowledge of such ac- tivities should facilitate the rendering of complete service to the clientele of the library. B u t some libraries have been content w i t h merely a statement of staff duties and privileges. Instead of prepar- ing a general manual including depart- mental procedures and duties, the Prince- ton University L i b r a r y , for example, has issued a Staff Handbook, which describes in an interesting manner the responsibili- ties and privileges of staff members. O f the 53 manuals which were acquired in the survey, 27 are mimeographed and 3 printed. A description of the forms of the manuals is presented in T a b l e I I I . O f the 21 typewritten manuals, 9 have been microfilmed for the G r a d u a t e L i b r a r y School collection of staff manuals. 1 1 T a b l e I V throws light on the discrep- ancy between the number of librarians 11 See Bibliography at close of article. T A B L E I I I F o r m o f M a n u a l s R e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e G r a d u a t e L i b r a r y S c h o o l C o l l e c t i o n Form of Manuals Libraries in Typed Mimeo-graphed Printed To- tal Micro- filmed* A.A.U. institu- tions 4 4 2 10 2 Approved A.A.U. colleges and uni- versities 17 20 0 37 7 Approved techno- 17 37 logical institu- tions 2 3 1 6 0 Total 23 27 3 53 9 * The manuals in this column are not in addition to those recorded in the other three columns. In their orig- inal form, they were typewritten. Positive microfilm cop- ies were made at the University of Chicago D e p a r t m e n t of Photographic Reproduction for the Graduate School col- lection which retains the negatives. stating that they had staff manuals of some sort and the actual number for w h i c h copies were either sent to or prepared for the G r a d u a t e L i b r a r y School. It is due to the large group of librarians w h o w e r e reluctant to permit outside individuals to examine staff manuals that were neither completed nor in attractive format. Reasons for Nonexistence of Manuals A s w a s stated earlier, the survey w a s started on the assumption that staff man- uals are useful managerial instruments. T h e r e f o r e , the reasons advanced by li- brarians for not developing staff manuals are w o r t h analysis. F o r purposes of dis- cussion, it may be said that the reasons center about three f a c t o r s : ( 1 ) lack of faith in the value of the staff manual as a managerial instrument; ( 2 ) the use of substitute methods which are said to serve the purposes of the m a n u a l ; and ( 3 ) lack of both time and funds for the prepara- tion of the instrument. Each of these factors may be considered in more ex- tended form. T h e large majority of the librarians (see T a b l e I V ) w h o have expressed nega- tive opinions regarding the value of the MARC hi, 1941 129 staff manual are associated either w i t h libraries w i t h large staffs (35 or more members) or w i t h small staffs ( 5 members or less). A m o n g the librarians of the large institutions w h o have disapproved of the staff manual in even semi-perma- nent form, the opinion is expressed that the instruments tend to crystallize action T A B L E I V M a n u a l s i n P r e p a r a t i o n a n d t h e N o n e x i s t e n c e o f M a n u a l s i n 179 L i b r a r i e s Institutions in Manuals in Prepa- ration N o Manual A.A.U. institutions A.A.U. approved colleges and universities Technological institutions 10 67 S 10 76 11 Total 82 97 179 Manuals extant (See Ta- ble ID 98 Grand total 277* * Several institutions had manuals of various types. and thought, and thereby permit little freedom of expression of a professional attitude. In some of these institutions, however, the technical department, e.g. order and/or catalog department, devise w o r k i n g codes incorporating routinized practices. In the small libraries, the attitude is concentrated about the uselessness of re- ducing routines and methods to w r i t t e n form for a staff that consists of from one to six regular members (the range of staff size in the libraries in which this feeling p r e v a i l e d ) . T h e opinions of librarians in large or in small institutions regarding the crystalliz- ing effects of staff manuals must, of course, be considered on a logical basis. T h e r e is some evidence that rationalization enters into this type of an opinion. W h i l e this statement is not w r i t t e n in advocacy of staff manuals, it is apparent that it is not entirely consistent w i t h logic for a librarian to decry the merits or demerits of a staff manual w i t h o u t ever having had one, or w i t h o u t ever w o r k i n g in an insti- tution that had one. T h e r e is no doubt that if a staff manual tended to crystallize thought and activity, its value w o u l d be reduced to a minimum. It is recognized at once that it w o u l d be unwise to permit a w r i t t e n code to ele- vate rules above judgment and profes- sional experience. W h e t h e r a staff man- ual, or, for that matter, any practice or device of a library, becomes an effective instrument of management, or a set of hard and fast rules depends, in our opin- ion, upon the administrative officers and the attitudes they have developed among the staff members in regard to limitations of the tool. ( T h e r e has been, of course, ample testimony to the effect that staff manuals have been useful devices.) It w i l l be observed from the letter that was sent to the librarians, no expression of opinion regarding either the merits or the demerits of the staff manual w a s re- quested. Y e t , opinions pro and con w e r e expressed, and they offer some evidence in an attempt to answer the second question that has been posed: Is there a positive correlation between the opinions of li- brarians concerning the practical value of staff manuals and the theoretical conclu- sions students have reached regarding them ? T h e preceding comments in this section, plus the discussion that follows, may give some basis for establishing an answer to the query. Staff Manual for Small Staff W h a t of the question of the need of a staff manual for a small staff, let us say, of one to six people? O n e librarian may be cited on this point: Since our permanent library staff con- 130 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES sists of two persons, the assistant librarian- cataloger and myself, we have not felt the need for a staff manual. I hope, however, that some time in the future a greatly needed enlargement of our staff may make such a manual necessary. A n d students of staff manuals w o u l d say that such instruments are useful "be- f o r e " the staff is enlarged. T h e point of view in the note of the librarian cited suggests that a manual is useful only to a staff of a certain size. It is further char- acterized by an apologetic tone which was present in a large number of replies from librarians w h o did not possess staff man- uals for their institutions. O t h e r librar- ians were more definite in indicating that a staff manual is not essential in a library w i t h a small staff. hnpermanence of Personnel I t is evident that some librarians have not thought that the question of imperma- nence of personnel through accident, ill- ness, or turnover is particularly serious. O f course, it is admitted that within a small group the chances for such occur- rences are small. Y e t , the testimony of several librarians, suggests that staff man- uals may have value in the*management of a library that has but one, two, or a half- dozen professional librarians: A s I expect to retire soon, I am particu- larly anxious to leave a very workable book- let to which my successor can go on, and on which she may build. I hope it (staff manual) would make the work easier for my successor than I found at the beginning at O College with no record of procedures of the past. M y ex- periences in going into a new library situa- tion with no staff manual for a guide to the work of the library has surely made me realize the great importance of a good manual in every type of library. Sometimes I get a little weary of com- piling these manuals wherever I go, but I have never yet inherited one from a prede- cessor. I wish the first-year library schools placed more emphasis upon the library manual, for until its importance is realized, there will continue to be all this lost mo- tion which could so easily be avoided. Orienting the New Librarian It seems therefore, on the basis of actual experience of librarians, that the staff manual, regardless of the size of the in- stitution, might be useful in orienting the new librarian. T h i s may be objected to by some w h o would give the new librarian a free hand in his w o r k , and not limit him w i t h prescribed routines, procedures, decisions, or activities of his predecessor. If this is admitted, and it is, it still seems that a staff manual w o u l d be useful, even though it may be used as a guide for things not to be done. It may be further argued that in small l i b r a r i e s — t h a t is, libraries in which de- partmentation has not set i n — d u t i e s group about the person rather than about the functions, and thus staff manuals are superfluous tools. T h e r e is no doubt that the staff manual in a library, just as the manual in a business or an industrial con- cern, becomes more useful as the size of the institution increases, as departmentation sets in, and when there is considerable turnover in the staff in the clerical and subprofessional as w e l l as in the profes- sional posts. Perhaps undue emphasis has been placed upon the operations or activities of f u t u r e librarians, rather than upon the present ones. Since Hutchins, Fay, Deininger, and H o w a r d have described in v a r y i n g degrees of detail the current uses to which staff manuals, or the information con- tained in them, might be placed, no minute review is necessary at this time. C h a r a c - MARC hi, 1941 131 teristics of some of the manuals which w e r e not accessible to either Deininger or H o w a r d have been referred to earlier. Substitutes for Staff Manuals T h e second reason for the nonexistence of staff manuals in many college and uni- versity libraries may be observed in the various substitutes that librarians have devised to perform the services that are claimed for the formal instruments. Some of these substitutes are actually staff man- uals in other forms. First, there is the device of sending notices to the members of the departments w i t h the understanding that the sheets are to be arranged according to an accepted outline. T h i s procedure may gradually build up a staff manual. Such information as hours of opening, staff privileges, build- ing rules, changes in cataloging procedure or other routines, may be contained in these notices. A second procedure is to post notices on bulletin boards regarding changes in routines, activities, or duties. T h e s e no- tices are usually supplementary to general information given to members of the staff at the time of their entrance into the serv- ice of the library. G e n e r a l l y , they are ad- ministrative in nature, and do not encom- pass the large field of activity that either a general or detailed departmental staff manual attempts. If carried out in a systematic order, these bulletins, like the notices distributed to departments, may serve as a basis for a manual, if one is desired. C a r d files form a third method of re- cording policies and routines. T h i s is not a very common method for general staff manuals, however, and usually appears as a departmental record of decisions in the order and catalog divisions. Verbal Instruction Substituted A fourth substitute for the formal staff manual is verbal instruction. " R e g u l a r staff meetings" and "close and frequent conferences" are used to carry out orders relating to organization and routine. Small staffs do not have definite duties prescribed for the individual members, and w o r k constantly overlaps. T h u s each member of the staff knows, or is presumed to know everything about the library. F o r ordinary current w o r k in a library of small size such a situation is not impos- sible, nor is the v i e w regarding its merit to be discredited. A s a sufficient reason for not recording essential activities, how- ever, it poses three questions. ( i ) Does the body of k n o w l e d g e concerned w i t h the activities, routines, and procedures of a small library differ considerably f r o m the content of courses that is assumed to be acquired by librarians during their courses in library schools? ( 2 ) W o u l d not recourse to established textbooks, man- uals, and codes that have been annotated serve the same purpose as a staff manual, except for details concerning local matters such as history, hours of opening, or staff privileges? and ( 3 ) W h e n does a staff manual become necessary for efficient pro- cedure in a l i b r a r y ? In response to the first and second questions, a considerable number of librarians w o u l d answer " n o " and " y e s " respectively. T h e third ques- tion is more difficult to answer categor- ically. It seems that the program of the college or university library w i l l determine to a large extent w h a t sort of information should be recorded. T h e extent to w h i c h a library engages in activities w h i c h are not included as standard practices in vari- ous Codes and manuals w i l l make it de- sirable to record these types of w o r k if uniformity and consistency are the goals. 132 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES It is apparent that routine tasks and opera- tions, such as occur in the catalog, order, circulation, and periodical departments of the larger libraries, are more likely to be recorded than activities which require in- dividual interpretation. Some of the administrators of institu- tions which are in the process of reorgani- zation or consolidation have refused to set down their w o r k practices in the form of a staff manual, although they have noted that manuals are planned for the future. T h e reason for postponing the prepara- tion of the instruments is the fear of mak- ing rigid certain information or proce- dures. T h e validity of this reason may be questioned on the basis of the experience of several other institutions in stages of reorganization or consolidation which have used staff-manuals for accomplishing w o r k in a uniform manner. In a situa- tion of this type, the principle of standard routines is closely f o l l o w e d . I t is useful when, in a period of r e o r g a n i z a t i o n , S e v - eral new staff members, professional and clerical, are added to the staff. A typical example w o u l d be reclassification and re- cataloging of the whole collection of books. Loose Leaf Manuals Staff manuals do not have to be rigid instruments. In a library that is g r o w i n g in collections, personnel, and complexity of organization, a staff manual should be constantly supplemented and revised. Be- cause of this fact, suggestions made re- garding the maintenance of loose leaf manuals are w o r t h y of consideration.1 2 T h e O k l a h o m a A . and M . manual, al- though printed and permanently bound, provides in an appendix a method and 12 See H o w a r d , op. cit., p. 96 f o r a detailed dis- cussion of the f o r m of manuals. The majority of the manuals are on pages 8J4 by 11 inches in size; the printed manuals are smaller in size. procedure for revising any portion of the w o r k . Constant revision of manuals, however, may make printing less desirable than mimeographing. A printed manual, particularly if it is in a small edition and contains a large number of forms, is more expensive to issue than several other means of reproduction. T h e policy of duplicat- ing staff manuals beyond the actual needs of a particular library may w e l l be ques- tioned. Joeckel's recommendation concerning the need of staff manuals for various types of libraries in order to minimize the em- phasis that has been placed upon detailed routines could be answered by the produc- tion of a f e w college and university man- uals. Specimens already exist. T h e O k l a h o m a A . and M . manual is a good example of a college library staff manual. T h e library manuals of the University of Nebraska, T e m p l e University, and the O r e g o n State System of H i g h e r Educa- tion are three examples of detailed instru- ments which might serve as patterns for larger college and university libraries. T h e University of C a l i f o r n i a staff man- ual is an example of a general manual that is not replete w i t h minor depart- mental detail. Limited Time and Funds In a number of instances, librarians have explained the nonexistence of the manuals by reference to a shortage of funds and time. T i m e to prepare man- uals, of course, is dependent upon suffi- cient funds. T h e excuse given by the librarians is probably legitimate. B u t so many librarians have acknowledged the values of staff manuals as managerial in- struments that one might r i g h t f u l l y ques- tion whether or not the librarians not having them are spending their funds in MARC hi, 1941 133 the most efficient w a y . T h e feeling that staff manuals, if made at all, should be done at "odd moments" or "slack times" has been expressed by several librarians. T h i s attitude, however, does not speak very highly of their importance w h e n com- pared w i t h other activities of the library. Staff manuals, of course, are w o r t h the time put into them if they increase the efficiency of the w o r k of the library in such a w a y that ultimately better service w i l l be rendered to the patrons. L i k e other activities of the library, the prepara- tion of the staff manual must be ranked in relative importance. If the staff manual, however, may be utilized as a chart of the library organiza- tion and an interpretation of its service to the staff, the library administration, the president and the f a c u l t y , 1 3 then it seems the administrator should allot library time for the preparation of the manual. Summary A l t h o u g h approximately 60 per cent of the librarians reporting stated that they had not developed staff manuals, only about 10 per cent of this group actually expressed negative opinions regarding their value. O n a purely quantitative basis, therefore, the opinions of librarians re- garding staff manuals are significantly in favor of them as managerial instruments. If w e rely upon the experiences of this group of librarians, it seems safe to con- clude that size of staff is not always the best determinant or criterion as to whether or not a library should produce a manual. Such matters as variations from standard practices, frequent turn- over in staff (particularly if student help is preponderantly u s e d ) , and interchange 13 As m a n y librarians believe. See Table I V . Approximately 40 per cent of the 244 libraries re- sponding either possessed staff manuals or had them in preparation. of staff among the departments must be considered. Collection of Staff Manuals A selected bibliography of college and university library staff manuals collected in the survey follows. It is not a com- plete list of staff manuals in all college and university libraries in the country, nor does it include manuals in prepara- tion. Copies of all the items listed are in the possession of the L i b r a r y of the G r a d u a t e L i b r a r y School, U n i v e r s i t y of C h i c a g o . N e g a t i v e films of the manuals produced on microfilm have been held in case libraries wish to have copies made. Positive copies may be obtained from the D e p a r t m e n t of Photographic Reproduc- tion, University of C h i c a g o Libraries. A Selected List of College and University Library Staff Manuals in the Graduate Library School Library, University of Chicago.1* General Organizational Manuals Antioch College. L i b r a r y . Staff M a n u a l . Y e l l o w Springs, O h i o . 1939. ( M i m e o - g r a p h e d ) C a l i f o r n i a . U n i v e r s i t y . Staff Association. Staff M a n u a l . Berkeley, C a l i f . 1936. M s . Fisk U n i v e r s i t y . L i b r a r y . Staff M a n u a l . Nashville, T e n n . 1937- ( M i m e o - g r a p h e d ) L a w r e n c e College. L i b r a r y . Staff I n s t r u c - tion Book. Appleton, W i s . 1940. ( M i m e o g r a p h e d ) O k l a h o m a A. and M . College. L i b r a r y . Staff M a n u a l . 2nd ed. S t i l l w a t e r , O k l a . 1938. O r e g o n State U n i v e r s i t y . L i b r a r y . Staff M a n u a l . Corvallis, O r e . 1 9 3 8 - ( M i c r o - filmed f r o m ms. copy) 14 Deininger's thesis contains bibliographical entries of a n u m b e r of departmental staff manuals of col- leges, as well as a copy of the staff manual she worked out f o r Columbia College. 134 ' COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES Temple University. Library. Sullivan M e - morial Library Staff Manual. Philadel- phia. 1940. Texas. University. Library. Library Staff Manual. Austin, T e x . 1936-(Partially mimeographed) Western Reserve University. Flora Stone M a t h e r College. Library. Staff Manual. Cleveland. 1935. (Mimeographed) Wheaton College. Library. T h e Style Book of the Wheaton College Library. Wheaton, 111. 1935. (Mimeographed) Departmental Manuals Technical Departments: Montana. State University. Library. Catalog Division Manual. Missoula, Mont. 1938. (Mimeographed) Nebraska. University. Library. Catalog- ing Department Manual. Lincoln, Neb. 1939. Ms. Service Departments: Nebraska. University. Library. Refer- ence, Order, Circulation Departments: Manual. Lincoln, Neb. 1939. (Micro- filmed from ms. copy) Wisconsin. University. Library. O u r W o r k : Circulation Department Manual. Madison, Wis. 1939. (Microfilmed from ms. copy) Staff Instructions, Rules, etc. General Staff: Princeton University. Library. Staff Handbook. Princeton, N . J . 1935. Western Reserve University. Library. Staff Manual—Rules and Privileges. Cleveland, Ohio. 1930. (Mimeographed) Student Assistants: Birmingham-Southern College. Library. Information and Directions for the Use of Student Assistants. Birmingham, Ala. 1939. (Mimeographed) Bowdoin College. Library. Instructions for Student Assistants in the Bowdoin College Library. Brunswick, Me. 1937. (Mimeographed) Swarthmore College. Library. Manual for Student Assistants. Swarthmore, Pa. 1939. (Mimeographed) Schemes of Service Washington University. Library. Survey of Positions in the Ridgely Library of Washington University. St. Louis, M o . 1939. (Mimeographed) Western Reserve University. Library. Staff Manual—Salary Schedule. Cleve- land, Ohio. 1940. (Mimeographed) Staff Manual—Service Schedule. Cleveland, Ohio. 1940. (Mimeographed) MARC hi, 1941 135