Interlending & Document Supply, Volume 33, Number 2, 2005

ilds cover (i).qxd

29/06/2005

14:18

Page 1

ISBN 1-84544-432-9

ISSN 0264-1615

Volume 33 Number 2 2005

Interlending & Document Supply Maurice Line: a celebration of a lifetime in librarianship Guest Editors: Mike McGrath and Stella Pilling

www.emeraldinsight.com

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33, Number 2, 2005 ISSN 0264-1615

Maurice Line: a celebration of a lifetime in librarianship Guest Editors: Mike McGrath and Stella Pilling

Contents 103

Maurice Line: a personal and inevitably partial view B.J. Enright

108

Maurice’s management maxims Maurice B. Line

109

Tilting at windmills: BLDSC and the UK higher education community Derek Law

Librarianship as it is practised: a failure of intellect, imagination and initiative Maurice B. Line

114

A lifetime’s change in LIS Maurice B. Line

90

A practical line in bibliometrics Jack Meadows

117

Publications of Maurice B. Line

95

The evidence-based academic library: Maurice Line and the Parry Report Bernard Naylor

131

A biography of Maurice Line Stella Pilling

133

Memories of Maurice Line

135

Maurice Line: a curriculum vitae

74

Maurice at his desk at Boston Spa

75

Guest editorial

76

The British Library: its origins, development and future Lynne Brindley

81

Information science as a liberal art William Y. Arms

85

100

The other side of Line Edward Dudley

Centre section Maurice Line: a photo gallery

Access this journal electronically The current and past volumes of this journal are available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm You can also search more than 100 additional Emerald journals in Emerald Fulltext www.emeraldinsight.com/ft and Emerald Management Xtra www.emeraldinsight.com/emx See page following contents for full details of what your access includes

Maurice at his desk at Boston Spa 74

both sides of the Atlantic. “The joy of backlogs” (1988) reminded me of guilty pleasures of my own – all those lovely books which could be relied upon to be available (to the privileged librarian) in pristine condition because no library users knew of their existence. Maurice was a practising librarian all his working life, latterly at the very highest level. His research and writing were the part time activities of a man of enormous energy, so much as to put overwhelming pressure on the most able and willing of secretaries, as Pam Maher describes. Joyce, his wife, with whom he recently celebrated their golden wedding, has put up with much, and her support has been crucial in underpinning his exuberance. He can be infuriating. His eagerness to change the world is matched by the energy of his walking. Whether in the streets of London or Budapest, or on the moors and dales of Yorkshire he always walks half as fast again as any companion wishes to do. He is often wrong; he is after all human (and his political views do not accord with mine!). But as a stimulus to cl5ear thinking about professional and other issues I have never met his peer. In argument he may not always convince one that he is right, but he always strikes sparks and makes one attempt to justify a contrary view by using the logical and quantitative criteria which he himself deploys so skilfully. This collection of essays chiefly relates to Maurice, the professional man. In a credo published as a supplement to a portrait in Logos in 2002 Maurice described from whence he came:

Guest editorial In admiration of Maurice Line

Chris Hunt Maurice Line’s first article (1952) was, in retrospect very unexpectedly, on cataloguing – “The classification and arrangement of music scores”. It was an excellent discussion of a difficult practical problem, and showed signs of iconoclasm even then. His first substantial work was “A bibliography of Russian literature in English translation”. A professor of Russian history told me recently that it was one of the best English bibliographies of Russian culture, retaining its usefulness 40 years on. Maurice never returned to Russia in his writings – but his enthusiasm for Russian novels has persisted to this day. However, my academic friend’s comment on the quality of this work could have been made about almost any one of his nearly 500 published writings, on an astonishingly wide range of subjects many involving considerable research. This collection of essays in honour of Maurice Line is able to reflect only a tiny proportion of his professional interests and contributions. Perhaps the fundamental point to make about this vast output is the lucidity of his written style and of his spoken English in both formal lectures and informal discussion. “ Managementspeak” is virtually non-existent, and obfuscation and puffing, of the type, which boasts, “how I run my library good” are absent. Jack Meadows draws attention to Maurice’s skill as a quantifier, basing all his arguments upon firm assemblage of data. Maurice does not like platitudes, particularly those backed by little or no evidence. “Is co-operation a good thing?” (1980, translated into German in 1981) is one of many deadly challenges to easy orthodoxy. “Library surveys: an introduction to their use, planning, procedure and pretension” (1967 and later editions), a textbook for librarians, remains valuable one-quarter of a century on with its emphasis on objectivity and avoidance of using measurement purely to support preconceived ideas and unacknowledged prejudices. Alongside research-based studies and textbooks, particularly on social science information, the advance of computing, and the management of academic and national libraries, Maurice has produced many short articles, often under rather transparent pseudonyms – Moses, Eunice M. Blair – written to challenge prevailing ideas and pinprick the pomposity of “leaders” of the profession. Edward Dudley (himself no slouch in giving similar stimulation) describes some of them here. In a sense they are as important as the research-based publications in changing attitudes – and libraries – for the better over the last four decades. “ On the construction and use of white elephants” (1968) along with its successors was an important popularising predecessor to research which has transformed understanding of cataloguing principles, a crucial adjunct to the computer revolution on

Beliefs are shaped by background. Mine is working class and Christian nonconformist fundamentalist. My father was a postman. We were Strict and Particular Baptists who believed in the literal truth of the Bible . . . I had a bad stammer from the age of three to twenty-two . . . I won a scholarship to a public school, and later to Oxford.

In later life Maurice would not describe himself as a Christian, but his energy in using his talents instead of burying them in a napkin must surely owe something to that strict non-conformist upbringing in Bedford – this was after all the birthplace of John Bunyan. The late Brian Enright’s portrayal of the mature man (1988) reprinted here, conveys his enthusiasm, intellectual power, energy, trenchant wit, social conscience, wideness of interests and personal kindness. Maurice Line is almost certainly the most widely known librarian of his generation; his writings, teaching and lectures continue to be influential throughout the world. Since retirement from the British Library much of his energy has been given to encouraging the development of information services in Eastern Europe and Africa. This is no obituary; in spite of his comment in the essay which he himself contributed to this festschrift (“This is almost certainly the last paper I shall write”) may he long continue to inspire and infuriate his colleagues.

About the author Chris Hunt is Emeritus Librarian at the University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 [2005] 75 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615]

75

The British Library: its origins, development and future Lynne Brindley British Library, London, UK Abstract Purpose – To summarise the development of the British Library and the role played by Maurice Line. Design/methodology/approach – The history of the British Library is described. The responses it is making to current changes in the audiences it serves and the environment in which it exists are analysed. Findings – The nature of the scholarly communication process is changing but document supply will continue to play an important role. Practical implications – Continuous innovation is vital today in order to meet the changing needs of users. Originality/value – Key developments in one of the world’s outstanding national libraries are summarised by its chief executive. Keywords Libraries, Interlending, Document delivery Paper type General review

professional, and managerial and leadership skills needed; and we have rationalised and modernised our portfolio of services, including a complete re-engineering of the largest document supply service in the world. But the real strategic challenge for all libraries in the twenty-first century, as now only one part of a great diversity of alternatives, is to find new ways to add value and remain relevant in a very fast moving and competitive environment. While the distant future for libraries is not clear, it is timely for libraries in general and the British Library in particular to challenge some historic assumptions and ask some fundamental strategic questions about their role into the future. This paper will focus on the external drivers of change and the strategic questions these pose, in particular for the British Library’s document supply services, a function for which Dr Line was responsible as a Director-General in the British Library from 1974 to 1988.

Introduction Libraries for many centuries – from Alexandria through medieval libraries and beyond – were essentially repositories of knowledge, physically accessible to the select few. Over the ages, change to the library model has been limited and has taken place incrementally until relatively recent times. It was the late 1990s that heralded a massive step-acceleration in the rate of change, with the internet transforming communications and the whole way in which information is created, disseminated, accessed and used. In the early years of the twenty-first century this transformation has continued with ubiquitous and increasingly mobile computing and communications and convergence of media technologies. At the British Library we can point to a number of crucial recent achievements of some historic significance. The end of the twentieth century saw the library successfully moved into its new, flagship building at St Pancras, London. The building stands as a confident symbol of the importance of all libraries to the nation’s cultural, educational and economic success. Researchers love the reading rooms and the much enhanced quality of associated services; visitors marvel at the showcase exhibition galleries; and large parts of the library’s collections are now housed in an environment fitting to their international standing. The passage of the Legal Deposit Libraries Act 2003 was another momentous achievement for the library to ensure that the UK’s digital knowledge is collected, preserved, and made accessible in perpetuity. Also we have embarked upon a transformational journey: the library is now more externally-focused and market-facing; we have recruited staff with the necessary specialist technical,

History of the British Library and its functions The British Library was established as the national library of the UK by the British Library Act (1972). It was created in response to the recommendations of the 1969 report of the National Libraries Committee(1969) – (the “Dainton Committee”) and in the wake of the 1971 White Paper, The British Library (1971) which set as the objective for the British Library: “to provide the best possible central library services for the United Kingdom”. This was to include: . Preserving and making available for reference at least one copy of every book and periodical of domestic origin and of as many overseas publications as possible. The aim will be to provide as comprehensive a reference service of last resort as possible. If a reader cannot get what he wants near at hand he will know he can find it in the British Library. . Providing an efficient central lending and photocopying service in support of the other libraries and information systems of the country. . Providing central cataloguing and other bibliographic services related not only to the needs of the central libraries but those of libraries and information centres

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 76– 80 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615] [DOI 10.1108/02641610510602600]

76

The British Library: its origins, development and future

Interlending & Document Supply

Lynne Brindley

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 76 –80

In 2001, Line explored this variety in the means of discharging national library functions by somewhat disconcertingly likening national libraries to dogs:

throughout the country and in close cooperation with central libraries overseas. The British Library Act 1972 brought together, under the management of the British Library Board, a number of diverse bodies with national library functions. These bodies were: the library departments of the British Museum (including the National Reference Library for Science and Invention), the National Central Library, the National Lending Library for Science and Technology, the Office for Scientific and Technical Information, and the British National Bibliography Ltd. The India Office Library and Records and the National Sound Archive were subsequently added in 1982 and 1983 respectively. The legacy from the amalgamation and consolidation of these bodies from their diverse origins into the new UK national library can be seen in the very wide range of functions assigned to the British Library and in the depth and richness of its incomparable collections. The classic expression of the conventional view of national library functions is contained in the article by (Humphreys, 1966), based on discussion in the IFLA Section of National and University Libraries in 1964. In his 1980 reassessment (Line, 1980), Line argued that in many developing and developed countries, the acquisition and retention of the nation’s publications and the production of the national bibliography were of less importance and magnitude than national information and document supply and the repository function, and he proposed a radically revised categorisation of national library functions as follows: 1 Fundamental functions: . the central collection of a nation’s information media; . central loan/photocopy collection of foreign literature; . planning and coordination of interlibrary lending; . publication of the national bibliography; . national bibliographic centre; . national repository; and . exchange centre. 2 “By-product” functions: . publication of catalogues; . exhibitions; . research on library techniques; . professional training; and . expertise in library techniques. 3 Other possible functions: . collection of information media relating to the country; and . books for the blind.

. . . no type of library varies so much in nature, size, types of media covered, range of acquisitions, functions and services than national libraries. National libraries are in fact rather like dogs: dogs also exhibit an enormous variety, but we somehow recognise them all as dogs . . . Some are very old dogs, some are puppies. Some are moderately friendly, some have to be approached with care. Most do not like children! Anything that is said about national libraries (or dogs) is almost certain not to apply to one or another specimen. Just about the only thing they (dogs and national libraries) have in common is that they all have very hearty appetites! (Line, 2001).

He went on: I would certainly not hold up the British Library as a model, because its scale and the richness of its resources are impossible for most libraries to imitate . . . In its range and quality of services, from document supply through science reference services to bibliographic services it was (and is) unique . . .

The British Library and document supply: Urquhart and Line Perhaps the key characteristic that distinguishes the BL from other national libraries is the scale of its remote document supply service: last year 2.4 million documents were delivered to remote users via the service. Alongside the free access to materials provided via the BL’s reading rooms, the document supply service plays a vital role in connecting researchers, students, businesses and members of the general public in the UK and overseas with information held in the Library’s collection The British Library’s document supply service has been described as “the greatest success story of British librarianship in the post-war period, and perhaps ever” (Naylor, 1989). The service grew out of a strong tradition of interlibrary lending and document supply in the UK. During the 1920s and 1930s the National Central Library worked to enable better sharing of resources between UK libraries through the promotion and development of union catalogues. As the NCL’s own collection developed, other public and university libraries were able to dispose of material they no longer required, either donating stock to the NCL’s central collection or to other organisations (Stephens and Ede, 1991). However, as the volume of research information grew, particularly in the field of science, so too did demand for access to that information. Against a backdrop of advances in overseas scientific research – particularly in Russia – the UK Government in the 1950s was particularly concerned to make that research more readily accessible to the UK’s scientific community. In his essay on the history of interlending in the UK, Bernard Naylor outlined how this prompted the proposal for a new lending library which would be dedicated to lending scientific material. This solution was proposed by the Government’s Advisory Council on Scientific Policy:

Subsequently, in a 1989 study funded by Unesco (Line, 1990) identified 11 categories of library and information needs that should be undertaken at the national level. He argued that it was not necessarily the case that each of the functions he identified need be undertaken by the national library; the functions might be centralised on the national library, they might be centralised but not carried out by the national library, or they might be decentralised. He noted that the means of performing these functions would differ from country to country, and depend on factors such as the general level of development and size of the nation’s library system, its economic strength, its political system, its structure (whether federal or unitary) and so on; but a national approach to their provision was required.

The Council felt that the main problem facing the scientific research community was not that the mechanisms for identifying and circulating literature were inadequate but that the literature wanted by scientists was not actually available in the United Kingdom . . . Improvements in conventional inter-library lending arrangements between existing libraries would therefore make little or no contribution towards alleviating the problem of access. The solution was for the proposed new library to buy the journals and lend them as required from its own stock.

In 1953 the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research recommended the creation of a national science lending library, and in 1961 the National Lending Library for Science and Technology was founded. This later joined with the 77

The British Library: its origins, development and future

Interlending & Document Supply

Lynne Brindley

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 76 –80

National Central Library (NCL) to form the BL Lending Library Division, renamed the Document Supply Centre (DSC) in 1985. The location chosen for the new National Lending Library was a redundant Ordnance factory in Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, and the service still operates from there today. The central location of the 60-acre site meant that nearly all parts of the UK could be reached by post within 24 hours. A total of 60 tons of material were transported from London to form the basis of the original collection – approximately 40 per cent from the Science Museum Library, the rest from donations and purchases. For over 40 years the British Library’s document supply service has fulfilled a critical role in the UK’s information provision, so it is difficult to imagine the scepticism with which its was initially greeted. Graham Cornish, former Director of the Copyright Office at the BL’s DSC, remembered how the library “had been founded in an atmosphere of great controversy, especially among professional librarians. Few could see the point of setting up a central collection of scientific and technical monographs and journals in the middle of rural Yorkshire, using techniques for storage, retrieval and delivery that were based more on mail order warehouses than traditional library arrangements” (Cornish, 2001). Despite these misgivings, the service flourished. Two men in particular will always be associated with the development of document supply at the British Library: Donald Urquhart, who founded the operation in the early sixties, and of course Maurice Line, who succeeded him as Director General of the BL’s Lending Division in 1974. Line’s association with the British Library in fact went back to 1970 when he directed the study into the scope for automatic data processing in the British Library, (Stephens, 1994). Both men played a central role in championing and growing the service, and under their leadership demand grow rapidly. In its first full year of operation in 1962, the NLL processed 200,000 requests; by 1970 it was handling over one million requests, with a further 50,000 from overseas (Cornish, 2001). The comprehensive range of materials coupled with the speed of service were seen to be the core reasons for the huge growth in volumes (Davey and Line, 1977). At its peak level of demand in 1998/1999, the British Library’s document supply service was fulfilling over four million requests for individual documents annually – three million to UK customers and one million overseas. At this point the service had over 20,500 customers worldwide and 82 per cent of requests were being satisfied from DSC stock. The Library’s Facts and Figures publication from that year shows that then, as now, Higher Education was the largest customer group, with over 50 per cent of UK requests coming from HE. The service also supported customers from industry (24 per cent), government (14 per cent) and public libraries (9 per cent). Customers could draw on a comprehensive collection which included over 261,000 journals, three million books, 60,000 doctoral theses, and more than four million reports. In keeping with the historical strengths of the collection, the most requested subjects were science and technology (72 per cent) and the bulk of requests were for journal articles (75 per cent) (The British Library, 1999). While demand has slowed in recent years due to major changes in the way information is disseminated and

accessed, in terms of both volume and revenue the British Library remains the world’s largest document supplier. During its 40 year history the service has fulfilled over 100 million requests and has responded to over 20,000 customers in 130 countries. The centralised service remains an invaluable underpin to the UK information infrastructure and retains widespread support from customers and stakeholders. Yet it also faces major challenges. For many years document supply struggled to overcome the concerns of publishers who were afraid that its existence would undermine the commercial basis of journal publishing. During the past two decades many proponents of document supply, including most notably Maurice Line, have spent time rehearsing the pros and cons of individual article supply. Although the debate has continued, document supply agents and publishers have largely succeeded in working alongside one another together to fulfil the spectrum of information needs, from single article supply through to multi-title subscriptions.

New challenges But with the arrival of the electronic information age a new set of challenges emerged. The internet has provided users with the ability to search independently for relevant information, and in some cases to have the full results of such a search delivered instantaneously. Coupled with this, new forms of digital information such as primary research data have become available at the desktop for researchers to do their own data interpretation, thus reducing their reliance on the published interpretations of others. The result is that user behaviour in scholarly research is changing: users are demanding immediate, direct access to information and increasingly expect to be able to access that information in its raw as well as its interpreted form. This could not have happened without a similar change in technology and standards having taken place. Broadband and more powerful, cheaper workstations offer an infrastructure which is transforming the way users can gain access to the rapidly growing digital collections. The confluence of technical infrastructure and electronic publications with data is providing a totally different external set of conditions under which document delivery now operates. A particular consequence of the new infrastructure has been the “big deals” which journal publishers have been negotiating with libraries and consortia. For a small additional price, these offer libraries an extended package of online journals, including many lower-use titles to which libraries would not traditionally have subscribed. These same marginal titles would, in the past, have been satisfied by document delivery. The result is that there has been a rapid downturn in demand for document delivery which can be traced back to the times of the early big deals, in 1998-1999 in particular. The impact of the big deals has occurred at a time when a new challenge to library-based document delivery is emerging. Publishers have invested heavily in developing their own servers from which electronic articles can be delivered. In many cases it is not just the current editions which are available online but also the full digital archive. It means that there is a rich collection of articles in PDF form which can now be accessed from the publisher site directly. Powerful search engines are now enabling users to navigate 78

The British Library: its origins, development and future

Interlending & Document Supply

Lynne Brindley

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 76 –80

through the universe of scholarly information. These search engines range from the specialist research services such as Scopus/Scirus developed by Elsevier, to the generic search engines which cover everything which is index-able such as with Google and Google Scholar. So users can now be referred back to the publisher site for an article which matches their search needs. Although many publishers have barriers in place to prevent unauthorized access to the full text, many are now finding a valuable new source of revenues for themselves by delivering the articles online under a pay-per-view entitlement. Suddenly document delivery has been born again within the publisher stable. Which means that the traditional supply of documents from the aggregators such as the British Library is being challenged – the publisher site has become the primary source for the electronic article. This has been accentuated by the cooperative projects which publishers have initiated such as CrossRef and CrossRef Search which provide a trail of references to other articles from other publishers from the citation list at the end of each article. Furthermore a profoundly important development that will change the shape of scholarly communications in the future has emerged from a different quarter. Some authors and librarians have started to question the iniquity of the present scholarly publishing system. Why is it, they ask, do large commercial journal publishers create operating profits in excess of 30 per cent of their revenues – which are taken out of the academic system and put into the publishers’ pockets? Why is it that institutions which have nurtured the research which led to the publication still have to buy back the very article which they helped create? Why is the serials crisis getting worse rather than better, with libraries forced to make tough decisions about their acquisitions? All of these things have led to the questioning of traditional publishing models and the emergence of alternative approaches. Under the sponsorship of advocates such as Professor Stevan Harnad (Universities of Southampton and Montreal), Dr Harold Varmus (former director of the National Library of Medicine), Dr Mark Walport (Wellcome Trust) and many others, traction has been given to a new business model which stresses “openness”. Scholarly information should be made free, should not hide behind access control barriers, is their common cry. There should be no such thing as a fee-paid publication. Three alternative processes have emerged which can be traced back to this cry for openness: open access journals; institutional repositories and self-publication via author web sites. The issue which holds all these new, alternative forms together is that the article will be available for free. Where is document delivery if researchers can get their information from a free download through the Internet? This latest development has critical implications for document supply.

navigation of web-based resource discovery tools is second nature. They need to establish how best to enable the research and learning process when increasingly it is happening in a virtual realm outside the context of the library, as well as finding ways to support those who have never set foot in a library. All libraries must keep a close eye on the changes taking place in publishing and intellectual property regimes, and consider how their role in the information chain is affected by these changes. And finally, we must look to our own operation to determine which types of skills are required to exploit advances in technology and informatics, both to enhance knowledge exploration and presentation and to enable new ways of searching and mining the library’s collections. While many of these questions look to the future, the impact of the changing information environment has been felt for some time in the library’s document delivery service. To many observers, it may seem inevitable that document delivery as a national service is destined to retrench into a back-up service providing only the most esoteric items. However, the same drivers which have led to the change in technology and behavioural patterns also offer new opportunities for document delivery. The new navigational search engines that are available so widely expose a much wider group of people to the world’s publishing output. Many in this group have hitherto been disenfranchised, because they were either on the fringes of, or outside, institutional academia and research. There are millions of such people, from the financial sector through to engineers, from distance learners to amateur scientists, from professionals to entrepreneurs in SMEs. They are now being reached by web-based search engines, and are likely to able to identify the occasional article which meets their specific needs. This new audience is likely to be a significant new market for document delivery. For the library to offer document delivery services to increasing numbers of end-users, as well as improving service levels to its existing customers, it must to some extent emulate the functionality that has become so familiar to so many. To that end, over the coming year our emphasis will be on enhancing our customer interface. We are close to introducing a British Library portal, which will provide seamless access to our full range if services as well as offering a pay-as-you-go facility. This will enable occasional customers to purchase their required documents through a simple online credit card ordering system, and represents a highly significant development in document delivery’s transition into the twenty-first century. Having said that, a great deal has already been achieved in modernising the library’s document delivery operation. Three years ago, the library embarked on a programme of extensive modernisation, partly funded by the Government’s Invest To Save Budget. The library replaced all photocopiers with stateof-the-art scanning stations, which enable us to deliver all documents electronically regardless of their original format, and which have since reduced standard turnaround times from days to just hours. For the customer, this means that they can search the library’s collections efficiently (thanks to the new integrated catalogue), order an article online, pay quickly and easily and receive an e-mail containing a link to their document. Of course, we would not have been able to introduce this new service without support from the publishing industry and from technology providers. The

The British Library’s response So what of the future? The speed and scale of change in the information sector is challenging almost every long-held belief about traditional information use, and demands that we ask ourselves some fundamental questions about the role of information providers in the future. Libraries need to consider how they can best support a “digitally savvy” generation that has been brought up with Google, and to whom the speedy 79

The British Library: its origins, development and future

Interlending & Document Supply

Lynne Brindley

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 76 –80

library worked closely with Elsevier and with Adobe to create a service that satisfied the requirements of all parties, guaranteeing the necessary protection rights-holders while offering a fast and efficient service to customers. As the library continues to modernise its services, we are engaging constructively with a range of new partners, and working with many key players in the information industry. The changing environment, and the new opportunities it brings, have also necessitated a new way of thinking about document supply. Traditionally, and understandably, document supply has been seen as a discrete service – a stand-alone business in effect. However, in a world dominated by the electronic and the immediate, it is no longer helpful to see document supply as a separate entity. Indeed, by viewing document supply as one part of an integrated range of information services, it takes on renewed significance. If the library exists to support anyone who wants to do research, it has a responsibility to provide research material to anyone who requires it, wherever and whenever they require it. Clearly, document supply has a critical part to play in ensuring the library fulfils this responsibility. The British Library is at the forefront of innovation in making information accessible to anyone who wishes to use it; certainly an aim that Maurice Line strove to achieve. His legacy, together with the necessary continuing modernisation, will make our services fit for the future and able to support thousands of researchers across the world.

Cornish, G.P. (2001), “Many titles, one editor: a history of interlending and document supply”, Interlending & Document Supply, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 86-91. Davey, J.S. and Line, M.B. (1977), “International activities of the British Library Lending Division”, State Librarian, March, pp. 2-3. Humphreys, K.W. (1966), “National library functions”, Unesco Bulletin for Libraries, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 158-69. Line, M.B. (1980), “The role of national libraries: a reassessment”, Libri, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-16. Line, M.B. (1990), “Do we need national libraries and if so what sort? An assessment in the light of and analysis of national library and information needs”, Alexandria, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 27-38. Line, M.B. (2001), “Changing perspectives on national libraries: a personal view”, Alexandria, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 43-9. National Libraries Committee (1969), Report, Cmnd 4028, HMSO, London. Naylor, B. (1989), “Interlending and bibliographic records: trends and controversies”, Eating the Menus – Essays in Honour of Peter Lewis, British National Bibliographic Service, London, pp. 70-96. Stephens, A. (1994), The British National Bibliography: 19501973, The British Library, Boston Spa, p. 111. Stephens, A. and Ede, S. (1991), “The role of the British Library in cooperation”, The Handbook of Library Cooperation, Gower, Aldershot, pp. 98-117.

About the author Lynne Brindley is the Chief Executive of the British Library, London, UK.

References (The) British Library (1971), Cmnd 4572, HMSO, London. (The) British Library (1999), Facts and Figures, April, The British Library, London. (The) British Library Act (1972), c.54, HMSO, London.

80

Information science as a liberal art William Y. Arms Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA Abstract Purpose – Attempts to deal with the issue of how we can educate the next generation of leaders for the information needs of the future. Design/methodology/approach – Uses a case study: the thinking behind the new information science program at Cornell University. Findings – Advocates a broad view of information science. In a rapidly changing world, leadership will come from flexible thinking based on a broad understanding of technology and the social sciences. In the American terminology, information science should be considered a liberal art, not a profession. An education in information science provides an excellent foundation for a career in libraries, publishing or information services, but there are many more career opportunities for somebody with this education. Originality/value – Most recent initiatives in information science have come from professional schools of librarianship. By starting from a liberal arts viewpoint, universities may be meeting the needs of a very wide audience. Keywords Information science, Leadership, Education, Careers Paper type Viewpoint

Lending Division, provides an illuminating example. The NLLST was one of the few libraries created in the twentieth century that was organized from first principles. In a remarkable paper in 1959, Urquhart and Bunn (1959) analyzed interlibrary lending patterns from their experience at the Science Museum Library and proposed an entirely new type of library dedicated to interlibrary lending (Urquhart and Bunn, 1959). When he became the first director of the new library, Donald Urquhart introduced management techniques, such as statistical sampling for quality control, that have much in common with modern mail-order businesses. His successor Maurice Line added a notable ability to design and analyze survey data to extract insights about information needs and opportunities. The result has been a combination of librarianship with modern management. If the British Library Lending Division has been a pioneer of applying management methods to libraries, the leaders in using computers for library data, specifically catalog records, were Henriette Avram of the Library of Congress and Fred Kilgour, the founder of OCLC. Their importance to the library community in the development of MARC and shared cataloguing is very well known, but their role in the history of computing is less well known. There appears to be no good account of MARC and OCLC from a computer science perspective. An interesting historical description is given by Avram (1975). In the 1960s, when MARC was created, computer systems used upper case letters only to represent data in rigid formats with fixed numbers of fixed length fields. MARC’s complex record structure, with its sophisticated semantics was unique. Another leader from this period was Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). The importance of his work goes far beyond the creation of services, such as Science Citation Index and Current Contents, see for example Garfield (1979). In a long series of papers, he developed the use of citation analysis to understand the structure of scientific information. These ideas are the foundation for modern link analysis, such as the

Introduction This special issue of Interlending & Document Supply celebrates the leadership that Maurice Line has provided to the world of librarianship. This article asks the question how can we educate the next generation of leaders for the information needs of the future? As an example we use the thinking behind the new information science program at Cornell University. It is always difficult to recognize trends from within, but there appears to be a movement away from professional education focused on librarianship to a liberal arts education that emphasizes the boundary between technical areas such as computer science and the social sciences that study how people and society interact with technology. This area is called “information” or “information science”, but people who are well educated in computer science and the social sciences have career opportunities that go far beyond libraries, publishing and information services.

Some leaders from the past In planning for the future, it is often useful to look at the past. Who are the leaders that played seminal roles in changing the world of information services over the past 50 years? How were they educated? Librarians as leaders The National Lending Library for Science and Technology (NLLST), which became the basis for the British Library The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 81– 84 Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615]

q 2005 William Y. Arms

81

Information science as a liberal art

Interlending & Document Supply

William Y. Arms

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 81 –84

PageRank algorithm used by Google. Garfield’s educational background is a template for today’s information scientists: an undergraduate science major (chemistry), a master’s in librarianship, and a PhD in structural linguistics.

Columbia University and the University of Chicago, simply closed their library schools. At Columbia, shortage of space on its campus in Manhattan was given as a factor, but there were other more fundamental reasons. The underlying concern was that the library school did not reach the academic standards of the rest of the university. Other universities recognized that digital information provides opportunities for a new type of professional school, with a new curriculum and a vigorous program of research. Two well-known examples are the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Michigan. At these two universities, and almost every other leading library school, four major changes have taken place: 1 the school has been renamed to emphasize information; 2 the Master’s programs have been revamped, often by adding a program that concentrates on information; 3 a major emphasis has been placed on federally funded research in technical areas; and 4 the leadership has changed.

Non-librarians as leaders Individually and collectively the pioneers described above provide example of creative thinkers whose ideas have transformed libraries and information services. They developed new ideas and created the organizations that put them into practice. These people were all educated as librarians. This might suggest that the traditional library school curriculum would provide a good education for the next generation. During the past 15 years, however, a different pattern has emerged. Recent developments have often been led by people who did not come from a library tradition. For example, the Paul Evan Peters Award is given by the Association of Research Libraries, the Coalition for Networked Information, and EDUCAUSE[1]. It recognizes, “the most notable and lasting international achievements related to high performance networks and the creation and use of information resources and services that advance scholarship and intellectual productivity”. With their strong roots in American research libraries, these organizations can be expected to have a deep understanding of the major developments in the field, yet the award has never been given to anybody with a library degree. The first three awards were to: Tim Berners Lee, the creator of the web, a physicist with great skill in computing; Vinton Cerf, one of the key people behind the internet, a computer scientist, and Brewster Kahle, the founder of the internet archive, also a computer scientist. To generalize grossly from these few examples, we could argue that until about 15 years ago the major innovations in libraries and information services came from people who were trained as librarians and assimilated knowledge of computing and management during their careers. More recently, however, many innovations have come from people with an education in computer science, who have assimilated a limited knowledge of the problems of libraries and information. This is a sweeping generalization and far from a universal truth. Currently, for example, some of the most exciting developments in scientific information are coming from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) at the National Institutes of Health. The teams at the NCBI bring together people with medical backgrounds, computer scientists and librarians. Many people would argue that this form of multidisciplinary teamwork is likely to be the model for future innovations.

Many recently appointed deans do not have a library background. The new dean at Berkeley was Hal Varian, an economist, and at Michigan, Daniel Atkins, an electrical engineer, both with national reputations in their fields. Other schools have made similarly high-profile appointments from outside the library profession.

Information science as a liberal art Liberal arts and professional education There is, however, another way to interpret the examples given in the first section of this paper. In the rapidly changing world of information leadership will come from flexible thinking based on a broad understanding of technology and the social sciences. In American universities, this is called “liberal arts” education to differentiate it from professional education that stresses the knowledge and skills for a welldefined profession, such as engineering, law or business. Organizationally, most universities have a central college of arts and sciences, to teach and do research in the liberal arts. Professional education is organized in professional schools. Thus economics is typically taught in arts and sciences while management is taught in separate business schools. For the past century the education of young librarians has revolved around library schools. Librarianship has been seen as a profession. In the USA, a master’s degree from a library school is a requirement for many jobs. While many American universities have introduced new programs in information science, almost all of them are built on existing library schools and emphasize professional education. For instance, at Berkeley, the faculty report (Information Planning Group, 1993), that guided the changes to the library school explicitly rejected the traditional school curriculum and the master of library science degrees. With remarkable frankness, the report stated:

Professional education Library schools A possible interpretation of these and similar examples is that the professional library school curriculum needed to be revised. Over the past few years, almost every American university with a library school has examined its programs and made major changes. Early in the 1990s, several universities questioned the quality of their library schools. Other professional schools, such as law and business, were attracting the nation’s brightest students and faculty, contributing outstanding research, and making a hefty profit. Library schools were not seen as their intellectual equals. Two good universities,

The degree to be awarded by this program . . . is not designed to meet American Library Association requirements; rather, it will serve as a model for the development of accreditation criteria for the emerging discipline upon which the School is focused.

In classic bureaucratic doublespeak, the fundamental decision was to “disestablish” the existing school and “reconstitute” a new school from its ashes. Notice that this excellent report 82

Information science as a liberal art

Interlending & Document Supply

William Y. Arms

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 81 –84

The information science curriculum

does not question the framework of a professional program in a separate school.

The universities that have created modern programs in information science are gradually coming to a consensus on the topics that should be included in the curriculum. Whether the program is seen as liberal arts or professional education the aim is to achieve a balance between computer science and the social sciences. Computer science needs to be a fundamental part of information science education, but computer science itself is often criticized for creating specialists with great technical skills who lack the human and social skills that are need to lead complex organizations. Cornell’s curriculum is exceptional in its emphasis on the underlying science and social sciences, but even so there is considerable overlap with professional programs, such as at Berkeley. Figure 1 shows the various departments that contribute to the Cornell program, arranged in three groups: technical, human, and social. The major subjects in the Cornell curriculum are as follows: 1 Information systems: . databases; . information retrieval; . natural language processing; . machine learning; . optimization; and . web algorithms. 2 Human-centered systems: . human computer interaction; . cognitive psychology; . linguistics; and . communication. 3 Society: . economics; . law; . sociology; and . science and technology studies.

The Cornell model Building on an existing school has many benefits, but also restricts the options available. Almost invariably, the main degree is a professional master’s. Typically there is an existing body of tenured faculty and a financial relationship with the university that depends on revenue from the Master’s program. In 2000, when we decided to introduce a program in information science at Cornell we had no existing organization to build on, no tenured faculty, no alumni body, and no tradition. The impetus for the program came from the faculty of Computing and Information Science. This is a college-like organization centered on the department of computer science with a mission of developing interdisciplinary programs. Since its creation in 1999, it has been an incubator for programs in areas such as information science, computational biology, digital arts and graphics, and computational science and engineering. Computing and information science could have proposed a professional master’s program in information science, but instead we have developed information science as a multidisciplinary program within the arts and sciences tradition. As such, we offer undergraduate majors and a PhD program, but no master’s program. Because of Cornell’s peculiar situation as both a major private university and also the land grant university for the State of New York, versions of the major are offered in three different colleges: Arts and Sciences, Agriculture and Life Sciences, and Engineering[2]. The great danger with multidisciplinary degree programs is that the students fail to develop a deep understanding of any of the disciplines. To avoid this situation, the program follows three important principles: 1 Faculty members in the information science program have their tenure home in a conventional department, such as computer science, communication, psychology, economics, linguistics, science and technology studies, operational research, physics, or statistics. To achieve promotion and tenure they must satisfy both their home department and information science. 2 To maintain high academic standards we have set a high academic threshold for students who wish to register for the undergraduate majors. We are being very selective in admitting to the PhD program. 3 The aim is to avoid special courses for information science students. Thus for example, when the PhD students take a course in cognitive psychology, they take the same course, taught by the psychology department, as the PhD students in psychology. Conversely, we hope that other students will benefit from associating with the information science students.

Figure 1 Departments and programs that contribute to the information science program at Cornell

Despite these precautions, there is concern that the less strong undergraduates may be broad rather than deep. It may be that we will need to establish a master’s degree to enable the students to take a larger number of advanced courses. If so, it will be a master of science degree – essentially an extra year of liberal arts – not a professional master’s. Overall, the goal is simple. We wish to develop information science as a discipline that ranks amongst the most distinguished programs at Cornell, whether measured by the academic criteria of faculty renown and research achievements, or by the accomplishments of our graduates. 83

4

Information science as a liberal art

Interlending & Document Supply

William Y. Arms

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 81 –84

A long-standing concern about even the best scientific and technical degree programs is that many of the graduates lack the human and organizational skills that are needed to rise to senior positions in organizations. As a result, there is a shortage of people in senior positions who have a good understanding of modern science. In developing information science as a bridge between computer science and the social sciences – in the liberal arts tradition – we may be meeting the needs of a very wide audience.

Mathematics and statistics: . probability and statistics; . linear algebra; and . experimental design.

In planning the curriculum, considerable discussions revolved around the final category, mathematics and statistics. Information science is a quantitative discipline. We would be failing our students if we allowed them to graduate without good computing skills and a solid mathematical background. (As an illuminating historical example, the well-known controversy over Maurice Line’s efforts to correlate Urquhart’s model of usage at the NLLST with Garfield’s citation analyses was eventually resolved by the development of more sophisticated statistical methods for rank-correlation coefficients, for which see Bensman (2001)).

Notes 1 For information about the Paul Evan Peters Award, see the EDUCAUSE web site: www.educause.edu/awards/ pep/ 2 For fuller information about Cornell’s Information Science program, see the web site: www.infosci.cornell. edu/index.html

Information science as general education Although an education in information science provides an excellent foundation for a career in libraries, publishing or information services, these are not the only careers for which a solid grounding in both computer science and the social sciences is a strong foundation. As part of the development of the Cornell program, we wrote to several other universities asking what careers their information science graduates were going into. The replies were fascinating. The following extracts are from the proposal for a PhD program in information science made to the Cornell trustees and the State of New York and replies to questions from the Cornell Graduate School in 2003. The University of California at Berkeley reported that:

References Avram, H.D. (1975), MARC, its History and Implications, Library of Congress, Washington DC. Bensman, S.J. (2001), “Urquhart’s and Garfield’s Laws: the British controversy over their validity”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 52 No. 9, pp. 714-24. Garfield, E. (1979), Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities, Wiley, New York, NY. Information Planning Group (1993), “Proposal for a school of information management and systems”, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, December 6, available at: www.sims.berkeley.edu/about/history/proposal.html Urquhart, D.J. and Bunn, R.M. (1959), “A national loan policy for scientific serials”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 27, pp. 21-37.

The generic job is “working for the CIO” [Chief Information Officer]. In general, CS [Computer Science] does not give you the full set of skills you need for CIO-type jobs, while we think that we do.

The University of Washington reported that, in addition to academic positions, many students go to Microsoft Research and Boeing, where their human-centered expertise complements the more technical members of research teams. The Pennsylvania State University reported that many students go into consulting, project management, and similar jobs. They noted that the average starting salary for their undergraduate majors are the highest of any college in the university. As universities have become more specialized, the sciences, social sciences, and humanities have become separated. In attempting to bring these disciplines together, information science is striving to develop a well-rounded graduate that has always been the goal of the best universities.

About the author William Y. Arms is Professor of Computer Science and Co-Director, Information Science at Cornell University, New York, USA.

84

Tilting at windmills: BLDSC and the UK higher education community Derek Law University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK Abstract Purpose – To provide an overview of, the relationship between the British Library and higher education libraries in the 1990s, with particular relation to document supply. It also goes on to explore current developments in scholarly communication. Design/methodology/approach – The author played a role in several of the events described and uses the available literature to enlarge on a personal view of that decade. Findings – The paper shows that the relationship was a strained one caused in part by a mismatch of resources, but is in any case dwarfed by the larger external forces and changing opportunities and technologies for scholarly communication. Originality/value – Provides a record of the period. Keywords Libraries, Higher education, Document delivery, Interlending, United Kingdom Paper type General review

should work with common standards, a common currency and common practices with the Sydney Public Library, or the National Library of Medicine with the Max Planck Institutes or Edinburgh University Library with Shanghai City Library. We take international document delivery so much for granted that we have never sat back and analysed just how remarkable, how complicated and how difficult a triumph of professional co-operation it is (Parent, 2004). And if many others deserve credit, and Maurice would be the first to wish that to be so, then we should not forget in a currently fashionable if much mis-used phrase, that it happened on his watch.

Preamble For many of my generation, Maurice Line has been a dominating hero figure. His impact on document delivery services, never mind the rest of the profession is impossible to overestimate and certainly impossible to do justice to in a single article. Maurice can only be described in adjectives: iconic; iconoclastic; irreverent; impatient; towering; quickwitted; a gangling man of jagged edges, whether dancing or walking, whether expressing views or chairing meetings. And he presided over BLDSC at a time of rapid change, turning a local lending service into a global giant. The often difficult relationship between the British Library (BL) and higher education (HE) in the 1990s have tended to conceal quite how much was achieved under his leadership. To take the most obvious example, Line was closely associated with IFLA’s core programmes – notably the Universal Availability of Publications (UAP), whose office was based for many years at Boston Spa. One of the most astonishing, if least remarked, feats of international librarianship, is the completion of the UAP and its partner UBC (Universal Bibliographic Control) programmes which IFLA declared closed in 2003. Line must take much of the credit for the fact that it is broadly possible to identify any book or journal article published in the last 50 years (at least), to fill in a form, often electronically, and within a matter of days the work arrives. Even more astonishing is the way in which libraries, on receiving a form, will send a book to the ends of the earth in the expectation that in due course it will return to the shelves. And yet there is no self evident reason why the British Library

BLDSC and changing collection development strategies But the story to be told here really begins almost 30 years ago in 1976 with the publication of the now largely forgotten Atkinson Report (University Grants Committee, 1976). In a foreword to the Report, Lord Dainton, Chairman of the UGC, said: By the end of 1974 the UGC had come to the conclusion that they were clearly not going to have enough resources, either in the short term or the long term, to build new libraries at all universities on the scale needed to match an indefinitely growing number of books. Even if this had been possible, it was doubtful whether it would have been the most sensible course to follow.

So with Atkinson came the notion of the “self renewing library of limited growth” i.e. a library in which space required for new acquisitions would be provided largely by space created by withdrawals. The report coloured thinking for almost 20 years. The emerging serials crisis and escalating costs at a time of almost static budgets had forced librarians to start looking at novel solutions. The phrase of the moment was access versus holdings, alternatively described as a move from just-in-case collections to just-in-time services. By 1987 the situation seemed critical with a report (Pocklington and Finch, 1987) suggesting that the deep cuts in HE library provision were having an impact on research output and that the BL too was suffering cuts just when HE libraries needed more not less back-up. Increased co-operation and substantial investment in IT systems was at best mitigating the position in HE.

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 85– 89 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615] [DOI 10.1108/02641610510602619]

85

Tilting at windmills: BLDSC and the UK higher education community

Interlending & Document Supply

Derek Law

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 85 –89

At that time, BLDSC occupied a singular and totally dominant position in remote supply. Its collections seemed comprehensive and its services were efficient and effective and relatively cheap. But throughout the 1980s the rapid development of library IT systems and the creation of UK consortia based on common IT platforms (BLCMP, LASER, SCOLCAP, SWALCAP) allowed models commonly practised in the USA to be explored. For example at one extreme it was possible to begin to think of the solution to the ever escalating cost of journals as being to rely entirely on BLDSC. Work at the University of East Anglia (Baker, 1992) concentrated on developing a matrix which would determine when it was more cost effective to move from subscription to transaction based access, relying on high quality document delivery services. But it also became possible to think of other models for document supply, based on regional or subject models. As always and even after leaving the BL, Line was a trenchant player in the debate, typically arguing against the prevailing fashion and concluding that access services could best act as a substitute for older not current material, where serendipitous browsing was a key feature of information gathering behaviour (Line, 1995). This period of BLDSC dominance may now be seen to have ended just after Line’s retirement (a technically accurate but totally inappropriate term) with the decision in 1990 by the Computer Board – the forerunner of JISC – to fund the ISI databases, hosted at the University of Bath as the Bath Information and Data Service (BIDS). This first example of a national site licence both showed that there was a role for JISC to act on behalf of the sector and was perhaps the first significant general service to the desktop, whetting academic appetites for easy unmediated access to the primary and not just the secondary literature. Its immediate success was followed by JISC’s stated aim to move into dataset provision with large ambitions and a large budget (Law, 1995). In effect the HE community demonstrated its intention to use technology to address the issues.

The intention was to break the mould. It was accepted from the start that a programme of projects which delivered on time and on budget but failed to influence both culture and thinking was less desirable than a programme whose projects failed to deliver on time or on budget but which did change culture and thinking. It was a time of almost messianic zeal in which the BL was seen as increasingly irrelevant to the needs of HE.

The British Library and higher education in the 1990s If the early 1990s were the best of times for higher education, they were perhaps the worst of times for the British Library. The Follett Report had led to an infusion of cash into the HE library sector which was bursting with ideas for innovation and the use of new technology, for the provision of national services and great enthusiasm for a period of rapid change. The very name of Follett Implementation Group for IT (FIGIT) embodied the restless energy which the eLIB programme would channel into literally dozens of projects, while at the same time the Information Services SubCommittee of JISC had an annual budget of millions to set up data services, the Arts & Humanities Data Service, image services, subject based portal services and much more. It (not always fairly) saw the British Library as sclerotic, with a poor track record on IT innovation, stultified by financial problems and with an introverted if understandable concern with little beyond the new St Pancras building. In terms of document supply it was seen as a near monopoly supplier with no clear intention to move towards electronic document delivery, a goal prized by the HE community (Law, 1999; E-SYS, 2000). This breakdown of understanding was typified by two substantial post-Follett investments. There had been a great deal of rumour over the possibility that the BL would charge for the use of its online catalogue. This was anathema to the rather better heeled HE sector and was a direct cause – although by no means the only cause – of the setting up of COPAC as a free public service on the internet. Equally impatient with what was seen as the failure to move on electronic document delivery, FIGIT set out with an interlending research strand whose implicit aim was to change the BL from a library of first resort to a library of last resort. In fairness, the BL had conducted a great deal of experimentation. If it was unrealistic to expect a service with millions of transactions to be automated quickly or easily, there was nevertheless a real frustration at the gap between good research and its apparent non-implementation (Tuck, 1995).

The Follett Report A seminal event for UK university libraries was the Follett report of 1993 (Higher Education Funding Council for England, 1993) which produced a sudden flush of cash and activity in higher education. In many ways the Follett Report was a middle point not a beginning, since much of the work on the IT related elements which would feature in the report had been done even before Sir Brian was appointed to chair the Committee (Brindley, 1996). Millions were released for everything from library buildings to IT projects. The eLib programme started in 1995 with funding of £15,000,000 over three years (Rusbridge, 2001). The aim of eLib was to “transform the use and storage of knowledge in higher education institutions”. The first phase of the programme was quickly set up, bids sought and projects funded. Some 354 bids were received, again showing the pent-up energy in the sector. The successful bids were organised into a number of discrete strands, as: . document delivery – four projects; . electronic journals – ten projects; . digitisation – four projects; . on-demand publishing – seven projects; . training and awareness – four projects; . supporting studies – five projects.

Electronic document delivery and the Follett Report This area was supported under phase 1 of the eLib programme. A general action to look at the Research Libraries Group ARIEL software in conjunction with Australian libraries was linked to four projects. The biggest project under this strand was London and Manchester Document Access (LAMDA). It originated from several premises. First there was the view that the sheer excellence of the BLDSC service had both prevented any real research into alternative models and mitigated against technical development; it was frustrating to see the 86

Tilting at windmills: BLDSC and the UK higher education community

Interlending & Document Supply

Derek Law

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 85 –89

continued dominance of postal delivery when JANET had put instant communication into every university. Second, worry over pressures on BL charging policies as a result of budgetary problems and copyright fees meant that the search for alternative models was seen as financially important. As a result LAMDA loans were priced quite aggressively. Third, the supplying libraries saw document supply both as providing an alternative source of income for their overstretched budgets and through increased use as a justification for the continuing investment in these collections. Fourth, technology was readily to hand in the shape of the Research Libraries Group ARIEL software, which allowed cheap scanning and electronic transmission of articles. It was also expected that the serials collections of HE libraries in these two major cities would meet a significant proportion of needs and the existence of local union lists of serials made identification of assets simple, at least in theory. Of course, a more anodyne message of partnership and co-operation was expressed publicly (Friend, 1996). Perhaps unsurprisingly the partners found running a document supply service tougher than expected and some of the delivery statistics were less than satisfactory. Against the BL’s ability to shift millions of requests, LAMDA manages some tens of thousands. It was clear that the issues were administrative rather than technical. (Blunden-Ellis, 1996). But LAMDA did and does provide thousands of cheap requests and helped to achieve perhaps its main goal of breaking the mould and opening up the market for a wealth of new technical possibilities. The second project, and the one receiving the biggest budget share, was InfoBike, based at Bath University and which can be said to have failed in terms of its expressed and very ambitious goals. The fundamental system concept was to separate resource discovery, or searching bibliographic catalogues, from access to electronic document stores, and the delivery of material from these. This demanded complex development work. Interestingly, the project managed to develop and change as the work plan progressed. First it turned into the BIDS JournalsOnline service, which in turn provided the core of the spin-off company ingenta, which is now a very successful multi-million AIM-listed company. The third project, SEREN was a project based in Wales aiming to provide a regional service through a distributed resource discovery model. It aimed to provide the software to enable the Welsh HE community to maximise use of the library resource-base in Wales before turning to BLDSC and other suppliers. It proposed to use simple Internet mail protocols available even to small libraries, to allow the scanning of documents and their transmission as attachments to e-mail messages. The project was a useful learning component of the programme, but in practice and as so often it was the hurdle of co-operation which proved the most daunting. The final project was EDDIS, based at the University of East Anglia, which aimed to produce an integrated, end-user driven identification, holdings discovery, ordering and electronic supply service for non-returnable items (typically journal articles) which could be used by all UK higher education institutions. Again this changed during the course of the project with the involvement of the commercial Fretwell Downing group. It was also the only one of the projects to work with BLDSC (Larbey, 1998). By the end of the decade, eLib had at least assisted in achieving its mould-breaking role, even if the projects other

than LAMDA had more or less withered. Technology had allowed a proliferation of rival services to emerge. The EDDIS study concluded that it was a range of non-technical issues such as copyright, culture, critical mass of titles and the like which really mattered (Larbey, 1998). Yet a study at the University of Liverpool compared six services and concluded that although the BL still provided a fast reliable service with the greatest breadth of journal coverage, its failure to deliver on sophisticated interfaces which the new technology offered was a source of concern, as more limited services were easier to use. Nevertheless for a multi-faculty HE institution it was still the best option – but now with BIDS and UnCover as serious rivals (Boyle and Davies, 1999).

The National Site Licensing Initiative As JISC structures developed and expanded, the pressure increased to give access to the primary literature. The National Electronic Site Licensing Initiative (NESLI) evolved from the three year Pilot Site Licence Initiative (1995-1997) and the original NESLI (1998-2001), which introduced the concept of a managing agent and piloted the use of a model licence for use in negotiating agreements with publishers. A second phase called NESLi2 has now been put in place. Content Complete Ltd (CCL) provides outsourced negotiations and related support services to academic and research libraries and institutions for digital content. CCL’s partner is MIMAS, the JISC/ESRC supported national data centre at Manchester, which provides the helpdesk and communications functions. Publishers had no real idea how to respond to the challenges of new technology in terms of pricing except, it appeared, to keep pushing prices up. The barrier of VAT on electronic only publications hampered substantial innovation in the UK and it seemed that the best that could be done was to develop the consortial approach now the dominant model in the USA. Superficially these “big deals” seemed attractive, but some publishers simply refused to take part while some demanded longer term deals than were comfortable and a realisation began to dawn that perhaps this militated against the interests of smaller publishers. Some railed that the development of the STM model was inappropriately colouring the development of e-journals, since it dealt with the minority of very large publishers, rather than the huge majority of very small publishers. The midpoint evaluation of NESLI found widespread acceptance of the value of a national negotiation service. However, many stakeholders considered that progress had been slow, that the process was complex and offers did not always provide value for money. Indeed the tide seems now to have turned against big deals, it seems, but what will not now change is a user expectation of direct unmediated online access to the literature. Indeed the whole future of scholarly communication is a matter of substantial debate.

The future of scholarly communication: a brief guide to the debate The growing debate on the future of scholarly communication has its origins in the journals financial crisis in libraries, but the discussion which has opened up has little to do with resolving that issue: it is purely an academic debate on the future of scholarly communication. 87

Tilting at windmills: BLDSC and the UK higher education community

Interlending & Document Supply

Derek Law

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 85 –89

There are some 20-25,000 peer reviewed academic journals publishing about 2,500,000 articles each year. As their prices continue to rise they become less available in libraries, while the restrictive practices of publishers somewhat curiously make access even more limited even to online journals. Two related movements have grown together to form the socalled gold route and green route to changing the face of scholarly publishing. The one with the highest profile is the so called gold route of publishing in open access journals. Some 5 per cent of journals – about 1,000 – are published as purely online journals with the full panoply of peer review and accreditation. Most of these are listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) (www.doaj.org/), a list of entirely free journals. In addition to these the biosciences have spearheaded a variant model in which in return for author charges the journal is made available free across the web. The two major activities here are the Public Library of Science (www.plos.org/) and Biomed Central (www.biomedcentral.com/), which publishes over 100 journals online. In the latter case the Funding Councils have paid a central subscription for the UK so that UK scientists can publish without charge. A whole raft of public bodies is beginning to line up to offer to pay authors charges on the grounds that the results of publicly funded research should be in the public domain. The Wellcome Trust (www.wellcome.ac.uk/en/1/awtprerel1003n303.html), The Max Planck Institute (www.biomedcentral.com/news/ 20031022/06), and in the USA the Howard Hughes Institute (www.earlham.edu/ , peters/fos/ bethesda.htm) and a growing list of funding agencies have all said they will prefer the OAI model and will fund it. In 2004 the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology (2004) reported on whether UK government funded research should be published openly. It concluded that the present model was no longer effective and made a case in favour of Open Access and institutional repositories, but, sadly, the DTI-led government response proposed that the Department of Terminal Inactivity should continue to live up to its name by simply denying that there was a problem. Remember that this debate is about access and not the price of serials. Although the OAI “movement” to create journals free at the point of use is barely 18 months old, at least one journal already has an impact factor of four, while a growing body of evidence shows that articles published in OAI journals are cited at least three times more often than articles in commercial journals. So OAI brings greater exposure and citation. At present UK scientists submit a growing number of articles – 53 in January – to Biomed Central under the Funding Council Scheme, of which 47 per cent are accepted through peer review. So this is not a soft option. However, many researchers worry about the RAE, the quality of OAI journals and the general novelty of it all. As a result the so-called “green route” has been developed. Computer scientists have developed standard interoperable software for e-print archives based mainly in universities. At the same time library organisations have negotiated copyright waivers with most publishers, so that articles from over 60 per cent (again a growing list) of publishers can be held locally (www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo.php). All that is required is for a copy of the article accepted by a publisher to be submitted in any standard format to a central institutional body, usually the library, which then deals with copyright and metadata tagging. Again the evidence is that this leads to a vast increase in access and citation, provided that this is

consolidated in a central repository using the agreed standards and not strewn across personal web pages in a variety of ways. By extension if all academics follow this route, web harvesters will search and find material with ease. The major proponent of this is Steven Harnad at Southampton who argues the case online at http://lists.openlib.org/ pipermail/ oai-eprints/2003-November/000108.html and in print (Harnad, 2004).

Conclusion Almost inevitably the pendulum has swung and relationships between the BL and HE have improved in the last few years, following a notable and welcome effort by the BL to repair the rift. (Anderson Report, 1996) followed on from the Follett Report and in turn led to the British Library/HE Taskforce (1999-2001). The Anderson report (never definitively published) focused on a national and regional strategy for library provision for researchers. The Research Support Libraries Programme (RSLP), was then funded by the four higher education funding bodies, to implement key proposals from the Anderson Report. The Research Support Libraries Programme (RSLP) was designed specifically to support and improve library provision for research in higher education, with a strong focus on promoting collaboration ranging from easier access to collections to the creation of digital libraries. The programme ended in the summer of 2002 having distributed grants of almost £30 million to universities over four years. It is also worth noting that the BL was a partner in 17 of the RSLP Projects compared with almost none of FIGIT’s 60-odd projects. The joint British Library/HE Taskforce was set up to identify areas for future collaboration between the British Library and higher education and implicitly to build bridges and revive relationships. The Task Force sought specific initiatives for common benefit, in line with the British Library’s increasing strategic emphasis on collaboration as a mechanism to deliver its own objectives. One consequence of this coming together is the creation of the Research Libraries Network, hosted by the British Library but aiming to link the national libraries and HE research libraries. It remains a matter of debate whether this is the wrong answer to the right question, but at least it demonstrates that the season of goodwill persists. Certainly, both groups are more than ever at the mercy of external forces and it does seem that commercial document supply will slowly wither on the vine as unmediated desktop access to the internet becomes the norm. The key for both parties will be how far they can create value-added services that will be perceived as relevant to the end-user. There is one last irony in this trot through 25 years of BL and HE relations. In 1980 the BL ceased to publish the British Union Catalogue of Periodicals, a costly publication deemed largely superfluous given the comprehensiveness and quality of BLDSC collections and services. The last act of the JISC before RLN takes shape under the wings of the BL, is to launch SUNCAT, a Serials UNion CATalogue for the UK. Its aim is to improve access for researchers rather than to stimulate document supply and one of its principal components is to list the serials holdings of the BL, without which no serious research could begin. One would love to hear the Line line on this, although his views on the value of co-operation may still hold true (Line, 1997). 88

Tilting at windmills: BLDSC and the UK higher education community

Interlending & Document Supply

Derek Law

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 85 –89

References

Line, M. (1995), “Opinion paper: access as substitute for holdings: false ideal or costly reality?”, Interlending & Document Supply, Vol. 23 No. 2. Line, M. (1997), “Co-operation: the triumph of hope over experience?”, Interlending and Document Supply, Vol. 25 No. 2. Parent, I. (2004), “The IFLA UAP and UBC Programmes”, Alexandria, Vol. 16 No. 2. Pocklington, K. and Finch, H. (1987), Research Collections under Constraint, British Library Research Paper, British Library, London. Rusbridge, C. (2001), “After eLib”, Ariadne, No. 26. Tuck, B. (1995), “Electronic document delivery: technical aspects and future developments”, in Collier, M. (Ed.), Electronic Library and Visual Information Research (ELVIRA 1), ASLIB, London. University Grants Committee (1976), Capital Provision for University Libraries: Report of a Working Party [The Atkinson Report], HMSO, London.

Anderson Report (1996), Joint Funding Councils’ Libraries Review, report of the Group on a national/regional strategy for library provision for researchers, available at: www. ukoln.ac.uk/ services/elib/ papers/other/anderson Baker, D. (1992), “Access versus holdings policy with special reference to the University of East Anglia”, Interlending & Document Supply, Vol. 20 No. 4. Blunden-Ellis, J. (1996), “LAMDA – a project investigating new opportunities in document delivery”, Program, Vol. 30 No. 4. Boyle, F. and Davies, M. (1999), “Access versus holdings: document delivery realities”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 17 No. 2. Brindley, L. (1996), “FIGIT – RIP?”, JISC News, No. 1. E-SYS (2000), “Summative evaluation of phases 1 and 2 of the e-lib initiative: final report”, available at: www.ukoln.ac. uk/ services/elib/ info-projects/ phase-1-and-2-evaluation/ elib-fr-v1-2.pdf Friend, F. (1996), “LAMDA: questions and some answers”, Interlending & Document Supply, Vol. 24 No. 3. Harnad, S. (2004), “Open access to peer reviewed research through author/institution self-archiving”, in Andrews, J. (Ed.), Digital Libraries: Policy Planning and Practice, Ashgate Press, Aldershot. Higher Education Funding Council for England (1993), Joint Funding Council’s Libraries Review Group: Report (The Follett Report), HEFCE, Bristol. House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology (2004), 10th Report, Scientific Publications: Free for All?, House of Commons, London. Larbey, D. (1998), “Project EDDIS”, Ariadne, No. 14. Law, D. (1995), “The development of a national policy for dataset provision in the UK: a historical perspective”, Journal of Information Networking, No. 1. Law, D. (1999), “The British Library and the impact of research”, Information Services and Use, Vol. 19 No. 2.

Further reading Association of Research Libraries (2005), for the inquiring mind dedicated FAQ pages and a bibliography of URL’s can be found at: www.arl.org/scomm/open_access/framing. html. Eason, K. (2001), “Evaluation of the National Electronic Site Licence Initiative (NESLI)”, Serials, Vol. 14 No. 2. Larbey, D. (1997), “Project EDDIS”, Interlending & Document Supply, Vol. 25 No. 3.

About the author Derek Law is Head of the Information Resources Directorate, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.

89

A practical line in bibliometrics Jack Meadows Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this article is to describe Maurice Line’s continuing interest in bibliometrics and in its possible application to library problems since the 1970s. He has especially emphasized two strands. One is the concept of obsolescence and how it applies in practice. The other is citation studies of the social sciences, which tend to have been ignored in comparison with the sciences. He has particularly explored the limitations that need to be taken into account when trying to apply bibliometric ideas in practical contexts. Design/methodology/approach – An analysis of Line’s publications on bibliometrics led to a selection of major themes in his writings. A subsequent study of the publications of others who wrote on this topic over the same period provided a framework for assessing his work. Findings – Maurice Line played an important role in the development of this area of bibliometrics, though he slightly modified some of his early ideas as time has passed. Originality/value – Provides a background to Maurice Line’s interest in bibliometrics since the 1970s. Keywords Obsolescence, Information science Paper type General review

question related particularly to journals. In the 1920s, Gross and Gross (1927) tried to obtain a quantitative answer for chemistry by analysing the journals mentioned in the references attached to papers in chemistry. This approach of ranking the importance of journals in terms of the references they received became quite popular in subsequent years, but was attacked by Brodman in the 1940s (Brodman, 1944). She pointed out that the method was based on a number of assumptions – such as that the value of a journal to a researcher was directly proportional to the number of times it was cited - which had never been tested. Her own study of physiology journals found little correlation between a ranking list based on citations and a preference list drawn up by a group of physiologists. These two strands – the size of the journal literature and the use of citations – were brought together by Fussler (1949). He suggested that the problem in trying to apply quantitative methods of prediction was that too little was known about the characteristics of the scientific literature. He therefore carried out a painstaking study of the physics and chemistry literature using citation analysis as a basis. He concluded that, though such a study left several questions unanswered, it could provide general help to librarians. In particular, he pointed to the guidance it could give on the decline in the use of literature as it aged. This point was subsequently followed up quantitatively by Burton and Kebler (1960), who used citation analysis to determine the “half-life” of the literature in a number of branches of science. The idea of a “half-life” came from the world of physics, where radioactive substances decayed exponentially with time. It was thought that, since the amount of literature available was increasing more or less exponentially with time, the references to it might be expected correspondingly to decrease exponentially into the past. (It was recognised, of course, that the analogy was only partial: radioactive substances are transmuted into something else, whereas papers in old journals are still available to be cited.) The interest in quantitative studies of the literature grew after the Second World War. However, such studies were still often sporadic and isolated, rather than forming a continuing

Background Throughout much of the twentieth century librarians worried about how they could find space for their precious, but everexpanding collections. Some hardy spirits tried to do quantitative assessments of future space requirements. The most detailed early attempt was based on an analysis of the growth of material in American college and university libraries up to the Second World War. It is worth quoting the author’s comments: Although it had been known for a long time that American research libraries were growing at a very rapid rate, it was not realised until a few years ago that they were, on the average, actually doubling in size every sixteen years . . . . When a library has ten thousand volumes, it may double itself in sixteen years without creating for itself any special difficulties; but when it has four million volumes, and still goes right on doubling every sixteen years, a situation very quickly develops which cannot easily be brushed aside or ignored (Rider, 1944).

The question of space was particularly pressing for larger or specialist research collections. For example, a study of the Chemical Society of London just before the Second World War noted that: In 1938 the situation seemed so desperate that plans were under consideration for adapting the Meeting Room to library use, which would have made it impossible for the Society to hold any of its meetings in its own rooms (Moore and Philip, 1947).

Smaller libraries were more concerned with the problem of limited funding. The question for them was what material should be purchased from the increasing amounts being published. It was recognised early on that, in the sciences, this The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 90– 94 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615] [DOI 10.1108/02641610510602628]

90

A practical line in bibliometrics

Interlending & Document Supply

Jack Meadows

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 90 –94

and coherent sequence. This situation began to change in the 1960s, when Derek Price (1963) published Little Science, Big Science, and followed this up with a number of papers on the same topic. Price’s interest was as an historian of science: he wanted to examine the structure of science in quantitative terms. His influential discussion of the growth rate of scientific periodicals and of the uses of citation analysis helped spark off an expansion of research in this field that has continued ever since. Such studies of the literature were labelled “bibliometrics”, though nowadays the more general term “scientometrics” seems to predominate. Price’s main concern was with the sciences, but, as will be described later, the 1960s also saw an enhanced interest in citation studies of the social sciences.

information the documents contain is incorporated into later work, or is no longer considered valid, and so on. In practical terms, obsolescence involves studying changes in the use of documents over time. The initial question is the obvious one – how much is older material used? But there is also a supplementary question – to what extent does this use truly reflect the value or relevance of the documents concerned? What must be avoided, they say, is the assumption that obsolescence is a given, and that the sole question is the rate at which it occurs. There follows a typical Line footnote. He refers to a paper that speaks of articles “achieving obsolescence”, and comments: “Some are born obsolete, some achieve obsolescence, and some have obsolescence thrust upon ’em”. If the meaning of obsolescence requires careful consideration, so, too, does the way it is measured. Line and Sandison emphasized the distinction between synchronous obsolescence and diachronous obsolescence. Synchronous studies compare use at a particular point in time with the age of the items involved. For example, measuring the age distribution of the references attached to papers in a single issue of a journal is a synchronous study. So is an examination of the publication dates of books borrowed from a library over a restricted period of time. A diachronous study is concerned with the history of specific items over an extended period of time. For example, how often is a particular research paper cited from year to year, or how often is a particular book borrowed. In principle, the latter is the kind of knowledge a librarian needs in order to implement a weeding policy. Unfortunately, it is much easier in practice to carry synchronous studies. The fundamental question, therefore, is whether synchronous and diachronous studies come up with appreciably different estimates of the rate of obsolescence. This proved to be a difficult question to answer. There is first of all the problem mentioned previously of allowing for the growth of the literature. This affects diachronous studies, as well as synchronous studies of citations, since it means that the number of opportunities to cite an older item is increasing with time. Add to this the amount of labour involved in making a full comparative study, and it is hardly surprising that the question has been more often discussed than investigated. Line, himself, investigated sociology journals and found a difference between the synchronous and diachronous data (Line and Carter, 1974). But subsequent studies have gone either way. For example, an examination of citations in the genetics literature suggested that, if the first two years of data were omitted, the rates of obsolescence measured synchronously and diachronously became statistically equivalent (Stinson and Lancaster, 1987). Not long after Line moved to Boston Spa, he worked with one of his colleagues to make a detailed comparison of data on requests for journal articles from Boston Spa for the latter part of the 1960s with citation data for the same period collected at ISI (Scales, 1976). The conclusion was that there was little significant correlation between the two in terms of journal rankings. When Line reviewed progress in work on the general question some 20 years after his initial study, he noted that both theoretical analyses and practical exercises in data collection continued to come up with different answers. He concluded:

Citations and obsolescence This background sets the stage for Maurice Line’s entry into world of citations. His particular interest from the beginning has been in the value of citation studies for a practical understanding of library and information work. In his initial paper (Line, 1970), he pointed out that measuring the halflife of a literature mainly reflected the growth of the literature, rather than decreases in usage of the literature with age. To determine the latter it was necessary to correct for the growth rate. Brookes (1970) published an immediate rejoinder, pointing out the need to distinguish between a diachronous view and a synchronous view (see below). Line’s other major point – that the growth rate of a library was not always the same as the growth rate of the literature that fell within its remit – was not disputed. Nor was his conclusion that halflives derived from the literature need not apply to any specific library. Line followed this up with a paper on the sources that could be used for citation studies (Line and Brittain, 1973). The paper begins with a listing of the uses to which citation studies could be put. These are divided into “primary analyses”, which collect the basic data, and the “applications” to which these data could be put. The various sources of citations – abstracting and indexing journals, bibliographies, primary publications and reviews – are looked at, in turn, and their advantages and disadvantages for different types of use assessed. Like most of his papers in this field, this one demonstrates a concern with a logical approach to classification and definition. The following year, he returned to the topic that has retained his long-term interest – the concept of “obsolescence”. He combined with Sandison to write what has often been seen as the first definitive paper on the subject. It was meant to be a general review – one of the series that the Journal of Documentation then ran under the heading “Progress in documentation” – but he, typically, saw the need to be clear about definitions first: The term “obsolescence” occurs frequently in the literature of librarianship and information science. In numerous papers we are told how most published literature becomes obsolete within a measurable time, and that an item receives half the uses it will ever receive (“half-life”) in a few years. “Obsolescence” is however very rarely defined, and its validity, interest, and practical value are often assumed rather than explained. Before reviewing studies on “obsolescence”, therefore, it is necessary to look at the concept and to identify the reasons why it should be of interest, (Line and Sandison, 1974).

The authors go on to point out that a decrease in the use of documents can arise from a variety of causes. Perhaps the

The more citation studies appear, the more apparent have become differences between subjects and types of articles as well as between

91

A practical line in bibliometrics

Interlending & Document Supply

Jack Meadows

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 90 –94

this, ranging from the needs of science policy to the central importance of journals in science. But some valuable surveys relating to the literature of the social sciences (especially psychology) appeared. For example, Louttit (1957) examined how the psychology literature had grown and changed in the first half of the twentieth century. It was subsequently noted that the number of references attached to papers in American psychology journals during the 1950s had increased considerably more than the growth rate of the psychology literature (Xhignesse and Osgood, 1967). In the 1960s, it was found that half of the references attached to social science papers were to material no more than five years old, and that the references to non-serial material were not too different in this respect (Broadus, 1967). A major study of citation decay in the social sciences was carried out in the UK by Earle and Vickery (1969). The mean citation age they found of six years could be compared with the results of a study of requests for social science serials received by the then National Lending Library, which was carried out at about the same time (Wood and Bower, 1969). The latter study found a fall-off in loan demand which was only slightly longer than the mean age derived by Earle and Vickery. Data from these and other studies suggested that the more quantitative and theoretical areas of the social sciences were tending towards the sciences in terms of their literature characteristics. During the first half of the 1970s, Maurice Line supervised a major research project on the design of information systems in the social sciences (DISISS). This involved an investigation of the social science literature which was both extensive in coverage and detailed in terms of analysis. Line (1979) subsequently brought together the information that had been unearthed regarding the nature and role of citations in the social sciences into one report. He explained that data from citation studies had their uses for designing information systems, more particularly in establishing the needs of different groups of readers in terms of subject coverage and language. He also emphasized the importance of using wide coverage of the literature in order to obtain meaningful results. In this case, the investigation covered 140 serials and nearly 300 monographs as sources of references, nearly 59, 000 of which were collected (48,000 from journals and 11,000 from monographs). The report reflects the thinking on citation studies that Line had developed during the 1970s. It devotes attention to definition of the technical terminology and to the need to be clear what the analysis is doing (for example, in distinguishing between synchronous and diachronous studies). The study provides a solid basis for distinguishing between the characteristics (sometimes widely differing) of the different subjects that fall within the overall field of the social sciences. Line notes, for example, that the spread of citations across the subject literature can differ greatly. In psychology, 30 per cent of the serial titles received 90 per cent of the citations, whereas in political science 80 per cent of the titles received 90 per cent of the citations. So far as citation decay was concerned, even when a correction was made for the growth rate of the literature, older material in the social sciences was found typically to be cited less than more recent material. In other words, there was a genuine decrease in usage of older material. Perhaps the most innovative aspect of the report was the comparison between different categories of source. Librarians have always had a gut feeling that researchers in the sciences read journals while researchers in

studies in what appear to be the same or similar fields. The great dangers of generalization are confirmed (Line, 1993).

In a note published in the latter part of the 1970s, Line (1977) concluded that many citation studies were drawing conclusions as regards library practice which were not justified by the evidence. (Needless to say, this was disputed by some of the authors.) He pointed out that it was not simply a question of journal usage. Librarians needed to know cost per use (allowing for the subscription price, processing, binding and storage) and the amount of shelf space occupied by each journal. He had already followed up the first point himself. He used data from a citation study of biochemical journals (Sengupta, 1973) as the basis for looking at the financial aspect of journal usage. He concluded that rankings of journals based on number of citations differed appreciably from those for the same journals based on cost per citation – a finding that is generally accepted. Line and Sandison (1975) also emphasized the question of usage relative to the amount of shelf space required. In the previous year Sandison (1974) had examined data for a number of physics journals, and had found that usage per metre of shelf space was effectively constant over the previous decade or more. In other words, later volumes of the journals were referred to more often, but also took up more space. So in terms of shelf space occupied, the earlier volumes were as valuable to readers as more recent ones. However, as with work on synchronous and asynchronous citation decay, different studies of this question have come up with differing results. For example, an in-house study of journal usage in a biomedical library concluded that use-density (the number of uses of each volume divided by its thickness) declined exponentially with age like the citations (Sullivan et al., 1980). A recent investigation of the journals in a medical library has compared the results of an in-house usage survey with a citation analysis of the same journals. The half-life for usage by library readers was found to be half that found for the citation half-life. Other evidence seems to support the contention that journal reading concentrates on even more recent material than citations – certainly more than the current growth of the literature would predict. The problem with all these studies is that investigations of library usage are as open to question as investigations of citation decay. One detailed study in the mid-1970s compared different ways of collecting usage data in order to decide weeding policy for a library (Taylor, 1976). It found that all approaches had their problems. For example, data derived from an examination of reshelving in the library only identified about a quarter of the actual usage by readers. It follows that both citation studies and usage studies produce a somewhat fuzzy picture of what is happening. This not only makes their application difficult, it also hinders comparison of results from different surveys. Line (1978) observed in one of his papers that: “No measure of journal use other than one derived locally from a local-use study is of any significant practical value to libraries”. The problem was that results from local-use studies could themselves be queried – a point that he came to accept.

Bibliometric data in the social sciences Much of the earlier work on citations was aimed at the sciences and medicine. There were a variety of reasons for 92

A practical line in bibliometrics

Interlending & Document Supply

Jack Meadows

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 90 –94

the humanities read books. The social sciences lie in between, using both forms of publication extensively. Indeed, the survey carried out by Line and his colleagues pointed to significant use of additional types of material, such as official publications and newspapers. The comparison between journals and books in the social sciences showed a range of differences, some of them quite large, in terms of age distribution of citations, type of material cited, subject self-citation, citations to fields outside the social sciences, and the countries of publication cited. References to books were distributed across a wide range of titles: less than 1 per cent were cited five times or more. Besides being more widely scattered, book citations, on average, decayed more slowly with age than journal citations. However, the extent of the difference varied considerably from subject to subject within the social sciences. This led to the important point that mixing references to books and journals when doing a citation analysis could lead to significant errors. The journal v. book comparison was a valuable addition to knowledge of citations; though Line characteristically began his concluding section with the comment: “Few citation analyses produce major surprises, and if they do it is the analyses that tend to be challenged rather than the assumptions”. The DISISS project produced detailed information on the rate at which social science literature was growing. Growth rates of journals had come to be a topic of major debate by the 1970s both for theoretical reasons (for example, determining the shape of the growth-rate curve for different subjects) and for very practical reasons (the increasing funding and space that they required). As a part of their examination of the social science literature, Line’s team examined the way in which it had grown with time. Particular emphasis, (Line and Roberts, 1976) was placed on exploring the methodological problems involved. For example, Price’s original estimate of journal growth rates had been based on adding together new journal titles and previous ones. This implicitly assumed that journal titles did not die. As Line and his colleagues showed, the death rate of journals in the social sciences cannot be ignored. Taking this into account slowed the calculated growth rate which, nevertheless, appeared to be exponential up to 1970, the end date of the study. However, the estimated growth rate varied appreciably from subject to subject. Line pointed out how necessary it was to get the data right:

A slowdown in growth might help librarians’ space problems, but did not help their budgets, since journal prices continued to rise. In universities, what was to be purchased had traditionally been agreed with the academic staff. As Line had found previously, staff judgements were not necessarily accurate. One study he carried out showed that about one-third of the books bought by two academic libraries were not used in the two years immediately following their purchase (Line, 1986). Academic opinions regarding journal titles could also be unreliable. Line (2001) reminisced: In my first few weeks as a university librarian many years ago I was berated by a professor of chemistry for ceasing to subscribe to a certain title, which he said he used all the time. Where he used it, or if he did at all, was not clear, since in fact the library had never taken the title in question!

Under these circumstances, the question of selection remained urgent. The difficulty with books was that usage could only be determined retrospectively, after the books had been purchased. Journals continued to offer the possibility of estimating future use, and so the likely benefit of retaining particular titles. Line noted that the idea of using citations for guidance seemed to have become much less popular by the latter part of the 1980s: The fact that little has been written since may mean no more than that people grew tired of the issue, and went on doing what they had been doing before – which was probably relying on intelligent guesswork and the recommendations of researchers.

It was just at this time that a re-evaluation was made of the comparative study published by Scales in 1976. This had been criticised at the time from various viewpoints, but most cogently by Brookes (1976) who objected – as was his wont – to what he saw as an incorrect application of statistics (the Spearman test had been used to compare rankings). Bensman (2001) reworked the data and showed that there was actually a reasonable correlation between the use data and the citation data. What this demonstrated was that the usage in a very large library with many users could parallel citation data. Line (2001) was prepared to accept this, as he was the idea that a study of the citations in the work published by library users might partially reflect the literature available locally. Neither conclusion negated the point he had been making for some time: that general citations study were usually not applicable locally and that really useful local studies took a great deal of time and effort. However, hanging over all this – as he recognised – was the question of the transition to electric journals. How would this affect librarians (assuming that they were still involved) in terms of the selection and discarding of material? To put it another way, to what extent is all the work put in by Line and others on bibliometric studies of printed journals applicable to an electronic environment? Maybe Maurice can be persuaded to write one more article on that!

The importance of collecting data as accurately as possible is emphasized by [a recent influential report] . . . which by using figures of doubtful validity and extrapolating on questionable assumptions predicts within a measurable period a volume of publication of vast dimensions.

Literature growth and an electronic environment Fifteen years later, Line returned to the question of growth (Archibald and Line, 1991), this time looking at all fields of research. The number of articles published in nearly 200 journals that had been in existence from 1950 onwards was counted. The analysis confirmed that there had been a rapid expansion in most subjects up to 1970. The growth then decreased up to 1980, after which it became mainly slow, or even declined in some subject areas. From the time of Price’s original proposal of an exponential growth rate, it had been realised that a slowdown must occur some time. This new work suggested that such a slowdown was actually beginning to occur.

References Archibald, G. and Line, M.B. (1991), “The size and growth of serial literature 1950-1987, in terms of the number of articles per serials”, Scientometrics, No. 20, pp. 173-96. Bensman, S.J. (2001), “Urquhart’s and Garfield’s laws: the British controversy over their validity”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, No. 52, pp. 714-24. Broadus, R.N. (1967), “A citation study for sociology”, American Sociologist, No. 1, pp. 19-20. 93

A practical line in bibliometrics

Interlending & Document Supply

Jack Meadows

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 90 –94

Brodman, E. (1944), “Choosing physiology journals”, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, No. 32, pp. 479-83. Brookes, B.C. (1970), “The growth, utility, and obsolescence of scientific periodical literature”, Journal of Documentation, No. 26, pp. 283-94. Brookes, B.C. (1976), “Citation v. usage of serials”, Journal of Documentation, No. 32, pp. 320-32. Burton, R.E. and Kebler, R.W. (1960), “The half-life of some scientific and technical literature”, American Documentation, No. 11, pp. 18-22. Earle, P. and Vickery, B. (1969), “Social science literature use in the UK as indicated by citations”, Journal of Documentation, No. 25, pp. 123-41. Fussler, H.H. (1949), “Characteristics of the research literature used by chemists and physicists in the United States”, Library Quarterly, No. 19, p. 19-35, 119-145. Gross, P.L.K. and Gross, E.M. (1927), “College libraries and chemical education”, Science, No. 66, pp. 385-9. Line, M.B. (1970), “The ‘half-life’ of periodical literature: apparent and real obsolescence”, Journal of Documentation, No. 26, pp. 46-54. Line, M.B. (1977), “Citation analysis: a note”, International Library Review, No. 9, p. 429. Line, M.B. (1978), “Rank lists based on citations and library uses as indicators of journal usage in individual libraries”, Collection Management, No. 2, pp. 313-6. Line, M.B. (1979), The Structure of Social Science Literature as Shown by Citations, DISISS Research Reports, Series A, No. 3, University of Bath, Bath. Line, M.B. (1986), “Can book selection be improved?”, British Journal of Academic Librarianship, No. 1, pp. 160-6. Line, M.B. (1993), “Changes in the use of literature with time – obsolescence revisited”, Library Trends, Vol. 41, pp. 665-83. Line, M.B. (2001), “The use of citation and other statistics in stock management”, IFLA Journal, Vol. 27, pp. 247-52. Line, M.B. and Brittain, J.M. (1973), “Sources of citations and references for analysis purposes: a comparative assessment”, Journal of Documentation, No. 29, pp. 72-80. Line, M.B. and Carter, B. (1974), “Changes in the use of sociological articles with time: a comparison of diachronous and synchronous data”, BLL Review, Vol. 2, pp. 125-30. Line, M.B. and Roberts, S. (1976), “The size, growth and composition of social science literature”, International Social Science Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 122-59. Line, M.B. and Sandison, A. (1974), “‘Obsolescence’ and changes in the use of the literature with time”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 30, pp. 283-350.

Line, M.B. and Sandison, A. (1975), “Practical interpretation of citation and library use studies”, College and Research Libraries, Vol. 36, pp. 393-6. Louttit, C.M. (1957), “Publication trends in psychology”, American Psychologist, No. 12, pp. 14-21. Moore, T.S. and Philip, J.C. (1947), The Chemical Society 1841-1941, Chemical Society, London, p. 171. Price, D. (1963), Little Science, Big Science, Columbia University Press, New York, NY. Rider, F. (1944), The Scholar and the Future of the Research Library: A Problem and its Solution, Hadham Press, New York, NY, p. 3. Sandison, A. (1974), “Densities of use, and absence of obsolescence, in physics journals at MIT”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, No. 25, pp. 172-82. Scales, P.A. (1976), “Citation analyses as indicators of the use of serials: a comparison of ranked lists produced by citation counting and from use data”, Journal of Documentation, No. 32, pp. 17-25. Sengupta, I.N. (1973), “Recent growth of the literature of biochemistry and changes in ranking of periodicals”, Journal of Documentation, No. 29, pp. 192-211. Stinson, E.R. and Lancaster, F.W. (1987), “Synchronous versus diachronous methods in the measurement of obsolescence by citation studies”, Journal of Information Science, No. 13, pp. 65-74. Sullivan, M.V., Vadeboncoeur, B., Shiotani, N. and Stangl, P. (1980), “Obsolescence in biomedical journals: not an artifact of literature growth”, Library Research, No. 2, pp. 29-46. Taylor, C.R. (1976), “A practical solution to weeding university library collections”, Collection Management, No. 1, pp. 27-45. Wood, D.N. and Bower, C.A. (1969), “The use of social science periodical literature”, Journal of Documentation, No. 25, pp. 108-22. Xhignesse, L.V. and Osgood, C.E. (1967), “Bibliographical citation characteristics of the psychological journal network in 1950 and 1960”, American Psychologist, No. 22, pp. 778-91.

About the author Jack Meadows is Emeritus Professor of Library and Information Studies at Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.

94

The evidence-based academic library: Maurice Line and the Parry Report Bernard Naylor Southampton, UK Abstract Purpose – To describe the part played by Maurice Line in the use of survey evidence and performance information in the management of academic libraries, commencing with the publication of the “Parry Report” in 1967. Design/methdology/approach – The Parry Committee found little practical evidence in 1963, and had to commission some work. Two studies carried out by Line at Southampton University were available, and this and other work by Line featured significantly in the committee’s work. The emergence of Line as a major figure in the development of academic and research libraries, the further development of the use of an evidence-based approach to the management of academic libraries, and the links between these two factors are outlined. Findings – The advance of Line’s professional career was accompanied by a substantial output of highly-regarded professional writing, which incorporated original thought and an evidence-based approach to a degree which was unusual for that time, especially from somebody in a relatively junior post. The paucity of similar work prior to 1970 is outlined and the development of the empirical approach, especially through the work of the newly-founded Library Management Research Unit (LMRU) is described. The 1976 report of the Atkinson Committee is portrayed as confirming the importance of evidence for the future management of academic libraries. Originality/value – Sketches the early stages of a career which has had a profound impact on the development of academic and research libraries since 1960. Keywords Libraries, History, Surveys Paper type Case study

time among his professional peers, Dennis Cox, Librarian of the recently founded and high profile University of Sussex, and later Librarian of the University of Leeds, and Sir Frank Francis, Director and Principal Librarian of the British Museum, the collections of which were then the nearest the UK had to a national library. Among the three assessors was the notable and distinguished Dr D.J. (Donald) Urquhart, founder and Director of the not long established National Lending Library for Science and Technology, which was to be the nucleus of the Lending Division of the British Library from 1974. Published in March 1967, the report’s recommendations included many aspirations which must have prompted wry smiles from senior academic library managers in the ensuing years, so far were they from ever being realised. However, since the report also devoted a whole chapter (Chapter VII) to “The National Library”, an institution which was to see the light of day barely seven years later, it has to be accepted that Dr Parry and his committee did lay down a mark which was picked up by the Committee on National Libraries chaired by Professor Fred (later Lord) Dainton, and which may be regarded as contributing to the establishment of the British Library.

Prologue In July 1963, the University Grants Committee (UGC), forerunner of the Higher Education Funding Councils (and the other bodies now responsible for channeling the funding, and monitoring the performance of the higher education institutions) set up a committee with the following terms of reference: To consider the most effective and economical arrangements for meeting the needs of the Universities and Colleges of Advanced Technology and Central Institutions for books and periodicals, taking into account expanding staff and student populations, the possible needs of other users, the growth of research, the rising cost of books and periodicals and the increasing cost of capital library accommodation; to assess how far greater use might with advantage be made of shared facilities, both between the institutions themselves and between them, outside library systems and other institutions, and of modern methods of reproduction; and to report.

The committee was chaired by Dr Thomas Parry, then Principal of the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and, in accordance with convention, the report has been commonly referred to by the use of his name, as “the Parry Report” (UGC Committee on Libraries, 1967). Among its librarian members were Kenneth Humphreys, Librarian of the University of Birmingham, and very prominent at that

Evidence and the Parry Report

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

In paragraphs 2-6 of the Introduction, the Parry Report outlines the various fact-finding exercises undertaken or used by the Committee and refers in particular (para 4) to “other surveys on student use of libraries, which had been carried out at the Universities of Birmingham, Leeds and Southampton” (UGC Committee on Libraries, 1967). At the University of Birmingham, the survey was carried out in May and July 1964 and the presence of Kenneth Humphreys on Dr Parry’s

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 95– 99 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615] [DOI 10.1108/02641610510602637]

95

The evidence-based academic library

Interlending & Document Supply

Bernard Naylor

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 95 –99

Committee makes both the choice of institution and the timing understandable. By the standards of provincial universities of that time, Birmingham was large. It had nearly 4,000 undergraduates (including students reading for the postgraduate Certificate in Education) and almost 1,600 postgraduate students and staff. Leeds too was clearly one of the large and long established civic universities with 3,800 undergraduates, and its librarian, B.S. Page, was an outstanding and senior representative of his peer group. The research at Leeds was supervised and written up by P.E. Tucker, later founding Librarian of the University of Warwick (Page and Tucker, 1959; Tucker, 1961). Southampton University, however, which was the source of not one, but two surveys, was a rather different case. The University had received its Royal Charter as recently as 1952, so was barely ten years old when the Parry Committee was set up. In 1962 and 1965, when the two surveys were carried out, student numbers at the university (one useful basis for comparison with the studies done at Birmingham and Leeds universities) were only 1,415 and 1,919 respectively. The librarian, B.M. Bland, was also relatively new in post, having been appointed in 1961, after being deputy librarian at the University of Birmingham. The studies were also remarkable for having been conducted and written up by a “third tier” member of library staff (M.B. Line), below the (first tier) librarian and his (second tier) deputy (R.G. Woods) (Line, 1963; Line, 1966a). Notwithstanding these apparently adverse factors, the research carried out at Southampton was clearly esteemed by the Parry Committee at least as highly as the work from the more prestigious institutions. Both the Southampton surveys received the attention of the Committee, though the second was considered more fully and was produced in its entirety (on pp. 243-263) as an Appendix to the report. In sheer volume, it is larger than either of the other pieces from Birmingham and Leeds. In addition, in a report not rich in footnotes, Parry not only cites Line’s 1965 study twice, on pages 19 and 40, but also cites other work by Line on pages 23, 24, and 28 (UGC Committee on Libraries, 1967). The studies at Southampton had been embarked on not to meet the needs of an external committee of investigation, but to promote the better management of the library itself. As Minute 39 of the Library Committee meeting of 7 June 1962 records:

were provided and the entire author catalogue was “reguided”. Special reference guides to the collections were prepared, and the reference stock was developed and brought together in a single sequence. There is evidence here of the emergence of a “virtuous library management cycle”, with investigation of needs through a survey being followed by specific changes in policy instituted in the light of the survey’s findings, and then a further study to determine whether the policy changes had produced the desired effect. By the beginning of the twenty-first century, such a process is common in academic libraries, though perhaps even now not so common as it ought to be. In the early 1960s, the Parry Committee appears to have found very little evidence of that kind in the academic library sector, which explains why it had to promote at least one study of its own.

Flowering of a career By the time the Parry Report appeared, Line had already moved from Southampton to be deputy librarian at the University of Newcastle. He must surely have looked back with satisfaction, if not with surprise, at the impact his work had made on such an important committee, when his own career was still at a relatively early stage, and he was still relatively inexperienced. Furthermore, some of the antecedents had not been entirely encouraging. Line was recruited to Southampton University Library in 1954, having previously served at the Bodleian Library, Oxford, as a trainee (1950-1951), and as a library assistant at Glasgow University Library (1951-1953). He joined the staff at Southampton in the same year as Alex Anderson, who also left Southampton in 1965 to become deputy librarian of the University of Exeter, and was later appointed university librarian of HeriotWatt University, Edinburgh. The annual reports of the librarian (Miss M.I. Henderson) and curators in the 1950s, give no indication of Line’s career potential. Apart from noting his actual appointment and his success in the final examinations for Fellowship of the Library Association, her reports contain no references to Line at all, whereas other senior staff do get an occasional mention. In 1961, however, when Miss Henderson retired and was succeeded by B.M. Bland, a remarkable change appears to have taken place. Apart from the two surveys which are the focal point of this paper, Line’s professional profile is shown by the Southampton University Library annual reports of the first half of the 1960s to be greatly enhanced in other ways. For example, the report for 1962-1963 contains three references to publications by him and the 1963-1964 report records his co-option to the Libraries Committee of the Association of University Teachers, his election to the Committee of the University and Research Section of the Library Association, and his nomination as a representative of non-professorial staff on the University of Southampton Senate. Furthermore, the librarian’s report to the Library Committee meeting of 30 January 1964, covering the previous three months also records:

. . . a questionnaire on the use of the Library had been sent to a random sample of 200 undergraduates in all faculties and departments . . . when analysed, the results would provide information not so far obtained in any other library survey and be of great assistance . . . in assessing the efficiency of current library practices.

The opening paragraphs of the report on the second Southampton survey describe its purpose as: . . . to try and assess whether changes that had been introduced [in the light of the findings of the first survey] had had any effect (Line, 1966a).

These changes had been substantial. A new post of sublibrarian (Reader Service) was established in September 1962, Line being the first to hold it. Seminars in library use for students in non-scientific subjects began on a voluntary basis in session 1962-1963. A Library Services Consultative Committee was formed in session 1964-1965, consisting of student representatives, library staff and library curators (senior teaching staff being members of the Library Committee). More shelf guides and plans of the library

A memorandum on the implications of university expansion for libraries by Mr Line and four other librarians from universities and a college of advanced technology was submitted to the Taylor Committee in September 1963, and it has been the subject of favourable comment in the Guardian, the Times Education Supplement, the Bookseller and the Economist.

It was presumably this memorandum which was the original source for an article by Line which appeared in the following 96

The evidence-based academic library

Interlending & Document Supply

Bernard Naylor

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 95 –99

year (Line, 1964). The librarian’s report to the committee on 5 November 1964 also notes:

“devising tests for the adequacy of academic library collections to meet the needs of faculty members and research students”, and paragraph 639(b) recommends consultation with students on library matters affecting them. Elementary though these recommendations may appear today, the evidence of the time is that investigation of the realities of academic library provision was almost nonexistent. Since the two Southampton studies and the Leeds study were all published in the Journal of Documentation, it is instructive to look at the contents of the journal over the years preceding and following the Parry Committee’s work. In 1954, Donald Urquhart published an article devoted to “the development of technical information services in the UK” (Urquhart, 1954). He laments:

Mr Line has almost completed a combined library use and attitude survey of students in five teacher training colleges at the request of the Librarian of the Institute of Education and has joined the Library Association Working Party on a National Reference Service.

The annual report for 1964-1965 recorded Line’s resignation on his appointment to be deputy librarian of the University of Newcastle, but also cited three publications of his in that year. It could be tempting to speculate on why a career, which showed no evidence of going anywhere in the 1950s under Miss Henderson, should have flourished so markedly in the 1960s under Mr Bland. But there is perhaps no need to speculate. In 2002, the University of Southampton published an “illustrated history” to mark the fiftieth anniversary of its achievement of university status through the granting of a royal charter in 1952 (Nash and Sherwood, 2002). Line was one of those interviewed about the university in its early days. He is reported (on p. 256) as saying that he “found her (Miss Henderson) so impossible that they spoke only at monthly meetings, otherwise communicating by notes”. He goes on to say that, apart from her rudeness, which alienated most library users, it was her inability to delegate which infuriated him. “She taught me one thing”, Line records, “how not to motivate staff”. The contrast with Bland, unobtrusive and carefully spoken, firm and authoritative, and prepared to give credit where it was due, could not have been more pronounced. The development of Line’s career from the early 1960s until his retirement in 1988 (and even after that date) is too well known to need further exposition here. However, in the context of this article, it is worth noting his conscious commitment to the development of an approach to library administration and management based on investigation and research. Shortly after he left Southampton, Line gave a paper to the January 1966 weekend conference of the University and Research Section of the Library Association (Line, 1966b). It contains many ideas which were little thought of at the time, for example on staff exchanges, and the article is suffused throughout with typical vigour and enthusiasm. Towards the end (p. 323), Line says:

The early discussions were hindered by the absence of authentic objective data on which future policies could be based. Attempts to obtain such data began in 1948.

He cites a previous paper of his own, “Distribution and use of scientific and technical information”, published in Journal of Documentation in 1948, and a paper by J.D. Bernal, “Preliminary analysis of pilot questionnaire on the use of scientific literature” which was submitted to the Royal Society Scientific Information Conference in the same year and published in the proceedings of the conference (pp. 588-637). However, as Urquhart himself states, he is concerned with “how industrial organisations [italics supplied] use science”. In the following three years, the Journal of Documentation carried no articles which could be construed as filling the gap noted by Urquhart. In 1958, the journal carried one article (Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 197-207) by P.F. Cole, Head of Technical Information and Library Service, British Petroleum Company, entitled “The analysis of reference question records as a guide to the information requirements of scientists”, clearly exploring an industrial organisation’s use of scientific information. In 1959, and 1961, Page and Tucker wrote up the survey of library use in the University of Leeds which had been carried out in 1957 (Page and Tucker, 1959; Tucker, 1961). This study certainly broached some of the major questions: “How far can the problems of university library administration be formulated in quantitative terms? How far are readers’ habits expressible statistically?” It also anticipated Parry’s recommendations: “it is much to be hoped that the Leeds survey will be followed by other general surveys and by the intensive survey of specific problems” – though the authors themselves do not appear to have left any evidence that, in subsequent years, they fulfilled the hope they had professed. In 1962, there was a further article by A.N. Oppenheim, a student supervisor at the London School of Economics.

I believe it is one of the tragedies of post-war librarianship in Britain that, although there is great potential among the staff of university libraries, and at the same time there are so many problems in, or related to, librarianship that cry out for investigation, so little research into our own subject has been done.

The studies which claimed the attention of the Parry Committee were early evidence of Line’s own determination to do what he could to compensate for this tragedy, and the bibliography of his professional contributions amply demonstrates his continuing commitment to this cause in subsequent years. I now wish to look at other evidence, which possibly indicates that the 1960s saw the early stages, not just of Line’s personal crusade, but also of a more general movement.

The primary purpose of the study was to give some practical research training to these students, as part of their course . . . the results are nonetheless worth having, and yield interesting comparisons with results of earlier readership surveys among students (Oppenheim, 1962).

In this context, Oppenheim cites the Page and Tucker survey. In 1963, T.H. Bowyer contributed “Considerations on book provision for undergraduates in British university libraries”, which did not report any new study, but cited both Tucker and Oppenheim (Bowyer, 1963). It would be nice to be able to show that the publication of the Parry Report, with its comments on the relative lack of factual information about the use of academic libraries, was followed by a marked increase in that area of activity. In fact,

The need for further research It is one of the jocular truisms of the research world that many studies include a recommendation about “the need for further research”. The Parry Report is no exception. In Chapter XIII (Summary of Main Recommendations, pp. 157-65) paragraph 632 (g) recommends further research on 97

The evidence-based academic library

Interlending & Document Supply

Bernard Naylor

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 95 –99

the Journal of Documentation provides no evidence in favour of that. However, there was another major development in that period which casts light on the focal point of this article. In 1968, the year following the publication of the Parry Report, both Lancaster University Library (Graham Mackenzie being University Librarian) and Cambridge University Library (under Eric Ceadel) applied to the government’s Office for Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) for a grant to set up a research unit (Plumb, 1971). Both applicants were interviewed, and a decision was taken to make an award to Cambridge, which led to the establishment of the Library Management Research Unit (LMRU). J.L. (Len) Schofield was appointed founding Director in June 1969, and brought with him “experience in administrative and O and M work in the Ministry of Defence followed by systems design for two large commercial organisations”. A steering committee was created, and Plumb’s account confirms that both Line and Urquhart were in membership, whereas Humphreys, Tucker and Cox, who might equally have been regarded as inheritors of Parry’s aspiration for more research, were not. The steering committee was prompt in fulfilling its task of laying out the guidelines for the new unit:

much to the pioneering and proselytising work of LMRU, guided, no doubt, by its steering committee as well as its staff.

Epilogue There are some for whom history is made by the titanic efforts of a few major individuals, the Alexanders or Napoleons of their time and context. There are others who take the view that no individuals, however great, can totally impose their will on their times. They must, in some measure, seize the tide of opinions and events, and make their major contribution by helping its flow. Those two opposing schools would likely take contrasting views of the part Line played in introducing or markedly increasing the role of evidence in the administration of academic libraries. I suspect that Line, and those of similar mind, may well still shake their heads at the extent to which past practice and prejudice, unilluminated by real evidence, still guide the administration of some academic libraries. And they may well find small consolation in speculating how much worse things might have been but for the opportunity provided by the Parry Committee to promote an evidencebased approach. However, it does seem beyond dispute that the ten years between 1961 and 1971 saw a major change in the terms of the debate about how academic libraries in the UK should be run, and equally incontestable that Line took up a position at the centre of this change, dominating the debate by the ardour of his presentation, but, even more importantly, by the rigour of his arguments. In the shorter term, the best testimony is provided by the next major national investigation in the field of academic libraries. Barely ten years after the Parry Report, Professor Atkinson’s Committee on Capital Provision for University Libraries issued a report (“the Atkinson Report”) which was a fraction of the size of the Parry Report, but caused many times more furore (UGC Working Party on Capital Provision for University Libraries, 1976). Far from being a lowly placed outsider, bursting onto the scene through the originality and sharpness of his message, Line was a member of Atkinson’s Committee, and, though other Committee members may beg to differ, was widely regarded as its most distinguished and prominent voice. The argument of the Atkinson Report, in favour of the concept of “the self-renewing library of limited growth“, was pursued with much more emphasis on the presentation of evidence than the touting of opinions, and it aroused a controversy which reverberated far beyond the UK, and persisted much longer than any discussion provoked by the Parry Report. But the account of that debate is another story, and goes beyond the limits of this article.

The main objective would be to study methods which would lead to increased effectiveness and efficiency in the running of all academic libraries. This could be summed up by the following questions: were libraries doing the right things; were they doing the right things in the right way and what statistical and financial data could be provided to assist librarians in applying for funds and in using existing funds (Plumb, 1971).

The first three initiatives could all have provided valuable evidence to Parry if they had been carried out a few years earlier. The first was a survey of undergraduate use of libraries, but one in which 42,000 forms were distributed in 21 institutions, and over 17,000 returned, a number which, incidentally, temporarily overwhelmed the slender resources of the new unit. The second was an assessment of administrative effectiveness in academic libraries: The aim was to provide a simple method of giving administrators of academic libraries the ability to assess the effectiveness of their procedures by means of up-to-date information at frequent intervals which would also provide a basis for decision making (Echoes here of the two successive Southampton studies.)

The third was a “failure survey” – “to provide the librarian with information about the incidence of failure by readers to find wanted books on the shelves”. The third survey probably attracted the most attention and was written up in two articles in the Journal of Documentation (Urquhart and Schofield, 1971a, b). However, the unit’s first publication was attributed to G.C.K. Smith and J.L. Schofield (Smith and Schofield, 1971). It started from “the assumption that in the past librarians all too often acted on the basis of guesses or out-ofdate information”, and addressed the second of the unit’s first three initiatives. Dissemination by seminars to an increasingly wide audience was also favoured and the earliest instances (in December 1970 and March 1971) preceded the unit’s first publication. LMRU itself has now fallen a victim to the passage of time. Only a vestige remains in the form of the Library and Information Statistics Unit at Loughborough University. But, in its heyday, the unit impinged very strongly on the consciousness of academic librarians, and the extent to which the “virtuous library management cycle” is now a feature of academic library administration in the UK owes

References Bowyer, T.H. (1963), “Considerations on book provision for undergraduates in British university libraries”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 151-67. Line, M.B. (1963), “Student attitudes to the university library: a survey at Southampton University”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 100-17. Line, M.B. (1964), “Libraries for expanding universities”, Universities Quarterly, Vol. 19 December, pp. 41-55. Line, M.B. (1966a), “Student attitudes to the university library: a second survey at Southampton University”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 123-35. 98

The evidence-based academic library

Interlending & Document Supply

Bernard Naylor

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 95 –99

Line, M.B. (1966b), “Libraries in institutions of higher education: independence versus interdependence”, Library Association Record, Vol. 68 No. 9, pp. 315-23. Nash, S. and Sherwood, M. (2002), The University of Southampton: An Illustrated History, James and James, London. Oppenheim, A.N. (1962), “Reading habits of students: a survey of students at the London School of Economics”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 42-57. Page, B.S. and Tucker, P.E. (1959), “The Nuffield pilot survey of library use in the University of Leeds”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-11. Plumb, P.W. (1971), “The Cambridge University Library Management Research Unit”, Library Association Record, Vol. 73 No. 10, pp. 187-8. Smith, G.C.K. and Schofield, J.L. (1971), “Administrative effectiveness: times and costs of library operations”, Journal of Librarianship, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 245-66. Tucker, P.E. (1961), “The sources of books for undergraduates: a survey at Leeds University Library”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 77-95. UGC Committee on Libraries (1967), Report of the Committee on Libraries (The Parry Report), HMSO, London.

UGC Working Party on Capital Provision for University Libraries (1976), Capital Provision for University Libraries: Report of a Working Party (The Atkinson Report), HMSO, London. Urquhart, D.J. (1954), “Facts and faith”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 123-6. Urquhart, J.A. and Schofield, J.L. (1971a), “Measuring readers’ failure at the shelf”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 273-86. Urquhart, J.A. and Schofield, J.L. (1971b), “Measuring readers’ failure at the shelf in three university libraries”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 233-41.

About the author Bernard Naylor was University Librarian of the University of Southampton from 1977 until his retirement in 2000. He served as Chair of the British Library Advisory Committee on Lending Services from 1981 to 1985 and was a non-executive member of the British Library Board from 1995 to 2001. He was President of the Library Association 2001-2002.

99

The other side of Line Edward Dudley London, UK Abstract Purpose – To look at the pseudonymous writings of Maurice Line. Design/methodology/approach – Appropriately humorous. Findings – Professional humour in the UK is rare and deserves to be better bibliographed. Better bibliographing is one object of this short exploration of the other side of Line, this unveiling of pseudonyms and will provide, perhaps, a wider access to a rare resource. Practical implications – Better bibliographing of pseudonyms. Originality/value – Highlights issues of pseudonymity by a librarian well known himself for his humorous writing. Keywords Humour, Literature, Authorship Paper type General review

Asked by the Editor of the Record if he had any more articles on the stocks, Line replied that he was looking for a joint author named Hook and another named Sinker. Line’s LA Presidential Address in 1990 was rare in that he chose not, as have many presidents before him and since, to dwell on the virtues and actions of the body which elected him President. Its title. “Knowledge is power, and power is dangerous: reflections on the availability of knowledge and information in Britain today” has a very contemporary resonance. It is a political statement (it was reprinted in the Radical Quarterly No. 20, Summer 1991) which can be re-read today in the light of the Patriot Act in the USA and the protracted gestation of an underweight Freedom of Information Act in the UK. Line stated that the “New Official Secrets Act is in many ways more restrictive than the previous one . . . ”. His professional stance is expressed in a sentence which gives a meaning to knowledge perhaps not clearly grasped by the pundits of knowledge management:

Maurice Line’s contribution to our professional literature is enormous – in scope of subject matter, in sheer volume and significance. To read today his books and articles reveals his delight in Plain English, pointed comment, original metaphor and an absence of that managementspeak now infecting much of our oral and printed professional communication. He is a serious writer, but never dull. There were, however, early signs that he could introduce a serious topic with a touch of humour. In January 1968 there appeared in the first redesigned and A4 issue of the Library Association Record M.B. Line and M.W. Grose, “On the care and construction of white elephants: some fundamental questions concerning the catalogue”. It suggested “that individual libraries do not need catalogues at all” . . . a sort of null hypothesis. We should not “jump on the bandwagon of mechanization without the least idea of where we are going”. This led to a small swirl in the letters column, one correspondent observing that the “Article established neither the existence of the elephant nor the need to whitewash it”. A different species was in the title of another Line sally, this time with joint author P. Bryant, in the Record of May 1969 – “How golden is your retriever? Thoughts on library classification”. Forthright statements such as “At present some classification research has about as much relevance to modern library functions as Christian theology – in the academic sense – has to practical Christianity” and “If we can’t have our ideal – and at present it is only hypothetical – perhaps a half-baked system would be better than an elaborate, expensive and overcooked system which was not”. The article led to correspondence continuing until the December 1969 issue of the Record.

Knowledge may be power, but knowledge alone does not confer much . . . what gives power is the will to use knowledge, and the knowledge how to do so.

Line’s partner on the stage at the LA Annual General Meeting as guest speaker was the media sociologist (and once an assistant in a Liverpool branch library) Laurie Taylor and they struck a columnist in the same November 1990 Record as a right pair richly deserving a bigger audience. Under the heading “Good double bill, poor house”, it recorded “the well rehearsed informal coruscation of Laurie Taylor’s walking up and down vaudeville reflections on IT and communication”. The columnist “Envisioned for a moment a Line and Taylor double act, but realised it wouldn’t work as neither would be the other’s straight man”. Line was a regular attender at IFLA’s Annual Meeting, suffering many of the ennuis of such international gatherings. At Stockholm in 1990 a participant observed that “Our President had gone to sleep”. Later he was seen “doing a crossword puzzle concealed in his conference bumph”. Line gave a paper at Stockholm IFLA on strategic planning and how difficult it was in times of uncertainty and change which led an American to bemoan sonorously and at length the difficulties of strategic planning when conditions were not stable and didn’t he agree? His response was “The only

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 100– 102 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615] [DOI 10.1108/02641610510602646]

100

The other side of Line

Interlending & Document Supply

Edward Dudley

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 100 –102

people living in stable conditions are horses”. At another IFLA meeting as we left a session in which a speaker, eyes down, delivered in a monotone a paper on sundry cataloguing trivia, Line lamented to me that he wished he had a tape of the paper to play when he could not sleep. A rare example of UK library humour is A Little Off Line: Irreverent Essays by Maurice Line, His Friends and Colleagues, 1988, ELM Publications, ISBN 0 946139 06 7 and still in print at £5.95. In his Foreword Line states that “All agree that professional library literature is far too solemn. I have produced more than my quota of solemnity. Unlike others, however, I have over the years tried to make some amends by writing occasional less solemn pieces, most of them for New Library World under various pseudonyms (to guard my respectability)”. It is copiously illustrated by Mark Bryant in a style reminiscent of his strip cartoon in New Library World, “Alice in libraryland”. Joyce Line adds a nice straight faced index with entries such as “cataloguers: as instruments of the orchestra” “stomach rumbles, contribution to meetings” and “lavatory walls: as information media”. Spatchcocked, however, into this collection is a serious (but not solemn) and previously unpublished piece entitled “Librarianship as it is practised: a failure of intellect, imagination and initiative”. It begins with a disquisition on the coming information societies (he was writing in 1988) which will derive “most of their wealth not from manufacturing but from the provision and transmission of information in its widest sense” at a time of reductions in resources of both public and private sector libraries. After identifying problems facing librarianship – reduced resources, rapidly changing technology, changes in society, nationally and globally – Line then lays about him in fine style:

He has little sympathy with an obsessive perfectionism which he saw in “already complex classification schemes or sophisticated subject indexing methods . . . that are in practice virtually useless because no-one can afford to use them . . . why must we always go for the unattainable 100 percent, and spend vast resources we don’t have getting nowhere near it, when we could reach 70 percent with quite modest resources?” The essay may have been prepared for a meeting that never happened or perhaps failed to find a place in a journal and Line inveigled the publisher to include it in A Little Off Line. It is of its time, but many of his targets and objects of professional scorn have not disappeared, but merely speak a different and bloated professional jargon and which have taken on new disguises or camouflage. Line today would perhaps claim that all he wanted to do was to convince librarians to put stopping and thinking into what he would not call their “portfolios” of “ skills and competencies”. The articles republished in A Little Off Line with two exceptions first appeared in New Library World, an independent journal, i.e. not part of the Library Association, founded as Library World in 1898 by the UK pioneer of open access libraries and creator of the Brown Classification, James Duff Brown. With various owners and editors it remained independent and became at times a maverick voice in the profession up to 1990 when under new auspices it became a more serious journal. Between 1973 and 1988 NLW published nine articles by the “friends and colleagues” of the sub-title, all of whom are Line under various pseudonyms. An example is B.L. Moses “Laws of librarianship” such as two possibly self-mocking laws “The reputation of a librarian bears a direct relation to the number of his publications”, and “The ability of a librarian bears no relation to the number of his publications. The search for the ideal” by Agnew Broome in A Little Off Line was first published in BLL Review in January 1974 and is a pre-echo of “Librarianship as it is practised” of a decade or so later. Neurotic perfectionism, cataloguing and classification and acquisition systems are called to account, the last “which have had built into them many checks to ensure, for example, that it is possible ten years after a book has been acquired to find out what its original price is if it is lost, to ensure that no duplicates slip through, to ensure that no supplier ever gets away with a single mistake, etc.”. Line used an anagram of his name, Eunice M. Blair, as pseudonym for the last two of his pieces, both flights of fancy, to appear in NLW. “ISLIP: an imaginative venture” notes that Iceland has a substantial book production but a limited market since almost no-one outside Iceland can read Icelandic. But Iceland has five sheep to every person and if sheep can be taught to read the market would increase to the benefit of publishers and libraries. So there evolved ISLIP – the Icelandic Sheep Literary Project with a director. But nothing came of it because sheep learned of their inevitable fate through reading the Icelandic Sheep Farmer and the project director went off to India to educate cows which cannot be slaughtered. “The joy of backlogs”, the other piece by Eunice M. Blair, is more grounded in reality. Library backlogs “have been so much accepted as a fact of life that no-one bothers to write about them”. However there took place the First International Conference on Library Backlogs in September 1985. “At least it would have done, but unfortunately invitations went out two

I would argue that in most cases librarians have failed to identify the problems, they have failed to see the problems in context, they have failed to identify the problems correctly and precisely, and when they have been confronted with problems they cannot avoid, they have failed to react intelligently.

Librarians’ response to the University Grants Committee Atkinson Committee on the growth of academic library collections was emotional rather than rational: “Perhaps their bibliothecal manhood felt threatened by the idea of premature stock withdrawal, or collectio interrupta”. On resources “It is noteworthy that one of the first reactions of librarians to shortage of money is to spend money on discussing with other librarians how to deal with the shortage of money”. Line generally took a dim view of much cataloguing practice and of cataloguers. “AACR2 is one of the most remarkable examples of trying to solve a problem by committee, with predictable results . . . No data on users’ needs were collected: instead cataloguers discussed how to change the rules, rather as if hens were to gather together to discuss the design of eggs . . . Cataloguers would lose their status if it were shown that most cataloguing is a trivial job easily done by clerical staff or that the length of a catalogue entry was not a sign of virility”. Throughout this well spiced dish of professional polemic, Line expresses his view that librarians seldom indulge in what is currently called “evidence-based” practice, that cynical but realistic librarians feel “that it is better to spend no time and effort reaching no solution than to set up committees and research studies to reach a non-solution”. 101

The other side of Line

Interlending & Document Supply

Edward Dudley

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 100 –102

years late as a result of backlogs of work among the organizers”. There follow descriptions of sessions which would have taken place, e.g. “Uses of backlogs”, “An anatomy of backlogs”, “Backlog management and development”. “A session on enemies of backlogs” would have recorded that “The obvious enemies are commonsense, efficiency and concern with users”.The last session would have been on “Backlog promotion and publicity with posters”, e.g. “Backlogs are the backbone of bibliography” and “My backlog is bigger than yours”. A few weeks after the publication of “The joys of backlogs”, the Editor of New Library World received a letter from a university librarian in West Africa asking for help in contacting the author as he wanted to get copies of the conference papers for his library. Professional humour in the UK is rare and deserves to be better bibliographed, to use the term coined by Edmund

Wilson in an essay entitled “Thoughts on being bibliographed” in the Princeton University Chronicle in 1944. Better bibliographing is one object of this short exploration of the other side of Line, this unveiling of pseudonyms and will provide, perhaps, a wider access to a rare resource.

About the author Edward Dudley, in retirement after a long career in librarianship, still writes a regular column for Update, the journal for professional librarians in the UK.

102

Maurice Line: a personal and inevitably partial view B.J. Enright (Brian Enright, now deceased, was Chief Librarian at the library of the University of Newcastle, Newcastle, UK) Abstract Purpose – An introduction to a book of papers by Maurice Line published in 1988. Design/methodology/approach – Based on personal recollections and knowledge of the author. Findings – A personal view of Maurice Line and his distinguished career. Originality/value – Provides an personal insight into Maurice Line. Keywords Humour, Librarianship Paper type Viewpoint

My earliest recollection of Maurice Line is of him at the Bodleian, not as a librarian but as a skilled table tennis performer (I believe he still is) interspersing his elegant, deadly strokes with regaling hilarious, sometimes lubricious anecdotes drawn from Oxford post-war undergraduate life. He had succeeded me in 1950 as the library’s graduate trainee and it fell to me to hand on the torch of what I had absorbed in the previous year. I have always been eternally grateful that the roles were not reversed. Maurice was already demonstrating qualities and characteristics, together with an incredible range of interests, which have distinguished his later career. It must be admitted that there was much in Bodley to attract his irrepressible curiosity and his explosive mirth. There was little need for him to embellish the description of the letter from one eccentric representative of an early feminist lobby, earnestly requesting the Bodley’s Librarian to consider shelving books by male and female authors separately in the interests of decency, or the report of the reader, caught eating smuggled fish and chips in Duke Humphrey, who protested that “nothing was at risk since as he was working on vellum manuscripts the grease wouldn’t go through”. His attention had also been caught by the loyal notice in the staff canteen “respectfully requesting members of library staff to refrain from discussing the librarian while colleagues were eating”. As an ex-classical scholar Maurice had no difficulty in mastering the arrangement of the public copy of the catalogue of pre-1920 publications which did not distinguish between I and J or U and V, or in dealing with the triumphalism demonstrated by experienced cataloguers (genus: elephantus candidus) accustomed to produce work of such high quality that in order to find the entry in the catalogue the reader had to have the book in his hand.

Most of all I envied Maurice’s sangfroid in giving assistance to readers. One enquirer plucked up the courage to request in those pre-liberation days the unexpurgated edition of Lady Chatterley’s Lover. Maurice, conforming to Bodleian staff guidelines, queried politely “Do you require it for study or pleasure?”. (Pleasurable activities, it should be understood, were at the time not generally encouraged at the Bodleian; the rejection of illicit and even legitimate requests was considered helpful in developing the personalities of library acolytes – a form of vicarious masochism.) On this occasion the outraged reader replied “both”, leaving Maurice momentarily completely at a loss for a word – possibly for the only time in his life. In contrast to the solemnity and hallowed procedures of centuries were the uninhibited laughter and bonhomie of the stack book-fetching team ranging from talented (sometimes over-talented) local beauties to singing men (with other optional gifts), “sunlighting” from their eventide service employment with Oxford college choirs. Maurice had no difficulty in establishing a familiar rapport with both categories, who otherwise were only united in paying allegiance to the illuminated notice above the pneumatic tube outlet which delivered requests from “ever hopeful” readers. This ran, as I recall, “There is no enquiry so urgent that delay on the part of the library staff cannot make more urgent”. Undoubtedly the Bodleian experience had its impact on Maurice’s bibliothecal thinking but, sadly for me, he seemed to consider that a year was sufficient. The library never felt quite the same again, though I received a number of long, extraordinarily racy and entertaining letters from his new base in Glasgow University Library, touching on the wayward behaviour of readers and staff north of the border, and on the effortless way in which he was dealing with Library Association examinations. Inevitably, my two years conscription in the RAF and (what appears in retrospect to be) an even more demanding stint of forced labour in the House of Commons Library disrupted regular contact, but

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

This article first appeared in Line on Interlending: Selected Papers on Interlending and Document Supply by Maurice Line, edited by Graham Cornish. Published by the British Library, 1988, ISBN 0712320466. q B.J. Enright (1988).

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 103– 107 Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615]

103

Maurice Line: a personal and inevitably partial view

Interlending & Document Supply

B.J. Enright

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 103 –107

with Maurice it always seemed easy to take up discussions where they had been left off as if no gap had ever occurred. I recall encountering him in the British Museum Reading Room on a particularly dreary, wet day, which he transformed by an uproarious first hand description of the tyrannical behaviour of one librarian who appeared to be the female equivalent of Captain Queeg, combining the belligerence of Boadicea with the persecution potential of Xanthippe. I attempted to console him (probably unsuccessfully) with the view that “it is only through friction that music is drawn from a violin”. In spite of this, or perhaps because of it, his energies made the University Library at Southampton a model of progressive librarianship and a power within the university itself. In one afternoon’s visit, after my years as a “non-print voyeur” attempting to reorganise the BBC Television Film Library, he provided me with advice, inspiration and a kit of documentation sufficient to turn a rundown College of Advanced Technology Library into what at times could resemble (and which was occasionally mistaken by the generous for) a working university library. I came to rely increasingly on his letters for guidance on a wide range of issues revealed and dissected by an array of characteristically balanced pros and cons and leading ineluctably to rational and relevant conclusions. The letterhead changed when he moved to Newcastle University Library but the value of the contents did not and, indeed, became enriched by a new range of experiences. As deputy he had succeeded Fred Ratcliffe, a hard act to follow in any circumstances, and encountered a tradition where the Librarian on arrival, according to one colleague, sat down beside each member of staff, saw what was being done, intoned in an authoritative pseudo-military manner, “Carry on”, and for the next 20 years had not been seen again. Newcastle offered some of the scope his abilities demanded. The library building was as inappropriate as the haphazard collections of treasures of past years masquerading as special collections. The “white elephant” catalogue demonstrated such acute symptoms of “listitis” that he rightly judged that nothing would be lost by exposing it to the clinical irradiation treatment of computerisation, “warts and all”, in an effort to achieve a benign state of “spontaneous listlessness”. Such Novocastrian radical subversive activities came to be popularly known as “Novocastration”. Maurice’s vision in securing research grants from OSTI (the forerunner of British Library Research & Development Department) was well in advance of his time, and even of the available technology. However, it set the scene at Newcastle and elsewhere for emancipation from the tyranny of idiopathic, whimsical cataloguers and the inevitable bankruptcy which their activities threatened to bring to academic libraries on the brink of developing the “in failure” syndrome which Kilgour had identified. His fruitful co-operation with the Computing Laboratory and his contacts with Dolby, Cox and Dews led to the publication in 1966 of the classic The Computer and the Library. The only way “society has found for increasing productivity exponentially is by the increasing use of mechanisation” and it was time for librarianship, a profession fighting a desperate and losing battle with costs, to follow society and secure the benefits of automated massproduction, notably in the crucial and costly area of cataloguing.

His contributions to Library Association committees and his impact in the corridors of SCONUL grew apace. Clearly his abilities demanded, and the profession desperately needed, that he should have greater scope. The difficulty lay in the characteristics of the membership of academic appointment boards which, for some reason best known to Maurice himself, he felt under an obligation to terrorise. In a courageous attempt to secure understanding of the need to bridge the gap between ideal and reality in academic librarianship, he indulged in a form of public strip-searching of the mental equipment of the vain, the wrong-headed and the prejudiced who statutorily graced the interviewing panels. Naturally there were members who considered this diverting enough as a typical piece of academic knockabout, delighting in the discomfiture of their arch-rivals. But they quickly reflected on the possibility that this relentless searchlight of devastating logic might be uncomfortable if it was turned in their own direction. It was said that certain vice-chancellors compassionately warned some of their less vigorous colleagues to absent themselves from these encounters in case of premature heart attacks. Others, playing a more Machiavellian calculating hand, deliberately encouraged attendance as a simple and effortless way of securing new blood. Fortunately, Bath University saw the light (and, incidentally, has never looked back). Almost simultaneously Maurice was invited to lead the National Library Automated Data Processing study. Computers in libraries, despite the exaggerated “mixture of tenses” pronouncements which came to be known as “library science fiction”, were not at that time properly house-trained, though one traditional librarian was heard to admit that one possible advantage of library automation was “at least you could leave two computers in a room by themselves without the slightest anxiety, which was more than could be said for members of the staff which it was hoped they might replace”. Maurice decided that Bath matters, including supervision of a large-scale research project on the information needs of social scientists, could be handled adequately one day a week on a Friday, concentrating for the rest of the week on the ADP study. This, it was said by local wits, was how the university was introduced to “online” and “offline” working. What a contrast to the traditional anguished plea from one chief librarian’s secretary, urgently pleading on behalf of her boss that “a meeting should not be fixed on Wednesday since it ruined both weekends!” The ADP study was completed on schedule with incredible, neardemonic energy, a clear example of “an irresistible force looking for (and finding) a near-immoveable object”. I shall never forget Maurice’s masterly exposition to a SCONUL conference without a note, opening up new vistas and revealing ways for librarians to escape from centuries of bondage and servility into a promising (if not a promised) land. His work not only promoted the establishment of the British Library, but made him the obvious choice to follow Donald Urquhart after he had presided over the merger of the National Central Library and the National Lending Library for Science and Technology to form the British Library Lending Division (later the British Library Document Supply Centre). The scale of his achievement must rank as one of the great British successes in the post-colonial era and one which perhaps is not sung about quite enough. This was brought home to me at a conference in Vienna when a Russian librarian told me how much he looked forward to visiting the 104

Maurice Line: a personal and inevitably partial view

Interlending & Document Supply

B.J. Enright

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 103 –107

UK. I enquired what he wanted to see, only to be told that most of all he wished to investigate a place called Boston Spa, which had excited his curiosity because it never failed to provide the photocopies he requested. Maurice’s efforts to promote genuine library co-operation, and to enable the working librarian to overcome the alluring, incessant and almost irresistible temptation of entering the zone of diminishing returns, have been exceptional. In particular I personally recall his invaluable support in getting the Northern Regional Transport System off the ground, which has done so much to draw libraries in the north closer together in self-interested co-operation, and has won them major and continuing savings and benefits. I have always regretted that Maurice’s contributions at the meetings of the Atkinson Committee on University Library Capital Provision were not recorded, particularly his revelation of the nature of open-ended academic library obesity for what it was, the need for library hygiene and the assault on library pollution. More delicately, perhaps, I had suggested that British universities and their libraries in the mid-1970s were in a similar position to the monasteries in the 1530s awaiting visitations from modern day equivalents of Thomas Cromwell’s commissioners. Ironically, neglect and laxity in the observance of the ritual of research in the cloistered groves of academia now appear to have come to be accepted as valid reasons for twentieth century closures. Joint occupancy of the dock, facing charges akin to bibliothecal treason when the report was published, followed by appearance in the pillory, as the target of hysterical abuse by the bibliographically virtuous, convinced us both of the danger of being a little in advance of the times and attempting the perennially thankless task, figuring in Oxbridge scholarship papers, of seeking to “do man good against his will”. It was some consolation for members of that committee to watch the purse-strings of capital provision being rapidly loosened, providing one new library building after another, together with extensions and stores, at a time when university resources were contracting, and only secured because a rational policy had been substituted for indefensible aspirations and unjustifiable assumptions. Maurice’s work in the British Library, his unequalled powers of communication and his indefatigable energy have given him a commanding position in British librarianship. Following a punishing timetable of overseas travel, on a scale meriting the allocation of a private jet, he also has a transglobal reputation. MPs used to confide to me that “at home they were merely politicians, but abroad they were statesmen”. Maurice has been equally statesman-like in both home and foreign affairs. There could be few who could measure up to the challenge of bridging the miles between Boston Spa and Holborn by undertaking the post of Director General of Science, Technology and Industry. It was not surprising that in his contribution to the Festschrift to Lord Dainton he chose “The universal library” as the title of his contribution. The range of Maurice’s contributions to librarianship and information science during the course of his busy working career is breathtaking. He has always been active in seeking to inject life into library education programmes. One library school lecturer, a “traveller from an antique land”, had quoted Macbeth:

and was surprised to gather, from the volume of Maurice’s guffaws, how much he agreed with him. Had Maurice been the head of library school, how much fewer might be those products to emerge with “delusions of adequacy”. I shall never forget, during a hiatus at a SCONUL meeting, how he drafted out his ideal library school syllabus, including options on the baking of clay tablets and the shredding of incunabula. Maurice’s concept of conservation is a refreshing one – conservation for use – and he is not slow to underline the liability of those seeking to curate rarities, where possibly the only things keeping them together were the bookworms holding hands. User education similarly has come under his critical scrutiny. Librarians seem to take a delight, he maintains, in making their libraries difficult to use and then proposing excessively ambitious and terminally boring user education programmes, seeking to achieve pseudo-academic status of the academic manqu by means of the tortuous complexity of what they contrive. The attempt to acquire a reputation for virtue by writing about library co-operation has been identified by him as frequently being in inverse proportion to what is actually happening, that it attempted to build bridges where there were no rivers, “Altruism which harms the giver without significantly benefiting the recipient is surely misplaced”. His encouragement of studies of new media, library technology and automation have all been effected by his proclaiming the need for research, preferably of a practical and relevant nature rather than adding to the Dunciad-like mountain of library literature effluent. Like Barnes Wallis, when asked “How do you keep up with the literature?”, Maurice can reply “I write it”. Undoubtedly Maurice is an exceptional man, an outstanding librarian – almost a phenomenon and certainly a legend in his own time. He intensely dislikes fuss and pomposity, tending to the view that “everyone has something to be modest about”. He would feel embarrassed by anything verging on the form of an advance panegyric. My justification for risking a note about him is because I feel I owe so much to him. And I am not alone. The number of librarians he has helped must be legion. His generous and giving disposition resembles a lifeboat always answering distress calls. Librarians have suffered from a curious, dry-as-dust image, dismissed in the popular mind and press as “a low stress occupation”. Maurice frequently speaks of the way in which libraries are considered to be quiet places of retreat from a busy world, ideal for the shy, the retiring and those who could not find something better to do. He often refers to incongruous references of the type “Mr X is a withdrawn lad, has a mediocre degree, has tried teaching and found it too testing. Although in indifferent health, he likes reading books and should therefore do well in your library”. Meetings and encounters with Maurice quickly give the lie to this image. Life in libraries with which Maurice is concerned is never dull, boring or unstressful. Maurice has an exhilarating, enchanting and almost exhausting flow of ideas. Anyone concerned in a meeting with him very rarely comes away without some more work, certainly with a lot more to think about and generally with some cherished notions relegated to the scrap heap. It has been rare in the history of librarianship for intellectual powers such as he possesses to be applied to the profession. He has risen above and brushed aside the epic hates, controversies and feuds in librarianship which tend to have the quality of a soap opera and become no less addictive

. . . we but teach Bloody instructions, which being taught, return To plague the inventor

105

Maurice Line: a personal and inevitably partial view

Interlending & Document Supply

B.J. Enright

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 103 –107

in encouraging professional fatuity. His judgment and penetrating vision bring unusual realism into discussions. He recognises that critical situations require desperate remedies, but also that he had to live in the imperfect world where bibliothecal aspirations and ideas have to be tempered by the reality of bibliographical entropy, human frailty and inherited messes while working for the world he hopes for. His practical approach reminds me of the advice of one practitioner that librarians should be resigned to their bibliothecal lot! “If you can’t be with the girl you love, you love the girl you’re with”. He is certainly aware that no plan, however well constructed or prepared, can survive contact with the enemy for very long, and his special gift, not frequently encountered in libraries, conies from his being firmly rooted in the real world. At times I used to think that his main entertainment and relaxation was to challenge and deflate the trumpet-blowing of arrogant librarians and the torturing, boring inconsistencies of their annual reports. Their glorification of their escalating library statistics is misplaced in his view, since (as with certain human vital statistics) “quantity did not always imply quality”. One librarian tended to use statistics rather like a drunken man uses lamp posts – for support rather than illumination. His targets are inertia, stasis, professional irresponsibility, and he is superb in demythologising some of the most cherished tenets and persuading colleagues to abandon the worship of false gods. This gentle subversion is always well-intentioned but sometimes is misconstrued. Often his aim is merely to liven up things and he does not expect to be taken too seriously, reminding me of a remark by a former Newcastle vicechancellor, who maintained that nobody could do anything really well unless he had an element of detached and sublime contempt for what he was doing. His great weapon in this campaign is humour of an irresistible and even outrageous kind which few others could have got away with. His artistry in the realm of oral and written bon-mots makes one envious. To watch his handling of a mixed audience of librarians, encouraging them to relax over expositions concerning such arcane activities as “bibliographical coupling” in libraries, is a joy to witness. Drawing attention to the bizarre by delicate mockery has a serious purpose aimed at encouraging reexamination of assumptions, and his splendid set of aphorisms deserve to be incorporated in a set of Linear or perhaps (better) Lineal “laws and lore of librarianship”. One is immediately aware at a meeting, however staid, or a conference, however stuffy, of Maurice’s presence, but of course it is his boisterous mirth and infectious laughter which are always a tonic to hear and distinguished any gathering he graces. He is generous, too, in appreciating humour from others, and I remember his delight when I recounted solecisms of a foreign professor from his old Newcastle stamping ground with an unsound command of English idioms, describing one library plan as a “complete dreampipe”, while praising library co-operation in the area as a happy instance of librarians “working closely hand in blouse together”. In a sense, Maurice is the library profession’s harshest critic. He has extraordinarily high expectations, and for him degrees and qualifications in librarianship are only evidence of good intentions, not always con-firmed, and certainly not absolving individuals from using their natural wits. He loathes bogus professionalism with its tendency to level down and produce slovenly and static services. He condemns the conceited and the haughty who “lacked inexperience” and

who “failed to live up to their limitations”. Their great difficulty was not that they could not see the solution, but they were not even aware of a problem. Maurice really believes in libraries as an educational force, instruments of education in their own right, not merely connected with education but an integral part of it. For him, access to information is necessary for a full and free life. The library is an activity, not merely a place in which individuals learn how to learn, how to acquire skill in organizing the lifelong, continuous self-education which modern life demands, where they can browse and indulge in creative thinking, and where they can develop a discrimination and even a facility for distrusting published information. Many of those in education, he concluded, often act as though no learning is taking place unless teaching is going on, when sometimes the very opposite is the case. Maurice is convinced that students need to learn how to emancipate themselves from dependence on the teacher and how to free themselves from the obsolescence of much of what they are taught – to become, in fact, responsible for their own independent thinking and for continually updating the information they require throughout life. In this cause, his mind takes on a razor-like sharpness. He can be merciless in his denunciation of error and idiocy whether it comes from friend or foe. The expression which passes across his countenance as he describes absurdities and eccentricities reflected the genuine pain and agonised irritation he experiences, and it is something which one tries to avoid provoking. Throughout, Maurice has vigorously sought to achieve excellence in libraries. Librarians have been castigated in official reports for at least two weaknesses – for tending not to be cost-conscious and also for seeking to avoid taking risks – concepts “alien to the thinking of most librarians”. Maurice has never been unaware of the importance of resources or short on courage. He is formidable and fearless in moving into action. He described the dilemma of one academic librarian: “whenever he thought about the problems of his library he felt terrible. At last he came to a fateful decision. He decided not to think about them”. For Maurice, many library decisions are rather like weather forecasting which “if you don’t do it fast enough, is hardly worth doing at all”. Inertia in high quarters, which was so fertile in discovering so many good reasons for doing nothing and where delay constituted the cruellest form of negation, meets with his strong condemnation. Well aware of the shortcomings of human nature, Maurice has a gift for attracting loyal, devoted, hardworking library staff who find him compassionate and fair, and are unable to resist becoming infected by his enthusiasm. His high, indeed rigorous, standards (which he applied remorselessly to his own behaviour) are on occasion difficult for colleagues to measure up to. One suggested that Maurice was rather like God, reasonably easy to please but desperately hard to satisfy. His references are models of objective and balanced assessment, which one ignored at one’s peril. “Mr A is not a born leader yet, a man of hidden shallows”, “Mr B hates being deprived of his complaints and has chosen a very curious ditch from which to make a last stand”, “Miss C is well meaning, but her mind is a chaos of clear ideas. She conveys, despite all her work, the dispiriting feeling of shovelling smoke”, “Mrs D indulges in an eloquent soliloquy on how bad the world is, but evinces no wish to make it better”. There is no need for Maurice to apologise, using 106

Maurice Line: a personal and inevitably partial view

Interlending & Document Supply

B.J. Enright

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 103 –107

Henry Miller’s words “I may be wrong, but I am never in doubt”. He is rarely wrong. He certainly believes in people but at the same time is aware of their flawed behaviour and the injury which can result. Perhaps this might be described as an advanced form of bibliothecal AIDS, where untold damage can be sustained from one misjudged, maladroit appointment, which may take a decade to manifest itself, and then tends to be irreversible – “corruptio optima pessima”. Above all, Maurice is a communicator, with an endless flow of papers, letters, lectures, superb at leading discussions and participating in conversations; an exchange agent par excellence, tirelessly entertaining, educating, informing. At meetings, his left hand can be seen filling pages with logical arguments and obiter dicta in his inimitable script. This seems to present no obstacle to his following the flow of discussion and making valuable contributions, for he seems to relish being “interrupt-driven”. There is never a need to issue him with the instruction from computer to human (often required in library staff meetings) “Remember to switch on brain before opening mouth”. I was left marvelling that Maurice can find time for anything else but librarianship, yet he does, with an incredible range of outside interests. He is proud of his origins, retains an engaging humility, and despite, no doubt, a fair share of life’s sorrows and disappointments, displays a tremendous zest for living and great stamina. He sets a tremendous pace as well as an example quite impossible to follow. I think he realises that human beings are only happy when they are striving for something.

British librarianship has been fortunate in having such an outstanding exponent of the art and science at such a crucial time. His career has spanned an age of critical importance for libraries and information services which has been marked by a flood of important reports and radical developments in library and information provision from the aberration years of the 1960s to the restraint and readjustment of the 1980s. It has been a time which has seen the rise and fall of the concept of open-ended, draughty librarianship. In many senses he has had the foresight of a prophet. The papers which follow are still relevant, mainly because they were in advance of their time. The scale of his achievement can be seen by looking around the library scene, not only at the monuments which he has left, but in the absence of ugly, teratologic, abnormal library growths which he has either prevented or excised through his enthusiasm for damage limitation. Here is surely a clear example of “genius doing what it must, in contrast to talent which merely does what it can”, who has left an indelible impression on the libraries where he has worked and on the profession of which he has been such an eminent practitioner. It is hard, indeed almost inconceivable, to imagine Maurice in retirement. I suspect that “life after office” is likely to be as active as before, and I look forward to seeing him working on behalf of libraries and information, freed from any restraint or protocol; though in fairness it must be said that this has not seemed to hinder his activities all that much hitherto. As was said in another context, it is probable that “you ain’t seen nothing yet”.

107

Maurice’s management maxims Maurice B. Line (Maurice Line is a retired librarian, having worked in several university libraries and the British Library, and then as a consultant for several years. He is the subject of this festschrift) Abstract Purpose – Aims to bring together the author’s management maxims. Design/methodology/approach – The approach is to provide a simple listing of the maxims. Findings – The list offers words of wisdom from an experienced information and library professional. Originality/value – Pertinent advice for information – and other – professionals and managers. Keywords Human resource management, Management Paper type Viewpoint . .

.

. .

. . .

.

.

. . .

.

.

. . .

. . . . . .

Never let the urgent stand in the way of the important. The real needs of the present should not be sacrificed to the hypothetical needs of the future. It is easier to achieve than to maintain (from a peak you can only go down). The more cautiously nettles are grasped the more they sting. There is always a best solution, even if it is not a good solution. Stand back – especially if you are particularly busy. Rapid change is OK – if you are in charge of the change. People do not mind being in a rocking boat so much if they know where it is going and it is somewhere they want to go. Bosses nearly always overestimate their importance to the organisation. Bosses nearly always underestimate their importance to the staff. A strong leader accepts his/her limitations. Lead, do not dictate. Staff want of a leader a sense of direction, not directiveness. Only people with short legs need to put themselves on a pedestal. People who behave like prima donnas should first learn how to sing. Your morale infects others whether you like it or not. The capacities of staff at all levels tend to be underestimated. Trust your staff to perform 25 per cent better than you expect of them. Delegating work is not the same as delegating responsibility. Staff can be overworked and understretched at the same time. Set high standards, give full support. Things look very different from above and below. Communication is never as good as you think. If you do not tell your staff what you think they will waste their time guessing.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. . . . .

.

. . .

. . . .

.

.

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister

.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

. . .

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 108 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615] [DOI 10.1108/02641610510607452]

Listening is more important than talking – and much more difficult. The privilege of making mistakes should not be confined to the boss. If you try to avoid putting a foot wrong you may not move at all. You cannot turn geese into swans, but you can usually make them better geese (but some people may be frustrated swans who have been treated like geese). You cannot resurrect the dead but you can awaken the sleeping. Never write people off – either make full use of them or sack them (if they are not fired with enthusiasm, they should be fired – with enthusiasm). Frustration and aggression can usually be harnessed; inertia has nothing to harness. Staff should not only tick over but sometimes chime. Feelings are facts, ignored at your peril. Criticism demotivates, praise motivates. People need mental space in which to “breathe”. Everyone should own his/her own job (but ownership should not mean possessiveness). Humour relaxes, creates bonds, gives perspective, stimulates creativity. A threat is an opportunity seen by a pessimist. An opportunity is a threat seen by an optimist. Those at the top of the tree should remember that they depend on the roots. Never treat front-end staff as if they were the rear end. Good high fliers teach their chicks to fly. If staff are stuck, it may be because the ground is swampy. Some bosses create swamps, some drain swamps, some wallow in swamps, some cannot get out of swamps. It is much easier to clean out the Augean stables if you move the horses out first. When a good boss goes he leaves behind him an organisation that can run without him. Attitudes are more important than techniques – but proper use of techniques can promote good attitudes. Principles are more important than rules. Amputation is better than slow rot. Insecurity is the great enemy.

This piece first appeared in Library Management, Vol. 20 No. 1 and is reprinted with the kind permission of the Editor, Steve O’Connor.

108

Librarianship as it is practised: a failure of intellect, imagination and initiative Maurice B. Line (Maurice Line is a retired librarian, having worked in several university libraries and the British Library, and then as a consultant for several years. He is the subject of this festschrift) Abstract Purpose – To highlight some fundamental weaknesses in the library profession internationally, including an inability to analyse problems, imagine new solutions and press for change. Specific weaknesses highlighted are the approach to resource sharing, the construction of bibliographic records and the identification of items for conservation. Design/methodology/approach – A critical assessment of the state of librarianship from the angle of an experienced librarian. Findings – That much more analytical thinking, imagination and initiative are needed. Research implications – That more data collection and rigorous research need to be done. Originality/value – This paper was given in 1983; it is useful to consider how much has changed since then in the areas of identified weakness. Keywords Interlending, Resource sharing, Bibliographic systems, Conservation Paper type Viewpoint

problems they cannot avoid they have failed to react intelligently.

Introduction It is becoming generally accepted that the future of developed countries lies largely in their becoming information societies, even information economies, deriving most of their wealth not from manufacturing but from the provision and transmission of information, in its widest sense – from primary education to advertising. At the same time, in nearly all these same countries the resources devoted to libraries, in both public and private sectors, are being cut back, often savagely. Either libraries are doing the wrong things or they have not convinced their lords and masters that they are doing the right things. Something is badly wrong. This paper tries to explore what it is. When making notes for it I soon realized that I could write a book on the subject (and may do so one day); all I can do here is to present the outline of my case, inevitably selective and over-simplified, but I hope not superficial: I warn you that my title is intended to be serious, You will also be glad to know that my text is written on acid-free paper. There are many problems facing librarianship. The challenge of reduced resources is one of them. Rapidly changing technology is another. Deeper than either are changes in society, both within countries and globally. Some of these problems are closer than others: some are already on us. I would argue that in most cases librarians have failed to anticipate the problems, they have failed in see problems in context, they have failed to identify the problems correctly and precisely, and when they have been confronted with

Space shortage in academic libraries My first example is an easy one, because it is already partly past history. It has been obvious for the last 20 years that academic libraries could not keep being provided with accommodation to keep pace with their intake. When a few of us tried to point this out in Britain and to urge that a great deal of factual evidence was needed on growth rates, costs, the value of browsing, improved means of access to remote stored material, and alternative national solutions to the coming space crisis, we were greeted with attitudes of “we don’t believe it”, “the UGC (University Grants Committee) will provide”, “we’ll wait till it happens”, “I’ll be retiring in ten years”, and “technology will find a solution”. When the UGC set up a committee under Professor Atkinson to look at the problem, university libraries still did nothing, though when the committee reported they were only too ready to complain that it did not have enough hard evidence - which is perfectly true, because some of the important evidence needed to he collected over several years. Immediately rebuttals began to appear, containing facts and figures of highly dubious quality and not addressing the real problem, which was simply that buildings could not keep pace with growth. The UGC set up a Steering Committee on Library Research, which, after several years of discussion and the collection of more and more information, came to no conclusions that contradicted the Atkinson Report. Libraries are now improvising, mostly by outhousing some of their stock. Shared regional repositories are still being discussed as a possible solution, though it requires little hard thought or elementary economics to see that several regional repositories cannot possibly

The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

This paper is a very slightly revised version of one given in Sydney, Australia in 1983. It was first published in 1989 in A Little off Line: Irreverent Essays by Maurice Line, ELM Publications, Kings Ripton, 1989.

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 109– 113 Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615]

109

Librarianship as it is practised

Interlending & Document Supply

Maurice B. Line

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 109 –113

Access to documents and resource sharing

compare with a single national repository for costs or effectiveness. This particular problem was not anticipated, understood properly or analysed with a view to identifying the best solution. If the reaction in the UK was emotional rather than rational, the reaction abroad was no better. Librarians all over the world reacted as if Atkinsonism was some kind of contagious disease that would infect their countries too if some antidote were not found. The report was seen as a threat to their stocks, though the precise nature of the threat in particular countries was rarely specified. Perhaps their bibliothecal manhood felt threatened by the idea of premature stock withdrawal, or collectio interrupta. Most of all, perhaps, it was seen as an attack on libraries, though why the UGC should attack libraries was not clear. In fact, if the UGC had not worked out a policy for dealing with a very real problem, it is doubtful whether the British libraries that subsequently received money for new buildings would have done so: it was rarely pointed out that the guidelines laid down were better than several libraries had, and allowed them to make a good case for more accommodation. In any case, the Atkinson Report was an attempt to find a solution to the problem in the UK, not a universal solution.

On a broader front, cuts lead libraries to talk about “resource sharing” – talk about it rather that do anything about it; because on examination (or even after prolonged discussion) it soon becomes clear that it is exceedingly hard to find any kind of resource sharing that yields half as much as it costs, in staff time, effort and hard cash. There are other alternatives to national provision than the sharing of resources among libraries, but these are rarely looked at because librarians have not even identified the problem as one of national provision: rather, they seem to have picked up a current catch phrase, or perhaps reacted with a sort of knee-jerk reflex – conditioned by “conventional wisdom”, so often a synonym for intellectual laziness. In fact, librarians make the worst of all worlds, because not only do they do little about resource sharing (and what they do do is mostly costly and ineffective) but they have wasted time and money discussing the wrong problem (it is noteworthy that one of the first reaction of librarians to shortage of money is to spend money on discussing with other librarians how to deal with the shortage of money, but there are few things librarians enjoy more than frequent, extensive and inconclusive discussions). As for national document provision and supply, I have visited quite a few countries, looking at their interlending systems more or less closely – in some cases very closely – and am amazed at the regularity with which they arrive at conclusions (“solutions” would be the wrong word) that are at best sub-optimal and at worst pessimal, as if their aim was to maximize the ratio of costs to effectiveness. In some countries an economic and effective solution to a very real problem is clearly visible, but is scrupulously avoided. Australia affords a particularly fine example of this. Its document supply problem is generally recognized; it has been the subject of several papers and two conferences in the last seven years alone. In Canberra stands the National Library, with a very large collection of current journals, grossly underused because Canberra is not a main centre of population or research and has no industry. Problem and solution are perfectly matched, but they do not meet. Why does this sort of thing happen? Sometimes a committee of librarians, most of them with their own special interests or axes to grind, is set up, or a research study is commissioned and then put before the library community to discuss. In either case the result is much the same: a compromise that does not upset too many people and that does not solve the problem either. More often no serious attempt is made to tackle the problem, librarians perhaps believing, cynically but realistically, that it is better to spend no time and effort reaching no solution than to set up committees and research studies to reach a non-solution.

Reactions to shrinking budgets Another example is very much with us all today. Budgets are not keeping pace with the volume and cost of publications. It would not have been easy to foresee this by more than a few years, but there were warning signs in the mid-1970s and some pretty strong signals by 1980. In view of this, it is hard to sympathize with the panic reactions – not too strong a word – of some librarians faced with a sudden cut. Public libraries, on the principle perhaps of “last in first out”, have often cut out their growing audiovisual services, not on the grounds of present and likely future demand but because they are an easy coherent chunk of activity to chop. Academic libraries first of all reduced their book acquisitions because they could not bear the thought of breaking journal runs, even though books probably have a greater browsing value than journals (so that local open access is more important), are more important for students, and are much less easy and convenient to obtain on interlibrary loan. When they discovered that if they went on doing this they would soon be buying no books at all (some nearly reached this situation) they started cutting journals – some by asking academic staff what they thought, some by sacrificing titles likely to cause least trouble, some on the basis of actual use studies, usually carried out over too short a period to yield really valid data. Is it too much to expect that they might have started to collect good data on use at least a year or two in advance of having to make cancellations, and related these to costs, not only purchase price but processing, binding and storage costs, so that journals were ranked in order to cost per use? There would of course be other factors to be taken into account, but the basic hard facts ought to be available. Incidentally, how many organizations could survive a continued inability to supply no more than 60 or 70 per cent of items wanted by customers within 24 hours?

Bibliographic networking and the construction of records Resource sharing is one trendy concept. Bibliographic networking is another. This is founded on two totally unproven assumptions: that there is a standard and extensive catalogue record that is appropriate for all libraries, and that it is more cost-effective to obtain catalogue records from a cooperative, or national file than to make them in one’s own library. AACR2 is one of the most remarkable examples of trying to solve a problem by 110

Librarianship as it is practised

Interlending & Document Supply

Maurice B. Line

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 109 –113

Selection of items for conservation

committee, with predictable results. The committee did not even tackle the right problem – what users surely want is not comprehensive or perfectly accurate bibliographic records, but far better subject access to books, comparable with that provided for scientific journal articles by the large international databases. No data on users’ needs, whether for bibliographic information or subject access, were collected; instead, cataloguers discussed how to change the rules, rather as if hens were to gather together to discuss the design of eggs. I am however doing the committee an injustice in accusing them of not involving consumers in their discussions, because much of the use made of catalogues is in fact by cataloguers for the purpose of adding to them. Cataloguers would lose their status if it were shown that most cataloguing is a trivial job easily done by clerical staff or that the length of a catalogue entry was not a sign of virility. The research reported several years ago into long vs short records by the Centre for Catalogue Research at Bath University poses two serious questions about both AACR2 and MARC records. Why was not such research carried out years ago? Why is discussion by groups of librarians, however distinguished, preferred to the collection of relevant facts? Our attempts to deal with subject access to books have been particularly ill-directed. We have heralded as major advances additional complexities in already complex classification schemes or sophisticated subject indexing methods like PRECIS that may represent conceptual breakthroughs but that are in practice virtually useless because no-one can afford to use them. Why not experiment, for example, with keyword searching on content pages fed into the computer? Such a system would contain a lot of “noise” and miss quite a lot, but it would give us, very cheaply, far better subject access than we have now. Why must we always go for the unattainable 100 per cent, and spend vast resources we do not have getting nowhere near it, when we could reach 70 per cent with quite modest resources? I would like to see a totally different approach to catalogue records of books, based on what is needed for local housekeeping and access, what files (and what sort of files) are desirable for locating materials elsewhere, what is needed for bibliographic searching (e.g. to check references) and what is needed for decent subject access. National databases as at present conceived seem likely to fulfil none of these desiderata very well. The third and fourth needs could probably be best satisfied by international databases, the first by simple local records, and the second by a specially designed national file, whose nature would be largely determined by the national document supply system. I am not saying that my alternative approach to catalogue records is right, or that it is the only sensible alternative. What I am saying is that I have seen little or no sign in the literature or elsewhere of a thorough analysis of the needs and issues involved or of any attempt to conceive of alternative approaches. Instead we have the good old tradition of assumed needs and largely preconceived solutions. Again there is a failure to identify the problem, a failure to imagine possible solutions, a failure to collect the information needed to help find the best solution, and a failure to analyse fully what data and proposed solutions are available. If the best solution were by any accident found, I have little doubt that the initiative and courage necessary to implement it would be lacking.

Another current buzzword is “conservation”. Numerous librarians all over the world have been bitten by the conservation bug. I am all in favour of conservation so long as it does not become an obsession and push other essential functions of libraries into subsidiary positions. However, it is usually assumed that what should first be conserved is the ordinary bound book – older before more recent, non-fiction before fiction. But if I were a historian I would have little interest in an edition of Macaulay’s History of England or many other standard books of the nineteenth (or any other) century: I would be much more interested in the ephemera of the day, broadsheets, pamphlets and local newspapers – material that is usually the last to be collected, let alone conserved. Have historians actually been consulted? And if not, why not?

The lack of incisive thinking I could offer many other examples to illustrate my thesis. If almost any major (or for that matter minor) issue in librarianship is examined in any depth, one is forced to question the conventional approach; the standard answers will rarely stand up to close scrutiny. It is particularly sad to see developing countries, with their very limited resources, straining to follow models in developed countries that are inappropriate even in developed countries and irrelevant to themselves. I would add that I am conscious of a serious general lack of incisive thinking, an inability to cut through the flannel and penetrate to the essential issues, an incapacity to see and tackle issues as management problems. For example, libraries have so much in the way of resources, of staff, money, stock and buildings. The questions are first, what is the best one can do with these resources, and second, how solid a case can be made for more resources if, even when optimized, they are genuinely not enough to serve users. It is criminal to stand by rigid cataloguing codes (even if they were soundly based) if this means the existence and even growth of a backlog of books awaiting processing. If such a stand is made for long enough, it may well prove to be “Cutter’s last stand”.

The broader picture I realized when I came to prepare my notes for this paper that the title I had chosen was incomplete, for not only have librarians failed to use their intellect and imagination, but they have failed to put their users before themselves and their stocks. How else can one explain catalogues designed for cataloguers, classification schemes designed for who knows what or whom (certainly not users), library systems that are so difficult to use that instead of making them simpler librarians have the impertinence of “educating” people to use them? How else explain the huge backlogs of current books that remain inaccessible in many libraries because librarians will not depart in the slightest degree from perfectionist cataloguing standards? How else explain bibliographers playing with their bibliographic tools while users remain unsatisfied? How else explain the common practice of sending journals to the binder for several weeks at the time of maximum demand? How else explain the mystification, the pseudo-professionalism, the status-seeking of librarians? How else explain our so-called professional education, which 111

Librarianship as it is practised

Interlending & Document Supply

Maurice B. Line

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 109 –113

Conclusion

inculcates knowledge that is either irrelevant or likely to be out of date in three or four years, while failing to recruit or develop the qualities of imagination and analytical ability and the spirit of service that we need so badly? Librarianship as it is practised is a failure of humanity as well as of intellect and imagination.

I return to my first statement: libraries are being cut back at the same time as our countries are moving towards information societies. Obviously we have not made a persuasive case to government[1] – although, in spite of all our deficiencies we do have quite a powerful case to make. Let us use our energies in making it, rather than in defending what we happen to be doing now. Trying to hold on to unused publications that libraries no longer have room to house, having theological arguments about the contents of catalogue records, and indulging in the numerous other irrelevant, inappropriate or trivial activities of which librarians are so fond, with their unerring eye for the inessential. If you think I am exaggerating, look at the large amount of library literature published in the UK, the USA, or in any other country in the last four or five years, and see how many writings you can find that deal with the major issues that will affect our future. You will not find more than a few. In even fewer will you find any sense of excitement at being part of a set of key activities that are crucial to the future of our societies. While the future of libraries is in the melting pot, librarians seem to be in a state of moral, social and political confusion. All over the world we have the unappealing picture of librarians contemplating their navels and holding on to their fallacies. Some of the issues I have raised are national and should be tackled at a national level: some are local. It would however be a cop-out or local librarians to leave national issues to others. It is too easy to say “these matters are too big for little me: somebody else should do something about them” (the SESDSAT syndrome); nobody may do anything about them unless there is pressure at the grass roots (the force exerted by growing grass is remarkably strong), and if somebody up there does try and do something it is unlikely to work unless a lot of people down here are willing and able to put a programme into action. (Every boss, however powerful, knows that his staff are able to obstruct or dilute almost anything he tries to get done and may well do so unless he gains their understanding and support). Nor is the solution to national problems a sort of superbody, as some have advocated – “what we need is a body with teeth”. This superbody would, its advocates hope, be programmed and operated by them, and its teeth would be permanently facing, if not gnashing at, others, people about whom something should be done. The fact is of course that if it had real teeth they would be sharp government teeth, not National Health Service false teeth that could be taken out if they caused trouble. We need national advocates for librarianship; we do not need national guards. It may be objected that my strictures on librarianship could be applied to almost any job or activity. To this I would reply not only that weakness in other areas is a very feeble excuse for weakness in one’s own, but that our situation is more serious. Few people regard librarianship as an essential job such as teaching, nursing, or for that matter plumbing. Anyway, why have museums made such enormous progress in the last three decades, to a point where many are now so popular that they can operate as commercial concerns? At the same time as new challenges and opportunities are appearing, we are seeing territory that we should he interested in holding, if not extending, being eroded or taken over by others. In the long term this may not matter so long as society is served adequately with information; but if the private sector takes over it may not be. In any case I doubt if many librarians

The need for a broader vision Why, for that matter, should we be talking about librarianship at all? If one thing is clear to me, it is that the boundaries, never as clear cut as was supposed, are becoming rapidly eroded. On the other side of our self-constructed (and defensive?) walls are several other major activities: publishing, bookselling, broadcasting, telecommunications, computer processing, even advertising. Unless we can see our future in a far broader context we may not have a future. We need a wide-angle as well as a telescopic lens. Our territory is being lost while we think we are defending it, because we are defending the form and not the substance, and the substance is changing. In order to see our future in a broader context, we have to go back to fundamentals: to look at the nature and needs of our future society – always bearing in mind that society consists of individual human beings; to look at likely future information needs – not merely research information but leisure needs; to explore how these could be met, bearing in mind the great advances in storing, retrieving and transmitting information of all kinds; and finally to see whether and how anything that we would recognize as librarianship fits into the picture. In public librarianship in particular a radical rethink seems to me to be quite urgently needed, since this is closest to the body of society; but all kinds of librarians – including national librarians – need to reassess their role. In doing so we shall at various points have to work together with our neighbours in publishing, telecommunications and so on. After all, it should be more interesting and exciting to operate in a larger area than our own small patch, the soil of which soon becomes exhausted without constant doses of fertilizer.

Failure of initiative I have said little directly about the failure of initiative, though it is implicit in much of the above. One indication of this failure is our habit of waiting until problems are on us before we react, and then blaming someone else. More profoundly, the way librarians have missed opportunities and seen their province gradually diminish is symptomatic – the early reactions of academic librarians to computerized database searching are one example of this. One of the biggest tests of initiative is about to come. Up to now librarians have competed largely with one another, and this has been easy enough – so easy that we are ill-prepared to face the competition from the private sector that will undoubtedly become more and more prominent as information comes to be regarded more and more as a commercial commodity to be subjected to the laws of a market economy. This is far too big an issue to discuss here, but it will demand all the initiative and leadership we can muster. If we are to judge by the leadership we have mustered in the past, we shall not do very well. 112

Librarianship as it is practised

Interlending & Document Supply

Maurice B. Line

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 109 –113

actually want to annihilate their jobs, though some of them seem to be doing their best to accelerate the process. (“It is downhill all the way from here”, as the Gadarene swine said). If we are to make a case, energy and leadership will not be enough: to prepare it we shall need all the intellect and imagination upon which we can call; and all we do must ultimately be in the service of human beings. I may have sounded pessimistic, but I simply do not believe that librarianship does not have somewhere among its practitioners enough of the qualities of intellect, imagination, initiative – and humanity – that are needed if we are to help to shape our future. Somehow we have to find ways of bringing them out, bringing them together, and using them. We have nothing to lose hut our mental laziness, our spiritual dullness, our introspection and our inhibitions. With these ringing phrases this paper should end, and in its primal version it did. But reactions from individuals to this first version prompted a coda. Not only was there support for my views from librarians at middle and lower management levels, but I was conscious of a large reservoir of energy and enthusiasm waiting to be tapped – and waiting in vain. Is it possible that it is being held back, not deliberately but by default, by senior management? Are there perhaps some chiefs who spend most of their time and energy coping with their committees, sitting on platforms at conferences, participating in national committees of more or (usually) less value, and travelling the globe telling other countries what to do – rather than seeing it as one of their main responsibilities to develop as many of their staff as possible as fully as possible, preferably to a level better than themselves? Is the road to professional advancement seen by many as the pursuit of convention and the avoidance of heresy, so that in due course young turks turn into old mandarins – a kind of reverse miracle of turning wine into water? There is an alternative and much gloomier possibility, that while younger librarians are quite ready to criticize their seniors, they do not want to assume responsibility themselves; they diagnose but do not wish to cure, content as so many are

when confronted by huge problems to live their own lives as quietly as possible – a kind of social despair, manifested most clearly in the cynicism of people towards politics, as if politics were something entirely separate, which did not concern them at all. The world may be hard to improve, but it is easy to make it worse – and cynical inactivity contributes to making it worse. Librarianship is not politics, and information and its communication are not the world, but the same considerations apply. Either we believe in what we are doing or we do not: and if we do we should act on our beliefs.

Note 1 An excellent example of our failure is provided by a report of the Government’s Information Technology Advisory Panel, Making a business of information (HM Government Information Technology Advisory Board, 1983). This ostensibly set out to redress a former bias towards technology by focusing on information, but barely mentioned libraries. Again, the term “added value” is common currency in the information world: but precious little attention is paid to the resources to which value would be added.

Reference HM Government Information Technology Advisory Panel (1983), Making a Business of Information, HMSO, London.

Further reading Seal, A., Bryant, P. and Hall, C. (1982), Full and Short Entry Catalogues: Library Needs and Uses, University Library, Centre for Catalogue Research, Bath. University Grants Committee (1976), Capital Provision for University Libraries: Report of a Working Party, HMSO, London.

113

A lifetime’s change in LIS Maurice B. Line (Maurice Line is a retired librarian, having worked in several university libraries and the British Library, and then as a consultant for several years. He is the subject of this festschrift) Abstract Purpose – To investigate and comment on changes in LIS during a lifetime in libraries, half of it spent in senior positions. Design/methodology/approach – Narrative reminiscence. Findings – Dramatic changes have occurred in the use of technology, management and attitudes to users, but most of them were initiated by nonlibrarians. LIS needs more leaders and innovators. Originality/value – Reflections on a lifetime in librarianship by one of its leading practitioners and the subject of this festschrift. Keywords Document delivery, Interlending Paper type Viewpoint

one or two of whom now have the rank of chief officers. On the positive side, some have achieved higher rank in local government, often remaining in overall command of libraries. In the academic world, quite a few librarians have been put in charge of other services as well, usually including computing, with titles such as Head of Academic Support Services, occasionally Pro-Vice-Chancellor. This has not always worked, and some merged services have subsequently had to be separated again.

Introduction It is very unusual for the subject of a festschrift to be asked to contribute to it, but there it is. The following piece will not be about myself. In response to pleas from others, I did once start to make notes towards an autobiographical sketch, but I quickly got bored with the subject, and also it was so critical that it verged on libel. I will deal instead with some of the main changes that have occurred in my active lifetime as a librarian (1950-2004), and in all of which I have played some part. A total of 53 years have passed since my first published paper in the field. During these years I have been responsible for the consumption of much paper and probably of readers’ time. This is almost certainly the last professional paper I shall write.

Automation It is hard to overstate the impact of automation, together with telecommunications, on libraries over the last 40 years. Automation has had a major impact on almost every industry, trade and profession, but in most cases by affecting the way things are done. In our case, and that of publishers, automation has had and is having a more fundamental effect. It has not only led to changes in bibliographic control and access, including of course catalogues, and the issuing of books for loan, but also made possible or easier new activities and services. In the early days there were inevitably many mistakes and wrong turnings, not to say dead ends. I do not look back with any great pride to my involvement in the first automated acquisition system in the UK (at Newcastle upon Tyne University Library), but we did all gain valuable handson experience, and I saw our faltering steps in a wider perspective when I visited the USA two years later and was proudly shown in one or two reputedly advanced university libraries MARC tapes sitting on shelves totally unused. Among the things I do look back on with much satisfaction is the innovative catalogue research I initiated at the University of Bath in the early 1970s, a programme that after several transformations became UKOLN, which is still with us. Automation has also enabled the ready collection of statistics and hence to better control over stock, including acquisition and relegation. It has also unfortunately led to renewed attempts to do things that had hitherto failed, such as distributed document supply by means of union lists (see Remote document supply below) and cooperative acquisition schemes. I have never had much time for the latter; the logistics are problematic, and very few have shown themselves to be justified in terms of cost-effectiveness (Line, 1998), but the gut feeling of most librarians that they ought to save

General trends Libraries, like all of the public sector, have been affected by general government policies, notably privatisation – the persistent belief, in spite of experience, that the private sector can always deliver better than the public, that few services should be tax-supported, and that everything that can be charged for should be – except of course armies and armaments, as Galbraith (1996) pointed out. Most library services remain free, but they have been under severe pressure (see Management below). The threat of General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) hangs over public libraries; if they are deemed to be in competition with services the private sector could give, they might not be allowed to continue. Local government internal reorganisations have resulted in a lowering of the status and influence of public librarians, only The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-1615.htm

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 (2005) 114– 116 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615] [DOI 10.1108/02641610510602664]

114

A lifetime’s change in LIS

Interlending & Document Supply

Maurice B. Line

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 114 –116

money seems to prevail over hard reality, as so often in the history of librarianship. Since my retirement from the British Library, digitisation of text has gained pace. This affects the essence of librarianship – what we collect, how it is stored, and how it is made available. This has led to serious questions as to whether libraries are needed at all, except as museums. Academics are able to read most of what they want online, and it is possible that the “common man” (which most academics are not) will in the future have access to e-books in one form or another. Librarians have been quick to argue that libraries will indeed have an important role in the electronic age, but they can be accused of special pleading – they would say that, wouldn’t they? I confess that I am among these defenders of libraries, in which I no longer have a personal stake (Line, 1995a, 2000).

popularity of a succession of techniques such as management by objectives (MbO). Some of these proved to be rather shortlived, and several were reinventions of old wheels; but most of them contained something useful, particularly TQM. The net effect was to focus the minds of librarians on managerial issues, and, equally important, to induce parent bodies to look for managerial qualities in making appointments. LIS departments made management an increasingly prominent feature of their courses, and it appeared more and more frequently in conference programmes. A persistent element in management, though in theory rather than in practice, has been delegation and staff involvement, another subject near to my heart (Line, 1995b). Many libraries are managed quite well at the top, but also from the top; whatever the boss thinks, most staff feel at best little real engagement, and at the worst positive demotivation. If this is still true in the UK, it is doubly true in countries where authoritarian regimes have fostered a culture where orders come from the top all through the system and any argument is severely discouraged. After I retired from the British Library much of my consultancy work took place in such countries; it took two or three years to persuade staff that they could think for themselves, and longer to persuade the boss to allow them to do so; it was always very difficult to break long-established habits, and in one or two cases I left an enthusiastic and motivated staff under a boss who was simply unable to change.

Focus on users This has been an issue close to my heart ever since I worked under a librarian whose main purpose in life seemed to be the frustration of users (as well as the destruction of the morale of staff). She achieved remarkable success in both. “How do you build libraries and information systems around people?” has been a persistent element in my thinking, and led directly to the studies I headed in the 1960s and 1970s into information requirements in the social sciences and the subsequent studies on the design of information systems geared to them (Line, 1974, 1980). These studies are incidentally now badly out of date, and need redoing. My pleas for more user-orientated systems seem to have struck a chord, especially with younger librarians, and there was a succession of user studies as well as gradual changes in practice. Monumental buildings gave way to much more friendly ones, procedures became simpler, and, perhaps most importantly, staff shed the custodian mentality and assumed a helpful one. I think I am right in saying that at Southampton University Library in the early 1960s we had the first fullblown Readers’ Service headed by a senior member of staff (me), though doubtless similar services had been around earlier. Concern with users can lead in public libraries to efforts to satisfy popular demand for light fiction and a general “dumbing down” of stock, including the disposal of older “classics”. This seems a strange policy at a time when the importance of lifelong learning is constantly thrust on us.

Remote document supply My last 17 years as an employee (1971-1988) were spent with the national document supply service, which has also been transformed, probably more after my time than during it as the scanning and electronic transmission of documents have become more economic – and permissible. Whereas most of the serial publications in demand are in digital form, this applies to only a minority of books, and in any case we are not as yet near a position where it can be held in this form by a public body and supplied automatically and immediately. Meanwhile, union lists have been given a new lease of life by the ease of their construction; librarians continue to cling to the belief that, with all those books lying in all those libraries, there must somehow be a more economic and efficient alternative to a centralised service. The real competition, for serials at any rate, comes from direct access to material from databases held by publishers or intermediaries. Nevertheless, I see the future in the UK as one in which the British Library works with publishers in giving a centralised service that is more economic for the publishers and more convenient to users than a service based on supply from numerous individual publishers.

Management The management of libraries has improved immeasurably since 1947 (Line, 1994). Academic libraries used to be headed by scholars manque´s – a collection consisting mostly of pseudo-academics, but sprinkled with the odd real academic whom the university did not quite know what to do with. Very few of them thought of themselves as managers; they would probably have felt insulted if anyone had called them that. The change began to occur partly because of a general rise of interest in management, accompanied by a flood of writings on the subject, most of them eminently forgettable and forgotten; but mainly, I think, because of increasing pressures to show value for money from parent bodies and ultimately the government. This necessarily led to an interest in costing and performance measurement management, and to the

Deprofessionalisation The content of LIS education and practice has changed radically. Cat and class have been relegated as other means of bibliographic access, most of them enabled or enhanced by automation and originating from outside the profession, have taken over on grounds of cost and ease of implementation. In their place have come skills in management (see above), computing, marketing and so on – which do not require an LIS qualification. At the same time, much work has been shown to be carried out by too high a grade of staff; I have 115

A lifetime’s change in LIS

Interlending & Document Supply

Maurice B. Line

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 114 –116

seen numerous examples of work hitherto deemed “professional” performed more than adequately by totally unqualified staff. Much of the professional mystique of LIS has been shown up as mystification as highly competent users of information have proved to be non-users of libraries, and staff with no LIS background or training have taken up senior posts with success.

of some German belly-dancers. I selfishly elected to dance with the one with the least belly and the best dancing. And in Kecskeme´t in Hungary a few years later, where I went with a broken ankle sustained four weeks earlier, I danced a csa´rdas on one leg (I had had quite a lot of practice – but do not try it at home, or anywhere else). Both of these occasions are recorded on videotape, and can be viewed on payment of a large sum.

Envoi I began my library career as a bookman (I was responsible for proposing the creation of the Rare Books Group of the LA), became a systems man, and finally a people man. This progression, which I am sure has been experienced by many others, reflects the changes in LIS during my time – not that we do not still need bookmen and, even more, systems men (and women). The long overdue merger of the Library Association with the Institute of Information Scientists has finally taken place, in spite of the fears of the “scientists” that their image might suffer. I would guess that the image of librarians has benefited from the advent of computers; perhaps the mystique of librarianship is being replaced by that of computer technology. While the future of academic libraries seems fairly safe, that of public libraries is increasingly questioned, especially as book issues have fallen in the last decade. To some extent this decline has been compensated for by increased loans of videotapes and dvds, and even more by the use of computers. But the impression remains that public libraries are still searching around for a role. As for national libraries, there are signs that some are beginning to discover what they are for. About 30 years ago I gave a paper in Australia in which I castigated my own profession before a somewhat bemused audience (Line, 1988). Things have improved since then, but rather less than I had hoped. We have partly abandoned the jargon of professional librarianship, only to adopt that of trendy management (some excellent examples of gobbledygook can be found in (Wheen, 2004). Too many initiatives come from outside the field; we seem to be quite good at developing but not at inventing. When we have invented, it has tended to be along conventional lines; an example is PRECIS, conceptually a brilliant indexing scheme, but practically unusable because of its cost. We need more questioning of theory and practice, more clear thinking and more radical thinking. (I have set out my own agenda for change briefly elsewhere (Line, 2004). We need a profession where the mediocre are not regarded as outstanding. We need some Martin Luthers, Tom Paines and Charles Darwins.

References Galbraith, J. (1996), The Good Society: The Humane Agenda, Sinclair-Stevenson, London. Line, M.B. (1974), “Information requirements in the social sciences, in: access to the literature of the social sciences and humanities”, Proceedings of the Conference, New York City, 5-6 April 1972, Queens College Press, New York, NY, pp. 146-58. Line, M.B. (1980), “Secondary services in the social sciences: the need for improvement and the role of libraries”, Behavioral and Social Sciences Librarian, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 263-73. Line, M.B. (1988), “Librarianship as it is practised: a failure of intellect, imagination and initiative”, in Line, M. (Ed.), A Little Off Line: Irreverent Essays by Maurice Line, His Friends and Colleagues, ELM Publications, Kings Ripton, pp. 39-50. Line, M.B. (1994), “Libraries and their management”, in Vickery, B.C. (Ed.), Fifty Years of Information Progress: A Journal of Documentation Review, Aslib, London, pp. 189-223. Line, M.B. (1995a), “The road through chaos: the future role of the university library in the creation of knowledge”, Serving the Scholarly Community: Essays on Tradition and Change in Research Libraries, presented to Thomas Tottie on 3 July 1995, University Library, Uppsala, pp. 13-22. Line, M.B. (1995b), “The management of library staff – trends and reflections”, in Biswas, S.C. (Ed.), Global Trends in Library and Information Science, Gyan Publishing House, New Delhi, pp. 383-94. Line, M.B. (1998), “Cooperation: not the only or always the best solution”, in Lee, S.A. (Ed.), The New Library Legacy: Essays in Honor of Richard De Gennaro, K.G. Saur, Mu¨nchen, pp. 44-58. Line, M.B. (2000), “The lifelong learner and the future library”, New Review of Libraries and Lifelong Learning, Vol. 1, pp. 65-80. Line, M.B. (2004), “An agenda for overdue change”, in Hilgemann, K. and Boekhorst, P. (Eds), Die effektive Bibliothek:Roswitha Poll zum 65, K.G. Saur, Geburtstag, Mu¨nchen, pp. 47-53. Wheen, F. (2004), How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World: A Short History of Modern Delusions, Harper Perennial, London.

Absolutely the last word I will close by breaking my promise at the beginning and mentioning my two most significant contributions to international librarianship. At an Essen International Symposium some 12 years ago, the entertainment consisted

116

(edited, with Joyce Line) National Libraries 3: A Selection of Articles on National Libraries, 1986-1994, Aslib, London, 1995, vii þ 303 pp. (edited) Journal of Documentation, 56(4), 2000, Special issue in honour of A.J. (Jack) Meadows. (edited) Interlending and Document Supply, 29(2), 2001, Issue dedicated to Dr David Wood.

Publications of Maurice B. Line

1. Books A Bibliography of Russian Literature in English Translation to 1900 (excluding periodicals), Library Association, London, 1963. 74 pp. Reprinted: Rowman & Littlefield, Totowa, NJ; Methuen, London, 1972. Library Surveys: An Introduction to their Use, Planning, Procedure and Presentation, Clive Bingley, London, 1967, 146 pp. rev. ed., 1969, 151 pp. 2nd ed., revised by Sue Stone, 1982, 162 pp. (edited, with K.P. Barr). Essays on Information and Libraries: Festschrift for Donald Urquhart, Bingley, London; Linnet Books, Hamden, CN, 1975, 211 pp. (edited, with Joyce Line). National Libraries, Aslib, London, 1979, 328 pp. (Aslib Reader Series, 1). Guidelines for National Planning for the Availability of Publications, (jointly with S.C.J. Vickers). IFLA International Office for UAP, Wetherby, 1983, iv þ 44 pp. Universal Availability of Publications (UAP): A Programme to Improve the National and International Provision and Supply of Publications (jointly with S. Vickers), K.G. Saur, Mu¨nchen, etc., 1983, 139 pp. (IFLA Publications, 25). Translated into Croatian: Univerzalna Dostupnoist Publikacija (UAP), Hrvatsko bibliotekarsto drustvo, Zagreb, 1989. Improving the Availability of Publications: A Comparative Assessment of Model National Systems (jointly with S. Vickers), IFLA International Programme for UAP, Wetherby, 1984, xvi þ 84 pp. (edited). The World of Books and Information: Essays in Honour of Lord Dainton, British Library, London, 1987, viii þ 214 pp. (edited, with Joyce Line) National Libraries 2: 1977-1985, Aslib, London, 1987, x, 398 pp. (Aslib Reader Series, 6). The Impact of New Technology on Document Availability and Access (jointly with Marie-France Plassard), IFLA Intemational Programme for UAP, Wetherby, 1988, vii þ 83 pp. Lines of Thought: Selected Papers of Maurice B. Line, edited by L.J. Anthony, Clive Bingley, London, 1988, xvi, 338 pp. Line on Interlending: Selected Papers on Interlending and Document Supply, edited by Graham P. Cornish, British Library Document Supply Centre, Boston Spa, 1988, iv þ 272 pp. A Little Off Line: Irreverent Essays by Maurice Line, His Friends and Colleagues, ELM Publications, Kings Repton, 1988, x þ 70 pp. (edited) Academic Library Management. Edited Papers of a British Council Sponsored Course, 15-17 January 1989, Birmingham, Library Association, London, 1990, xii þ 263 pp. The Changing Role of Nordic Academic, Research and Special Libraries, Nordinfo, Esbo, 1992, 139 pp. (Nordinfo publikation 22). Translated into Slovene: Vloga nordijskih akademskih, raziskovalnih in specialnih knjiznic na prelomnici. Maribor: IZUM, 1995, 142 pp. (Biblioteka Globalna Informacijska Druzba, 1).

2. Papers A classified catalogue of music scores: some problems, Library Association Record, 54(11), November 1952, 362-364. The librarian and the Citizens’ Advice Bureau, Library World, 60(708), June 1959, 263-264. Blue dye in English paper, 1780-1830, Notes & Queries, n.s.6(7), July/August 1959, 240-252. A classification for music scores on historical principles, Libri, 12(4), 1963, 352-363. Some moral problems of psychiatry, Case Conference, 10(2), June 1963, 43-47. Student attitudes to the university library: a survey at Southampton University, Journal of Documentation, 19(3), September 1963, 100-117. Libraries for expanding universities, Universities Quarterly, 19(l), December 1964, 41-55. Library provision in British universities: present inadequacies and future needs, Lucknow Librarian, 3(4), March 1965, 113-118. Ends and means – librarianship as a social science, Library World, 66(779), May 1965, 270-275. School and university: an experiment in closer relations (jointly with J.B. Hunt), Times Educational Supplement, no. 2617, 16 July 1965, 117. Staffing university libraries, British Universities Annual, 1965, 93-99. Research libraries, Education, 126(3276), 5 November 1965, 940-945. Automation of acquisition records and routine in the University Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, Program, No. 2, June 1966, 1-4. College of education libraries – self-sufficiency or dependence, C.I.S.E. Newsletter, no.13, June 1966, 7-9. Student attitudes to the university library: a second survey at Southampton University (assisted by M. Tidmarsh), Journal of Documentation, 22(2), June 1966, 123-135. University libraries and the information needs of the researcher, I: a provider’s view, Aslib Proceedings, 18(7), July 1966, 178-184. Libraries in institutions of higher education: independence versus interdependence, Library Association Record, 69(9), September 1966, 178-184. Report by the Southampton University Library on a survey into student attitudes to the library carried out in May, 1965, in: University Grants Committee, Report of the Committee on Libraries, HMSO, London, 1967, Appendix 7, 243-259. (A fuller version of No. 15.) New deal for university libraries, in Association of Assistant Librarians, South Eastern Division, Libraries in Education, AAL, London, 1967, 12-29. Why libraries differ – and need they? (jointly with J.W. Jolliffe and F. Robinson), in Cox, N.S.M. and Grose, M.W. (Eds), Organization and Handling of Bibliographic Records by Computer, Oriel Press, Newcastle, 1967, 62-68. On the construction and care of white elephants: some fundamental questions concerning the catalogue (jointly

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 [2005] 117–130 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615]

117

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Information services in a technological university: plans and prospects, Information Scientist, 5(2), June 1971, 77-88. The information uses and needs of social scientists: an overview of INFROSS, Aslib Proceedings, 23(8), August 1971, 412-434. Or ask the librarian?, New Society, No.475, 4 November 1971, 11-13. Information and the social scientist, SSRC Newsletter, No.13, November 1971, 11-13. Cataloguing and classification at Bath University Library: on the track of white elephants and golden retrievers (jointly with Philip Bryant), Library Association Record, 73(12), December 1971, 225-227. The developing national library network in Great Britain, Library Resources and Technical Services, 16(l), Winter 1972, 61-73. Towards a better national lending system: planning the British Library’s lending services, ATCL Newsletter, No.12, April 1972, 4-5. Interlibrary loan requests refused by libraries: the scope for improvement, NCL Newsletter, No.12, April 1972, 8-9. Interlibrary lending in the social sciences: a note, Aslib Proceedings, 24(8), August 1972, 445-448. Planning the British Library’s lending services: progress report, NCL Newsletter, No.13, October 1972, 6-8. The British Library and the public library in the next few years: a personal view, in Library Association, Proceedings of the Public Libraries Conference, Brighton, 1972, Library Association, London, 1952, 15-24. Automation and the British Library, Library Association Record, 74(l 1), November 1972, 213-215. British Library: kansalliskirjastoja¨rjestelma¨n kehitys Isossa Britanniassa [The British Library: the development of the national library system in Great Britain], Kirjastolehti, 1972 (11) 392-396. The national organization of the acquisition of foreign books – a personal view, in Bloomfield, B.C. (Ed.) Acquisition and Provision of Foreign Books by National and University Libraries in the United Kingdom, Mansell, London, 1972, 201-211. The ability of a university library to provide books wanted by researchers, Journal of Librarianship, 5(l), January 1973, 37-51. Sources of citations and references for analysis purposes: a comparative assessment (jointly with J.M. Brittain), Journal of Documentation, 29(l), March 1973, 72-80. Planning the British Library’s lending services: further progress, NCL Newsletter, No.14, March 1973, 4-5. Availability of music scores requested on interlibrary loan from the NCL and Central Music Library (jointly with Karen Isaksen), NCL Newsletter, No.14, March 1973, 8-12. Direct lending between libraries: results of an NCL pilot sample survey (jointly with J.H. Petrie), NLL Review, 2(6), April 1973, 177-181. Information services in social welfare, New Library World, 74(874), April 1973, 79-80. Social science material at the National Central Library, SSRC Newsletter, No. 18, March 1973, 25. ADP and the British Library, Catalogue & Index, No.29, Spring 1973, 1, 7-9. A personalized service to social science researchers: the Experimental Information Service in the Social Sciences

with M.W. Grose), Library Association Record, 70(l), January 1968, 2-5. The impact of [library] research on libraries and their parent institutions, in Society for Research in Higher Education, Research into Library Services in Higher Education, SHRE, London, 1968, 27-31. Social scientists’ information, SSRC Newsletter, No.3, May 1968, 2-5. The functions of the university library, in Saunders, W.L. (Ed.) University and Research Library Studies, Pergamon, Oxford, 1968, 148-158. The Parry report and its impact on universities, British Universities Annual, 1968, 105-114. The social scientist and his information needs, in Library Association. Reference, Special and Information Section, Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference and Study Group, Durham, April 19th-22nd, 1968, RSI Section, London, 1968, 10-18. The university library: functions and opportunities, Library Review, 21(7), Autumn 1968, 345-348. Information requirements in the social sciences: some preliminary considerations, Journal of Librarianship, 1(1), January 1969, 1-19. White elephants revisited, Catalogue & Index, No. 13, January 1969, 4-6. Some notes on book stealing, Library Association Record, 71(4), April 1969, 115-116. How golden is your retriever? Thoughts on library classification (jointly with Philip Bryant), Library Association Record, 71(5), May 1969, 115-116. Information services in university libraries, Journal of Librarianship, 1(4), October 1969, 211-224. The cost of classification: a note, Catalogue & Index, No. 16, October 1969, 4. A note on MARC, Program, 3(3/4), November 1969, 104-105. The “half-life” of periodical literature: apparent and real obsolescence, Journal of Documentation, 26(l), March 1970, 104-105. Information services in academic libraries. L4TUL Proceedings, 5(l), May 1970, 28-34. Also printed (with discussion) in Lincoln, C. M. (Ed.) International Association of Technological University Libraries, Educating the Library User. Proceedings of the Fourth Meeting, IATUL, Loughborough, 1970, B1-B10. On the design of information systems for human beings, Aslib Proceedings, 22(7), July 1970, 320-335. Reprinted in Katz, B. and Schwartz, J.J. (Eds) Library Lit. – the Best of 1970, Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ, 1971, 214-235. Also in Ward, P. Layzell (Ed.) The Professional Development of the Librarian and Information Worker, Aslib, London, 1980, 110-124. Translated into Portuguese: Revista da Escola de Biblioteconomia da Universidade Federal de Minas, Gerais, 7(l), March 1978, 27-58. Innovation resulting from research and development in the information field, 2: the user’s view, Aslib Proceedings, 22(l 1), November 1970, 559-569. Automation and the national libraries, Times Literary Supplement, No. 3594, 15 January 1971, 58. Primary materials in the social sciences: conclusions, Aslib Proceedings, 23(4), April 1971, 203-206.

118

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Reprinted in Progress in Documentation: Some Themes and Topics, Ashb, London, 1981, 49-116. Changes in the use of sociological articles with time: a comparison of diachronous and synchronous data (jointly with Brenda Carter), BLL Review, 2(4), October 1974, 125-130. The British Library and the future of interlibrary lending, An Leabharlann, n.s. 3(3), October 1974, 5-16. Reprinted (revised) in: BLL Review, 3(2), April 1975, 37-43. Translated into Japanese: Nihon Gakujutsu Shink-o-Kai [Japanese Scientific Monthly] , 29(6), 1976, 428-435. Access to resources through the British Library Lending Division, Aslib Proceedings, 27(l), January 1975, 8-15. Optimisation of library expenditure on biochemical journals, Journal of Documentation, 31(l), March 1975, 36-37. The British Library and the provision of music on interlibrary loan, Brio, 12(l), Spring 1975, 1-6. Demystification in librarianship and information science, in Barr, Keith and Line, Maurice (Eds) Essays on Information and Libraries. Festschrift for Donald Urquhart, Bingley, London; Linnet Books, Hamden, CT, 1975, 105-116. BLLD progress report 1974/75, BLL Review, 3(3), July 1975, 65-73. The British Library Lending Division and western Europe, LIBER Bulletin, No. 5/6, 1974, 65-73. Practical interpretation of citation and library use studies (jointly with Alexander Sandison), College and Research Libraries, 36(5), September 1975, 393-396. Provision for the humanities by the BLLD (jointly with A. Allardyce, G. Cornish and J.S. Davey) BLL Review, 3(4), October 1975, 89-94. The effect of a large-scale photocopying service on journal scales (jointly with D.N. Wood), Journal of Documentation, 31(4), December 1975, 234-245. Reprinted in: Bush, G.P. and Dreyfuss, R.H. (Eds) Technology and Copyright, Lomond Books, Mt. Airy, MD, 1979, 375-386. National library planning in South Africa – some notes, South African Libraries, 43(2), October 1975, 43-45. The prospect before us, School Librarian, 24(l), March 1976, 5-13. Alternatives to conventional publication and their implications for libraries (jointly with Bernard Williams), Aslib Proceedings, 28(3), March 1976, 109-115. Translated into Japanese: Yakugashu Toshokan, 22(2), 1977, 60-65. The functions of an IFLA Office for International Lending, IFL4 Journal, 2(l), 1976, 34-38. The size, growth and composition of social science literature (jointly with Stephen Roberts), International Social Science Journal, 28(l), 1976, 122-159. The principles of cost recovery for international loans, IFLA Journal, 2(2), 1976, 81-86. BLLD progress report 1975/76, BLL Review, 4(3), July 1976, 63-70. Serving users in hard times, New Library World, 77(915), September 1976, 174-176. Translated into Dutch: Bibliotheek en Samenleeving, 5(l1), December 1977, 320-322.

at the University of Bath (jointly with Susan M. Evans), Journal of Librarianship, 5(3), July 1973, 214-232. Information needs of the social sciences, Inspel, 8(2), April 1973, 29-39. Also in International Federation for Documentation, Participation of Small and Less Developed Countries in World-wide Documentation Activities and Information Exchange, National Committee for FID, Budapest, 1973, 123-135. Information and the research process, SSRC Newsletter, No. 20, October 1973, 18-19. Local acquisition policies in a national context, in Jeffreys, A.E. (Ed.) The Art of the Librarian, Oriel Press, Newcastle upon Tyne, 1973, 1-13. Summing up: the information service in practice (47th Aslib Annual Conference), Aslib Proceedings, 26(l), January 1974, 47-53. [under pseudonym “Agnew Broome”) The search for the ideal. BLL Review, 2(l), January 1974, 47-53. Translated into German: Nachrichten fu¨r Dokumentation, 25(6), 1974, 253-255. The final year of the NCL, BLL Review, 2(l), January 1974, 3-4. National library planning in the United Kingdom – the British Library, Australian Library Journal, 23(l), February 1974, 5-15. Also printed in Library Association of Australia, Outpost: Australian librarianship ’73. Proceedings of the 17th Biennial Conference held in Perth, August 1973, Westbooks, Perth & Sydney, 1974, 47-60. Draft definitions: information and library needs, wants, demands and uses, Aslib Proceedings, 26(2), February 1974, 87. Academic libraries in the United Kingdom in the 1970s: reflections on current trends, Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 5(l), March 1974, 1-10. Interlibrary lending statistics: their collection and use (jointly with S.J. Ede) BLL Review, 2(2), April 1974, 44-50. Inclusion of materials in national bibliographies, Libri, 24(l), 1974, 78-86. Libraries in higher education – cooperation and comparative standards, in Wood, Jean ( Ed.) College of Education Libraries and Higher Education, Association of Teachers in Colleges and Departments of Education, 1974, 23-47. Does physics literature obsolesce? A study of variation of citation frequency with time for individual journal articles in physics, BLL Review, 2(3), July 1974, 84-91. Information requirements in the social sciences in Access to the Literature of the Social Sciences and Humanities. Proceedings of the Conference, New York City, April 5th and 6th, 1972, Queens College Press, New York, 1974, 146-158. Concluding considerations, in: Access to the Literature of the Social Sciences and Humanities, 1974, 183-186. Information services in university libraries: introductory talk, in Ayres, F.H. and Hall, J. (Eds) Information Services in University Libraries, SCONUL, London, 1974, 1-5. The case for information officers, in Lubans, J. (Ed.) Educating the Library User, Bowker, New York and London, 1974, 383-391. “Obsolescence” and changes in the use of literature with time (jointly with A. Sandison), Journal of Documentation, 30(3), September 1974, 283-350. 119

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

UAP: the way ahead, Focus on International and Comparative Librarianship, 9(3), 1978, 29-30. Universal Availability of Publications: progress and development, IFLA Journal, 4(4), 1978, 345-346. Le roˆle international de la British Library Lending Division. Revue de l’AUPELF, 16(2), November 1978, 126-148. National interlending systems: existing systems and possible models, Interlending Review, 7(2), April 1979, 42-46. Universal availability of publications, in Burnett D. and Cumming E.E., (Eds), Library Association. International and Comparative Librarianship Group, International Library and Information Programmes. Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary Conference, Loughborough, 1977, Library Association, London, 1979, 36-57. Document supply: an essential support to science and technology, Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research (New Delhi, 38(2), February 1979, 53-57. Rank lists based on citations and library uses as indicators of journal usage in individual libraries, Collection Management, 2(4), Winter 1978, 313-316. Recent developments in international lending, LIBER Bulletin, No.12, 1978, 6-25. The psychopathology of uneconomics, Library Trends, 28(1), Summer 1979, 107-119. Reprinted in: Roberts, S.A. (Ed.) Costing and the Economics of Library and Information Services, Aslib, London, 1984, 324-336. Universal availability of publications and developing countries, in Vervliet, H.D. (Ed.) Resource Sharing of Libraries in Developing Countries. Proceedings of the 1977 IFLA/UNESCO Pre-session Seminar for Librarians from Developing Countries, Antwerp University, 1977, K.G. Saur, Mu¨nchen etc., 1979, 162-169. The practical impact of UAP, Unesco Journal of Information Science, Librarianship and Archive Administration, 1(2), April-June 1979, 76-78. UAP and the United Kingdom, Unesco Journal of Information Science, Librarianship and Archive Administration, 1(2), April/June 1979, 99-101. Trends in primary publication, and the implications for libraries, in Seminario sobre o Planejamento de Redes Nacionais de Informaca˜o e Documentaca˜o, Brasilia, 1979, British Council, Rio de Janeiro, 1979, 19-37. Access to documents, in Seminario sobre o Planejamento de Redes Nacionais de Informaca˜o e Documentaca˚o, Brasilia, 1979, British Council, Rio de Janeiro, 1979, 19-37. Criteria for selecting material for a central lending stock, Interlending Review, 7(4), October 1979, 126-129.

The British Library Lending Division, in Saunders, W.L. (Ed.) British Librarianship Today, Library Association, London, 1976, 86-108. Primary and secondary sources, in Anthony, L.J. (Ed.) Information for the ’80s. Proceedings of an Aslib Seminar for Information Planners and Industry, May 1976, Aslib, London, 1976, 43-53. International activities of the British Library Lending Division (jointly with J.S. Davey), State Librarian, 25(l), March 1977, 2-3. On the irrelevance of citation analyses to practical librarianship, in EURIM II: A European Conference on the Application of Research in Information Services and Libraries, 23-25 March 1976, Aslib, London, 1977, 51-56. Universal availability of publications, Unesco Bulletin for Libraries, 31(3), May/June 1977, 142-151. Dansk biblioteksvaesen – nogle uformelle betragtninger [The Danish library scene – some informal observations], Bogens Verden, 59(4), 1977, 139-143. National libraries, in British Librarianship and Information Science 1971-1975, Library Association, London, 1977, 132-145. The repository function of the British Library Lending Division (jointly with A. Allardyce), in Blackwood, J.W. (Ed.) The Future of Library Collections. Proceedings of a Seminar held by the Management Research Unit, University of Technology, Loughborough, 1977. (LMRU Report 7), University, Loughbrough, 1977, 64-69. Principles of international lending and photocopying, International Library Review, 9(4), October 1977, 369-379. Citation analyses: a note, International Library Review, 9(4), October 1977, 429. The ability of the British Library Lending Division to supply British publications on loan to other countries: report of a survey conducted in 1977 (jointly with Alan Seal), BLL Review, 6(2), October 1977, 119-126. Interlibrary lending in the United Kingdom: summary report of a national survey conducted in February 1977 (jointly with Robert J. Steemson) Interlending Review, 6(2), April 1978, 31-38. Principles of national interlending systems (jointly with Stephen Vickers) Interiending Review, 6(2), April 1978, 50-53. Translated into Portuguese: Revista da Escola de Biblioteconomia da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 10(l), March 1991, 13-26. Document access, British and worldwide, in Engelstad, K. and Roed, J.E. (Eds) Interlibrary Lending – the Challenge of Cooperation. Lectures and Discussions held at the Conference on Inter-library Lending, Lysebu, Oslo, August 1977 (Scandiaplanen, Skriftserie, 4), Hovedkomiteen for Scandiaptanen, Oslo, 1978, 23-37. UAP and interlibrary lending, IFL4 Journal, 4(2), 1978, 118121. Policy, management and communications at the British Library Lending Division, Interlending Review, 6(4), October 1978, 118-124. Policy, management and communications at the British Lending Division, Interlending Review, 6(4), October 1978, 118-124. Barriers on the road to universal availability of publications, Library Association Record, 80(11), November 1978, 570-571.

[Interlibrary

Britain]. , No. 74, 1979, 34-41. Also (in English) in Interlending Review, 7(4), April 1979, Supplement: Anglo-Soviet Conference on Library Co-operation, 3-8 April 1978. [Proceedings] [microfiche]. The influence of sources used on the results of citation analyses, Journal of Documentation, 35(4), December 1979, 265-284. The role of national libraries: a reassessment, Libri, 30(l), 1980, 1-16. Reprinted in Line, MB and Line, J. (Eds) National libraries 2. Aslib, London, 1987, 5-18. 120

lending

in

Great

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Is cooperation a good thing?, in Fja¨llbrant, N. (Ed.), International Association of Technological Libraries, Library Cooperation: Trends, Possibilities and Conditions. Proceedings of the 8th Meeting, IATUL, Go¨teborg, 1980, 5-14. Translated into German: Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis, 5(2), 1981, 160-165. Storage and deposit libraries, in Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, Marcel Dekker, New York and Basel, Vol. 29, 1980, 101-133. Universele beschikbaarheid van publikaties – een IFLAproject, Open, 12(7/8), July/August 1980, 356-361. Visit to China, Focus on International and Comparative Librarianship, 11(2), June 1980, 15-17. Universal availability of publications and the publisher and bookseller, Bookseller, No. 3985, 16 August 1980, 668-670. Some questions concerning the unprinted word, in Hills, Philip (Ed.) The Future of the Printed Word, Pinter, London, 1980, 27-35. Planning interlending systems for developing countries, I: a view from a developed country (jointly with E.S. Smith), Interlending Review, 8(4), October 1980, 111-114. Reprinted in Inspel, 16(2), 1982, 69-78. The British Library Lending Division, Journal of Information Science, 2(3/4), October 1980, 173-182. Concluding observations, in Stone, Sue (Ed.) Humanities Information Research. Proceedings of a Seminar, Sheffield 1980. (CRUS Occasional Paper 4; BLR&D Report 5588). Sheffield: Sheffield University, Centre for Research on User Studies, 1980, 91-96. Innovation and external factors affecting producers and users, in EURIM IV – a Europe Conference on Innovation in Primary Publication: Impact on Producers and Users, 23-26 March 1980, Aslib, London, 1980, 57-59. UAP and patterns of interlending, in Rickards J.M. and Cayless C.F. (Eds), Interlending in the 80’s. Proceedings of a National Conference at the University of Queensland, August, 1980, Library Association of Australia, Brisbane. 1980, 1-16. A national lending library for Australia, in Rickards J.M. and Cayless C.F. (Eds), Interlending in the 80’s. Proceedings of a National Conference at the University of Queensland, August, 1980, Library Association of Australia, Brisbane, 1980, 201-207. Ignoring the user: how, when and why, in The Nationwide Provision and Use of Information. Aslib-IIS-LA Joint Conference, 5-9 September 1980, Sheffield, Library Association, London, 1981, 80-88. Reprinted in: Katz, B. (Ed.). Library Lit 13 – The Best of 1982, Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ and London, 1983, 26-36. Translated into German: DFW Dokumentation, 30(2/3), March/September 1982, 45-49. The structure of social science literature as shown by a largescale citation analysis, Social Science Information Studies, 1(2), January 1981, 67-87. Secondary services in the social sciences: the need for improvement and the role of libraries, Behavioral and Social Sciences Librarian, 1(4), Summer 1980, 263-273. Reprinted in: Katz, B. and Weibel, K. (Eds). Library Lit – The Best of 1981, Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ and London, 1982, 136-146.

Designing secondary services in the social sciences: reflections on a research project, Inspel, 15(2), 1981, 85-95. Planning interlending systems for developing countries, VII: a summary and response, Interlending Review, 9(3), July 1981, 93-97. Access to documents: cooperation versus centralization, in White, A.G.D. and Taylor, A.F. (Eds), Scottish Library Association, Peebles ’81. Proceedings of the 67th Annual Conference, 26-28 May 1981: “Themes for the Times”, SLA, Glasgow, 1981, 25-36, 60. The paperless society – Do we want it? Do we need it?, Technicalities, 1(12), November 1981, 2-3. The British Library Lending Division, RQ, 21 (1), Fall 1981, 39-40. Libraries and information services is a post-technological society, Journal of Library Automation, 14(4), December 1981, 252-267. Redesigning information packages for electronic transmission, in Jones, K.P. and Taylor, H. (Eds) The Design of Information Systems for Human Beings. Informatics 6 – Proceedings of a Conference Held by the Aslib Informatics Group, Oxford, 24 September 1981, Aslib, London, 1981, 29-39. Reprinted in a revised version as: Redesigning journal articles for on-line viewing, in Hills, P. (Ed.) Trends in Information Transfer, Pinter, London, 1982, 31-46. The need for improved worldwide availability of publications, Unesco Journal of Information Science, Librarianship and Archive Administration, 4(l), January-March 1982, 8-17, 75. Core collections of journals for interlending purposes (jointly with Brian Kefford), Interlending Review, 10(2), April 1982, 35-43. The national supply of serials – centralization versus decentralization, Serials Review, 8(l), Spring 1982, 83-85. The production and dissemination of information: some general observations, in Katzen, M. (Ed.) Multi-media Publications, Pinter, London, 1982, 138-146. Reprinted as: How electronic technology can help communications, InterMedia, 10(4/5), July/September 1982, 14-17. Problems and uses of bibliometric studies, Tidskrift fo¨r Dokumentation, 38(2), 1982, 25-33. UAP: stage one completed, Bookseller, No. 4003, 11 September 1982, 1040-1042. Universal availability of publications: users before systems (jointly with Stephen Vickers), Library Association Record, 84(10), October 1982, 357-358. The availability of old, rare and precious books: problems and solutions, Interlending Review, 10(4), October 1982, 119-124. IFLA’s programme of UAP – Universal Availability of Publications (jointly with Stephen Vickers), International Forum on Information and Documentation, 7(3), July 1982, 8-9. The British Library Lending Division as a central document supplier, Inspel, 16(4), 1982, 209-224. Impressions of the Chinese library and information scene (jointly with E. S. Smith) [in Chinese], Keh Qingbao Gongzuo, 1981, (10), 25-26. 121

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Problems in the availability of some social science publications, Interlending and Document Supply, 11(1), January 1983, 3-6. Cooperative purchase and storage of library materials, in Stoakley, R. (Ed.) After Selection. Papers Presented at a Course Organized by the South-Western Branch of the Library Association on the Subject of Stock Control and Maintenance, Ilminster, Somerset, 8-10 November 1981, South-Western Branch, Bridgwater: L, 1983, 65-72. Universal Availability of Publications (UAP) an introduction, Scandinavian Public Library Quarterly, 15(4), 1982, 78-79. Document delivery, now and in the future, Aslib Proceedings, 35(4), April 1983, 167-176. Access to publications, including interlibrary loan, in Parker, J.S. (Ed.) Aspects of Library Development, Mansell, London, 1983, 74-92. The supply of academic publications to libraries, in Dudley, E. (Ed.) The Development of National Library and Information Services. Papers Given at the First Library Association International Workshop, London 1981, Library Association, London, 1983, 187-202. Requirements for library and information work and the role of library education, Education for Information, 1(1), March 1983, 25-37. Universal availability of publications, Journal of Academic Librarianship, 9(2), May 1983, 73. National library and information planning, International Library Review, 15(3), July 1983, 227-243. Also in: Arab Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 2(1), January 1982, 11-31 Reprinted in: Katz, Bill (Ed.) Library Lit – the Best of 1983, Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ and London, 1984, 43-60. Researching into the availability of publications, Library Quarterly, 53(3), July 1983, 292-306. Some implications for publishing of electronic document storage and supply, in Fja¨llbrant N. (Ed.), International Association of Technological University Libraries, The Future of Serials: Publication, Automation and Management. Proceedings of the Tenth Meeting of IATUL, Essen, 1983, IATUL, Go¨teborg, 1984, 219-230. Reprinted in: Communication, Technology, Impact, 5(6), September 1983, 1-7. Translated into French: Bulletin des Bibliothe`ques de France, 29(5), September/October 1984, 370-375. Libraries in Saudi Arabia: some reflections, International Library Review, 15(4), October 1983, 365-373. The future of libraries in the information transfer chain, Information Services and Use, 3(3), Summer 1983, 129-140. Also in Colwell, R.R. (Ed.), Information for the Advancement of Science: Proceedings of a Building Dedication Symposium, BioSciences Information Service, Philadelphia, October 20, 1982. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1983, 11-22. Performance assessment at national level, in Blagden, J. (Ed.), Do We Really Need Libraries? Proceedings of the First Joint Library Association Cranfield Institute of Technology Conference on Performance Assessment, Cranfield Press, Cranfield, 1983, 25-45. Thoughts of a non-user, non-educator, in Fox, P. and Malley, I. (Eds), International Conference on User

Education, 3rd [1982], Proceedings, INFUSE Publications, Loughborough, 1983, 2-9. Some possible future effects of information technology, IFLA Journal, 10(l), 1984, 57-62. Translated into French: Bulletin d’Informations de l’Association des Bibiothe´caires Francais, (122), 1er trimestre 1984, 7-9. Seminar on interlibrary lending in Western Europe: a report (jointly with B. Kefford), Interlending and Document Supply, 12(2), April 1984, 35-41. National access in an international context, in Library Association, Conference, Torquay, 1983, Access to Published Information, Library Association, London, 1984, 1-9. Resource sharing: the present situation and the likely effect of electronic technology, in Fja¨ llbrant, N. (Ed.), International Association of Technological Libraries, The Future of Serials: Publication, Automation and Management. Proceedings of the Tenth Meeting of IATUL, Essen, 1983, IATUL, Go¨teborg, 1984, 1-11. Changes in rank lists of serials over time: interlending vs citation data, Interlending and Document Supply, 12(4), October 1984, 145-147. Also in College and Research Libraries, 46(l), January 1985, 77-79. Interlibrary lending in the United Kingdom, IATUL Proceedings, 16, 1984, 1-7. (Volume entitled Interlending and document delivery, edited by Nancy Fja¨llbrant). Developments in interlibrary lending in Western Europe, in Vago, J. (Ed.), Library Association of Australia, Library Interlending Conference 1983, LAA New South Wales Branch, Sydney, 1984, 3-21. Where to now for interlending in Australia? in Vago J. (Ed.), Library Association of Australia, Library Interiending Conference 1983, LAA New South Wales Branch, Sydney, 1984, 146-157. Use of citation data for periodicals control in libraries: a response to Broadus, College and Research Libraries, 46(l), January 985, 36-37. Planning union catalogues of books in developing countries (jointly with R. Bennett), IFLA Journal, 11(l), 1985, 27-35. Provision of serials in times of stringency, in Cox, B. (Ed.), UK Serials Group, Serials 1984. Proceedings of the UK Serials Group Conference, University of Surrey, March 1984, UK Serials Group, 1985, 1-22. UAP and school libraries, in Irving, A. (Ed.), International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. Section on School Libraries, The School Librarian in an Information Society. Proceedings of the Seminar, Nairobi, 1984, IFLA Section on School Libraries, Loughborough, 1985, 41-57. On-demand and online publishing and the bookseller: lifeline, death knell, or irrelevant?, Bookseller, No. 4149, 29 June 1985, 2629-2931. Access to resources: the international dimension, Library Resources and Technical Services, 30(l), January-March 1986, 4-12. Translated into Italian: Biblioteche Oggi nel Mondo, Supplemento al n.6, 1989, 25-33. The death of Procrustes? Structure, style and sense, Scholarly Publishing, 17(3), July 1986, 291-301. 122

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Management, Library Association, London, 1990, 185-195. Universal availability of publications (jointly with S. Vickers), IFLA Journal, 12(4), 1986, 325-328. An evaluation of the INFORSK Research Group, University of Umea˚. Report to the Delegation fo¨r Vetenskaplig och Teknisk Informationsfo¨rso¨rjning (jointly with T.J. Allen and O.A. Wiio), in Utvo¨rdering av INFORSK. Stockholm: DFI, 1986, 13-23. (DFI-Publikationer 1986:5). Can book selection be improved? (Review essay), British Journal of Academic Librarianship, 1(2), Summer 1986, 160-166. The universal library, in Line, M.B. (Ed.) The World of Books and Information: Essays in Honour of Lord Dainton, British Library, London, 1987, 119-133. Information availability and access: issues and approaches (keynote address), in White, B. (Ed.) Information for All: Access and Availability. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Institute of Information Scientists, Peebles, 1986, Taylor Graham, London, 1987, 1-15. Reprinted in: Fox, N. (Ed.), in the Marketplace for Knowledge: The Future and Role of Information Services in Libraries, Aslib, London, 1991, 64-75. The future of libraries – threats, challenges and opportunities, in Opening Universiteits-bibliotheek Groningen, Symposium “De wetenschappelijke bibliotheken in de komende decennia”, 21 mei 1987, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Groningen, 1987, 46-54. The shoulders of giants, or the backs of mice? A comment on “Testing the Ortega hypothesis: facts and artifacts”, in MacRoberts, M.H. and MacRoberts, B.R. (Eds), Scientometrics, 12(5/6), 1987, 297-298. Interlending and conservation: friends or foes? Interlending and Document Supply, 16(l), January 1988, 7-11. National libraries in a time of change, IFLA Journal, 14(l), 1988, 20-28. Also in Pustakala Pravrtti (Sri Lanka National Library Services Board News Bulletin), 9(l), January/March 1988, 4-9,17. Reprinted in Hannigan, J.A. (Ed.) Library Lit – The Best of 1988, Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, NJ and London, 1989, 25-35. Reprinted in Line, M.B and Line, J. (Eds) National libraries 3, Aslib, London, 18-25. Translated into Hebrew: Yad-Lakore (The Reader’s Aid: Israel Journal for Libraries and Archives), 24(3/4), June 1990, 38-45. Translated into Italian: Biblioteche Oggi nel Mondo, Suppl. al n.6/1989, 35-45; Translated into Japanese: Biblos, 39(l), January 1988, 2-10. Translated into Polish: Nadbitka z Rocznika Biblioteki Narodowej, 23/24, 1991, 11-20. National repository planning, International Library Review, 20(3), July 1988, 310-319. Information for science and technology: the organization and financing of national library and information provision for S & T, Open, 20(5), May 1988, 166-171. Reflexo˜es sobre a Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal no contexto da cena bibliotecono´mica portuguesa, Revista da Biblioteca Nacional, (2) 3(1), January-April 1988, 131-141.

Translated into German: Der Tot des Procrustes? Auswirkungen von Computerspeichung und -zugang von Informationen. Nachrichten fu¨r Dokumentation, 36(6), December 1985, 264-268. Electronic publishing: implications for libraries, in Electronic Publishing and the UK: Prospects, Economics and Constraints. Proceedings of a Conference held in London in December 1984, British Library, Boston Spa, 1986, 88-93. What will people want of libraries in an age of information technology? in The Impact of Information Technology on Academic Libraries and Library Networks: A Seminar held in Edinburgh University Library, May 1984, University Library, Edinburgh, 1986, 35-45. The supply of scientific and technical information: public or private responsibility?, Tidskrift fo¨r Dokumentation, 41(4), 1985, 97-104. Current trends and issues in librarianship and information science (jointly with S. Howley), in Cawkell, A.E. (Ed.), Handbook of Information Technology and Information Systems, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986, 851-882. Access to the nation’s resources of non-book materials, Audiovisual Librarian, 12(2), May 1986, 63-68. UAP and audiovisual materials, IFLA Journal, 12(2), 1986, 91-103. Library research and national needs: planning, coordinating and funding, in Allen, G.G. and Exon, F.C.A. (Eds) Research and the Practice of Librarianship: An International Symposium, The Library, Western Australia Institute of Technology, Perth, 1986, 199-209. (Western Library Studies, 7). The survival of academic libraries in hard times: reactions to pressures, rational and irrational, British Journal of Academic Librarianship, l(l), Spring 1986, 1-12. Future strategies and opportunities: the scope for coordination? in Research Collecting under Constraint and the Future Coordination of Academic and Library Provision. Report of a Seminar Sponsored by SCONUL and the British Library, 28 February-2 March 1986, SCONUL, London, 1986, 63-70. (British Library R&D Report 5907). The role of national libraries in UAP, Information Development, 2(3), July 1986, 167-174. Reprinted in: Boon, J.A. et al. (Eds) National Libraries: Some South African and International Perspectives on Challenges and Opportunities. A tribute to H.J. Aschenborn at sixty-five, State Library, Pretoria, 1986, 111-124. H 1unikh bibliouhkh: paradosh kai allagh (The national library: tradition and change). Diabazo [Diavazo], no.149, 30 July 1986, 5-10. Translated into Singhalese: Pustakala Pravrtti (Sri Lanka National Library Services Board News Bulletin), 8(3/4), 1987, 20-22. The total national resource: reflections on document provision and supply in New Zealand, New Zealand Libraries, 45(3), September 1986, 45-49. Training the information researcher for the future, NORDINFO-Nytt, 9(2), 1986, 7-15. Library goodness, U C & R Newsletter, No. 20, November 1986, 3-8. Reprinted in a slightly revised version as: The concept of “library goodness”: user and library perception of quality and value, in Line, M.B. (Ed.) Academic Library 123

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Translated into Hungarian: Tudoma´nyos e´s Mu´szaki Ta´je´koztata´s, 37(6), 1990, 229-232. Libraries: fifty years on, British Book News, 50(3), March 1990, 160-162. Also in: Maktaba (OfficiaI Journal of the Kenya Library Association), 11(2), 1991, 1-3. The impact of British government policies on academic libraries, in Bibliotheek, wetenschap en cultuur. Opstellen aangeboden aan mr. W.R.H. Koops bij zijn afscheid als bibliothecaris der Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen, Universiteitsbibhotheek, Groningen, 1990, 122-134. Also in: Signum, (2), 1990, 51-58. Document provision and supply in less developed countries, with special reference to the potential of regional systems, Interlending & Document Supply, 18(2), April 1990, 47-51. Current issues in academic libraries, in Line, M.B. (Ed.) Academic Library Management, Library Association, London, 1990, 1-6. Interlibrary access, national and international, in Line, M.B. (Ed.) Academic Library Management, Library Association, London, 1990, 139-146. Academic libraries: a new generation? in Line, M.B. (Ed.) Academic Library Management, Library Association, London, 1990, 255-263. Libraries in the educational process, Library Association Record, 92(7), July 1990, 504-506. Also in: UC & R Newsletter, No. 31, Summer 1990, 2-5. Do we need national libraries, and if so what sort? An assessment in the light of an analysis of national library and information needs, Alexandria, 2(2), July 1990, 2738. (A much longer version of: National library and information needs: alternative ways of meeting them, with special reference to the role of national libraries, IFLA Journal, 15(4), 1989, 306-312.) Staff development in academic libraries (jointly with Keith Robertson), British Journal of Academic Librarianship, 4(3), 1989, 161-175. Perspectives of information management, in Cronin, B. and Klein, S. (Eds) Informations-management in Wissenschaft und Forschung /Information Management in Science and Research, Vieweg, Braunschweig, 1990, 175-183. Knowledge is power, and power is dangerous: reflections on the availability of knowledge and information in Britain today (LA Presidential Address 1990), Library Association Record, 92(11), November 1990, 829-835. Also in: Radical Quarterly. No. 20, Summer 1991, 19-32; and in a reduced version, in: The Bookseller, 2 November 1990, 1326-1328 (with title: The erosion of knowledge) and 9 November 1990, 1398-1400 (with title: The commercialisation of information). Translated into French: Bulletin des Bibliothe`ques de France, 36 (4), 199, -Z64q79. Universal availability of information in less developed countries, in Membrey, D.J. (Ed.) Nothing to Read? Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the International and Comparative Librarianship Group of the Library Association, Birmingham, August 31st-September 2nd, 1989, ICLG, London, 1990, 35-43. Why isn’t work fun? Library Management, 11(5), 1990, 15-17. UAP and rural libraries, in Saunders, R. and Henri, J. (Eds), Rural Libraries and Community Resource Centres. Proceedings of the COMLA Workshops, Australia 1988

Acquisition policies and practices: local, national and international, in Henkes, V. (Ed.), National Acquisitions Group, The Eternal Triangle. Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference, York, 1987, NAG, London, 1988, 81-88. Measuring the performance of document supply systems, Interlending and Document Supply, 16(3), July 1988, 81-88. Whose rights? Rights, 2(2), Summer 1988, 5-6, 14. Reprinted in: Information Reports and Bibliographies, 18(5) 1989, 12-14. Do engineers use published information? If not, why not?, Notes and Comment (Engineering Information, Inc.), 12(3), 1988, 4. The research library in the enterprise society, LSE Quarterlv, 2(4), Winter 1988, 361-378. Reprinted in: Australian Library Journal, 38(3), August 1989, 197-209. Commercial and revenue-earning activities in national libraries (jointly with Peter Scott), IFLA Journal, 15(l), 1989, 23-36. Translated into French (in a reduced version): Bulletin d’Informations de I’ABF, no.141, 4th quarter 1988, 32-38. Satisfying bibliographic needs in the future – from publisher to user, Catalogue & Index, No. 90/91, Autumn/Winter 1988, 10-14. Reprinted in a slightly revised version as: Bibliographic records for users: from disordered superabundance to cost-effective satisfaction, Aslib Proceedings, 42(2), February 1990, 41-49. The future of CD-ROMs for full text of joumals, in Helal, A.H. and Weiss, J.W. (Eds) The Impact of CD-ROMs on Library Operations and Universal Availability of Information. 11th International Essen Symposium, September 1988, Universita¨tsbibliothek Essen, Essen, 1989, 189-198. (Publications of Essen University Library, 11). Bridging the gap between resources and exploitation, Industry and Higher Education, 3(1), March 1989, 4-8. Beyond networks – national and international resources, IATUL Quarterly, 3(2), June 1989, 107-112. UAP and statistics, in Papers and Proceedings of the Post IFLA Conference Workshop on Statistics, Nairobi, Kenya, August, 1984, Curtin University of Technology Library (for IFLA Section of Statistics), Perth, 1988, 55-59. Interlending and document supply in a changing world, in Cornish, G.P. and Gallico, A. (Eds), Interlending and Document Supply: Proceedings of the First International Conference, London, 1988, IFLA Office for International Lending, Boston Spa, 1989, 1-4. Also in International Forum on Information and Documentation, 14(3), 1989, 23-26. National library and information needs: alternative ways of meeting them, with special reference to the role of national libraries, IFLA Journal, 15(4), 1989, 306-312. (See also: Do we need national libraries, and if so what sort? An assessment in the light of an analysis of national library and information needs. Alexandria, 2(2), July 1990, 27-38.). Education and training for the book and information world, Serials, 2(3), November 1989,11-18. Universal availability of publications in an electronic age, IATUL Quarterly, 3(4), December 1989, 214-223. 124

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

How to demotivate staff. a brief guide, Library Management, 13(l), 1992, 4-7. Translated into Hungarian: Korszeru¨ Vezete´s, 28(7), July 1993, 78-83. The publication and availability of scientific and technical papers: an analysis of requirements and the suitability of different means of meeting them, Journal of Documentation, 47(2), June 1992, 201-219. The use of computers in LIS – a core or fringe area? Newsletter, CTI Centre for Library and Information Studies, 3(3), May 1992, 3. National libraries (jointly with Joyce Line), Library & Information Briefings, Issue 32, May 1992. 11 The species bibliotheca nationalis: its extraordinary origin, life style, and habits, Logos, 3(2), 1992, 106-108. More books, higher prices, declining library budgets – where do we go from here? Taking Stock: Libraries and the Book Trade, 1(1), May 1992, 6-11. Modelli alternativi di controllo e accesso bibliografico nazionale, Bollettino AIB, 32(2), June 1992, 141-151. On appropriate librarianship: the genesis of the library of today, and its possible exodus tomorrow, in Weiss, J.W. (Ed.), Innovation for Information: International Contributions to Librarianship. Festschrift in Honour of Dr Ahmed H. HeIal, Universita¨tsbibliothek Essen, Essen, 1992, 35-42 (Publications of Essen University Library, 16). Reprinted (slightly revised) in: Logos, 13(1), 2002, 55-58. Strategic planning in national libraries (jointly with Patricia Donlon), Alexandria, 4(2), 1992, 83-94. Access to the literature of the social sciences: where do we stand, and where can we go? in Gondolatok a ko¨ nyvta´rban/Thoughts in the library, Magyar Tudoma´nyos Akade´mia Ko¨nyvta´ra, Budapest, 1992, 167-171. (A Magyar Tudoma´nyos Akade´ mia Ko¨nyvta´ra´nak Ko¨zleme´nyi, 30(105)). Perspectives europe´ennes a` l’aube de XXIe sie`cle, in Poulain, M. (Ed.), Histoire des bibliothe`ques franc¸aises. Les bibliothe`ques au XXe sie`cle, 1914-1990, Promodis e´ditions du Cercle de la Librairie, Paris, 1992, 715-732. Information management for information services – economic challenge for the ’90s. Post-seminar observations, in Goedegebuure, B.G. and Stroetmann, K.A. (Eds), Information Management for Information Services – Economic Challenge for the ’90s, Deutsches Bibhotheksinstitut, Berlin, 1992, 107-116. Dal prestito interbibliotecario alla fornitura elettronica dei documenti: tendenze e prospettive in Europa, in L’informazione a portata di mano: biblioteche, tecnologie e servize agli utenti. Atti del XXXVII Congresso nazionale dell’Associazione italiana biblioteche, Pisa, 27-29 novembre 1991, A cura di E. Boretti e R. Ridi. (Biblioteche e archivi: quadreni di lavoro, 9), Giunta Regionale Milano, Toscana, 1992, 119-132. National libraries, Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide, Bowker-Saur, London, 1993, 51-70. The continuing consultancy: a way to manage change, Librarian Career Development, l(l), 1993, 9-11. Summary and conclusions, in Geh, H.-P. et al. (Eds) Knowledge for Europe: Librarians and Publishers Working Together. European Conference, 11-13 November 1992, Brussels. Proceedings, K.G. Saur, Mu¨nchen, 1993, 214-222.

and Malta 1990, International Association of Rural and Isolated Libraries for the Commonwealth Library Association, Wagga Wagga, 1990, 17-23. Trends in British academic libraries, in Cantwell, I. et al. (Eds), Bibliotek: tradition och utveckling. Festskrift till Lars-Erik Sanner den 18 januari 1991, Universitetsbibliotek, Stockholm, 1991, 36-42. The size and growth of serial literature 1950-1987, in terms of the number of articles per serial (jointly with Gillian Archibald), Scientometrics, 20(l), 1991, 173-196. On scrutinizing, planning and the management of change, U C & R Newsletter, No. 32, Autumn 1990, 22-23. Getting closer together, NAG Newsletter, No. 10, January 1991, 25-30. Librarians and knowledge, in Meadows, Jack (Ed.) Knowledge and Communication: Essays on the Information Chain, Library Association, London, 1991, 77-89. Strategic planning as an instrument of improving library quality, Inspel, 25(l), 1991, 7-16. Preserving the eternal values of the research library in a throw-away age, Library Review, 40(2/3), 1991, 44-51. Reviewing the past and planning for the future, USLG Newsletter, (2), 1991, [2]-[3]. (Newsletter of the University and Special Libraries Group of Ireland) Library management styles and structures: a need to rethink?, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 23(2), June 1991, 37-44. Interlending and document supply: to charge or not to charge?, FIL Newsletter, (6), June 1991, 2-3. A worldwide bibliographic database: why it is needed and how it could be achieved, Logos, 2(3), 1991, 145-149. Performance measurement within interlending and document supply systems, in Gallico, A. (Ed.), Interlending and Document Supply: Proceedings of the Second International Conference . . . London . . . 1990, IFLA Office for International Lending, Boston Spa, 1991, 5-13. Egyetemi e´s kutato´inte´zeti ko¨nyvta´rak vezete´se egy va´ltozo´ ta´rsadalomban (Managing academic and research libraries in a changing society), Ko¨nyvta´ri Figyel, 37(3), 1991, 429-434. Also in Polish: Nadbitka z Rocznik Biblioteki Narodowej, 26, 1993, 149-157. Keynote address (The economics of library and information services), in Dudley, E. et al. (Eds), The Economics of Library and Information Services: An Anglo-German Perspective, Anglo-German Foundation for the Study of Industrial Society, London, 1991, 3-9. Research policy in librarianship and information science: keynote paper, in Harris, C. (Ed.), Research Policy in Librarianship and Information Science: Papers Presented to a Conference of the Library and Information Research Group and the Public Libraries Research Group, Salford, 1990, (BL R&D Report 6010), Taylor Graham, London, 1991, 1-10. Measuring the measurers: a plea for scientometricianometry, Psientometrics, 60, 8 March 1992, 53-64. Libraries and electronic publishing: promises and challenges for the 90’s. Conclusions and comnients, in Helal, A. H. and Weiss, J.W. (Eds), Libraries and Electronic Publishing: Promises and Challenges for the 90’s. 14th International Essen Symposium, October 1991, Universita¨ts-bibliothek Essen, Essen, 1992, 195-204 (Publications of Essen University Library, 14). 125

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Service and self-service: the electronic library from the user’s point of view, in Helal, A.H. and Weiss, J.W. (Eds) Opportunity 2000: Understanding and Serving Users in an Electronic Library, 15th Essen Symposium,, 1992. Festschift in honour of Herbert S. White, Universita¨tsbibliothek, Essen, 1993, 283-294. (Publications of Essen University Library, 15). Managing change – changing managers, in Foreman, L.R. (Ed.), Change in Libraries and Information Services: Managing Change or Changing Managers?, HMSO, London, 1993, 5-16. Aspects of Nordic academic and research libraries: thoughts based on a study carried out for NORDINFO, with special reference to the implications for library and information education, in Rugaas, B. (Ed.), Library and Information Science Education for the 21st century. The Tromsø Conference, January 1992, New Neal-Schuman, York, London, 1993, 91-104. Changes in the use of literature with time – obsolescence revisited, Library Trends, 41(4), Spring 1993, 662-683. La gestio´ del canvi a les biblioteques, Item: Revista de Biblioteconomia i Documentacio, (12), January/June 1993, 66-80. National libraries, in ALA World Encyclopedia of Librarianship and Information Services, 3rd ed. American Library Association, Chicago, 1993, 605-611. National libraries and the decline of the nation state (Editorial), A1exandria, 5(2), 1993, 95-98. Libraries and information services in 25 years’ time: a British perspective, in Lancaster, F.W. (Ed.), Libraries and the Future: Essays on the Library in the Twenty-first Century, Haworth Press, Binghampton, NY, 1993, 73-83. Human resource management in library and information services (jointly with Margaret Kinnell), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 28, 1993, 317-359. Epilogue, Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide, Bowker-Saur, London, 1993, 257-260. The new tribalism: its implications for libraries all over the world, Logos, 5(l), 1994, 6-12. What to look for when planning national and regional document supply systems, in Swires, A.J. (Ed.), Interlending and Document Supply. Proceedings of the Third International Conference, Budapest, 1993, IFLA Office for International Lending, Boston Spa, 1994, 6673. Translated into Hungarian: Tudoma´nyos e´s Mu¨szaki Ta¨je´koztata´s, 41(2), 1994, 53-56. How fast are serials growing?, BSP Journal News, Spring 1994, 5-6. Evaluation of academic libraries: with special reference to the Copenhagen Business School library (jointly with Michael Cotta-Schønberg), Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 26(2), June 1994, 55-69. The implications of declining library resources and improving electronic technology for document access and supply: a review article, Interlending and Document Supply, 22(2), 1994, 19-23. Relating quality management to strategic planning, Inspel, 28(2), 1994, 219-226. The scope for cooperation between national libraries: some ideas and observations, IFLA Section of National Libraries Newsletter, No. 1993/no. 1994, July 1994, 13-23. Translated into Russian:

, ( ), 1994. Tendencje rozwojowe w swiatowej informacji (Trends and developments in the world information scene), Bibliotekarz, (4), 1994, 3-8 and (5), 1994, 12-15. The interlending of fiction (jointly with Margaret Barwick) Interlending and Document Supply, 22(3), 1994, 3-7. What national libraries have been in the past and what they might be in the future, Conference held at the Biblioteca de Catalunya, 18 February, 1994, Biblioteca de Catalunya, Documents, 4, 1994, 29 The pursuit of competitive advantage in libraries leads, where?, New Library World, 95 (1116), 1994, 4-6. The national planning and coordination of library services, Internkontakt (Norsk Bibliotekforenings Medlemsblad), 19(4), 1994, 15-21. The road through chaos: the future role of the university library in the creation of knowledge, in Serving the Scholarly Community: Essays on Tradition and Change in Research Libraries. Presented to Thomas Tottie on July 3rd, 1995, University Library, Uppsala, 1995, 13-22. Translated into Catalan: Item: Revista de Biblioteconomia y Documentacio, (14), January-June 1994, 62-73. The changing role of national libraries, in Proceedings of the International Conference on National Libraries – Towards the 21st Century, April 20-24, 1993, Taipei, National Central Library, Taipei, (1993), 87-104. How can bibliographic services be managed at a national level?, in Proceedings of the Expert Seminar on Bibliographic Control in South Africa, 19-20 May 1994, State Library, Pretoria, 1994 (each paper has separate pagination). Libraries and their management, in Vickery, B.C. (Ed.), Fifty Years of Information Progress: A Journal of Documentation Review, Aslib, London, 1994, 189-223. The bonfire of the author’s vanity, Electronic Author, Winter 1994, 10-11. Needed: a pathway through the swamp of management literature, Library Management, 16(l), 1995, 36-38. Reprinted in: Emerald – The Guide, 2, 1996, 17-18. Access as a substitute for holdings: false ideal, costly reality?, Interlending and Document Supply, 23(2), 1995, 28-30. Also in: OCLC Systems and Services, 11(4), 1995, 11-13. Back to basics for national libraries? (Editorial), A1exandria, 7(l), 1995, 1-3. Who pays for information? And why should they? in Helal, A.H. and Weiss, J.W. (Eds), Information Superhighway: The Role of Librarians, Information Scientists, and Intermediaries, 17th International Essen Symposium, 1994, Festschrift in Honour of Frederick Wilfrid Lancaster, Universita¨tsbibliothek, Essen, 1995, 262275. (Publications of Essen University Library, 18). Do we need national bibliographies any more?, Catalogue & Index, (15), Spring 1995, 4. Concluding paper, in Hogg, F.N. (Ed.), A Practical Look at New Developments in Library and Information Services for Visually Impaired Persons, VIP Second International Conference on Library Services to Visually Impaired Persons, 1994. Looking Ahead, Ulverscroft Large Print Books, Anstey, 1994, 174-178. The management of bibliographic services at a national level, in 1895: das Buch zum Jubila¨um, Schweizerische

126

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Libraries and information services in criminology in the UK, ISTD Bulletin, (26), Winter 1996/97, 3. Epilogue, Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide, 199697, Bowker-Saur, London, 1996, 299-301. Chaos, strategy and planning: can they be reconciled? in Helal, A.H. and Weiss, J.W. (Eds), Towards a Worldwide Library. A Ten Year Forecast. 19th International Essen Symposium, 1996, Universita¨tsbibliothek, Essen, 1997, 102-114. (Publications of Essen University Library, 21). Orsza´gos Sze´che´nyi Ko¨nyvta´r: megoldando´ feladatok e´s inte´ zkelde´ si javaslatok (The National Sze´ che´ nyi Library: issues facing the library and proposals for action), OSZK Hı´rado´, 39(9/10), 1997, 16-32. Re-engineering libraries for a lifelong learning society, Logos, 8(l), 1997, 35-41. Translated into Chinese: Beijing Shifan Daxue Xuebao, (10), 1998, 118-123. Co-operation: the triumph of hope over experience? Interlending and Document Supply, 25(2), 1997, 66-72. Time to think: an imperative for effective functioning (Editorial), Alexandria, 9(l), 1997, 1-2. Tomorrow’s professional: creating a new breed, in Watson, W.M. (Ed.), Information and Library Management 2000 þ : A Celebration of Fifty Years of the Department of Information and Library Management, University of Northumbria at Newcastle, the Department, in association with NBS Services, Newcastle upon Tyne, 1997, 29-40. World librarians in conclave: IFLA’s long pursuit of common causes, Logos, 8(3), 1997, 153-158. Electronic information: use and users, in 6es. Jornados Catalanes de Documentacio´. Cap a la societat digital: un mon en continua transformacio´, 23, 24 i 25 d’octubre de 1997, Barcelona, [Barcelona]: Societat Catalana de Documentacio´ i Informacio´ (ISOCADO) [&] Col.legio Oficial de Bibliotecaris-Documentalistes de Catalunya (COBDC), 1997, 25-36. Translated into Catalan: Anales de Documentacio´n, 1, 1998, 199-212. Do libraries contribute to wealth? Library Association Record, 99(11), November 1997, 603. The public library in the future: a British response to Buildings, Books and Bytes. Library Trends, 6(l), Summer 1997, 68-82. Organizational styles and structures in national libraries (Editorial), Alexandria, 9(3), 1997, 171-172. What do national libraries do in the age of the Internet?, Ariadne, (13), 1998, 6-7. (Full version at http://www. ariadne.ac.uk) Translated into Spanish: on Biblioteca Nacional de Argentina web site: www.bibnl.edu.ar/national.htm Le me´tier de bibliothe´caire: un ensemble de pratiques confuses et discontinues, Bulletin des Bibliothe`ques de France, 43(2), 1998, 44-48. The case for retaining printed LIS journals, IFLA Journal, 24(1), 1998, 15-19. Muerte o transfiguracio´n? Las bibliotecas nacionales en el siglo XXI, Patrimonio Cultural (Chile), 3(1), April 1998, 26-27. An information world apart: the Royal Society Scientific Information Conference of 1948 in the light of 1998, Journal of Documentation, 54(3), July 1998, 275-283.

Landesbibliothek . . . . Schweizerische Landesbibliothek Bern, 1995, 295-308. Is strategic planning outmoded? (Editorial), Alexandria, 7(3), 1995, 135-137. The management of library staff – trends and reflections, in Biswas, S.C. (Ed.), Global Trends in Library and Information Science, Gyan Publishing House, New Delhi, 1995, 383-394. Access versus ownership: how real an alternative is it?, IFLA Journal, 22(2), 1996, 35-41. Translated into French: Bulletin des Bibliothe`ques deFrance, 41(l),1996,32-41. ˝ szaki Translated into Hungarian: Tudoma´nyos e´s MU Ta´je´koztata´s, 44(4/5), April/May 1997, 135-143. The universal library report, Library Management, 17(l), 1996, 32-35. Also in: Asian Libraries, 5(1), 1996, 55-59. A vision of the new Alexandrian Library, Corniche: Newsletter of the British Friends of the Alexandrian Library, (2), March 1996, 2-3. The role of paranational libraries in national information provision, Information Development, 11(4), December 1995, 225-228. Line’s five laws of librarianship, and one all embracing law, Library Association Record, 98(3), March 1996, 144. International library access as an alternative to national collection development in The Netherlands, in Collecties op achterstand: buitenlandse wetenschappelijke literatuur in Nederlandse bibliotheken, Koninklijke Bibliotheek Den Haag, 1996, 19-35. National self-sufficiency in an electronic age, in Helal, A.H. and Weiss, J.W. (Eds), Electronic Documents and Information: from Preservation to Access, 18th International Essen Symposium, 1995, Festschrift in Honour of Patricia Battin, Universita¨tsbibliothek, Essen, 1996, 170-193. (Publications of Essen University Library, 20). But what can be done about our bosses?, Library Management, 17(3), 1996, 32-37. Translated into Hungarian: Ko¨nyvta´ri Figyelo¨, 44(l), 1998, 76-83. Access to library and information science journals from less developed countries and countries with non-European languages, Newsletter, IFLA Round Table of Editors of Library Journals, 1(9), April 1996, 3-5. Also in: Focus on International and Comparative Librarianship, 27(l), 10 May 1996, 32-35. What do people need of libraries, and how can we find out?, Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 27(2), June 1996, 77-86. Managing change in libraries, Journal of Information, Communication and Library Science (Taiwan), 2(3), Spring 1996, 3-12. National libraries and national funding (Editorial), Alexandria, 8(3), 1996, 151-153. The British Library, in Feather, J. and Sturges, P. (Eds), International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, Routledge, London, 1997, 40-41. Library and information services and institutions, in Feather, J. and Sturges, P. (Eds), International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, Routledge, London, 1997, 266-273. 127

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Why is interlending and document supply still the ugly sister? (Opinion paper), Interlending and Document Supply, 28(2), 2000, 91-92. Bibliography of writings by A.J. Meadows, Journal of Documentation, 56(4), July 2000, 351-360. Cooperation: not the only or always the best solution, in Lee, S.A. (Ed.), The New Library Legacy: Essays in Honor of Richard De Gennaro, K.G. Saur, Mu¨nchen, 1998, 44-58. The next ten years in national libraries: an overview, Alexandria, 12(3), 2000, 199-200. Is national planning for acquisitions and document supply still valid? (Opinion paper), Interlending and Document Supply, 28(4), 2000, 192-194. Does low pay have to be associated with high boredom? (Management musings, 1), Library Management, 22(1/ 2), 2001, 98. David Wood: a personal appreciation, Interlending and Document Supply, 29(2), 2001, 57-58. The coming transfiguration of academic libraries: meeting the challenge of changing society, changing education and changing needs, in: H akadhmaikh bibliowhkh v6 1kpaid1ytikh monada sthn 3p xili1tia. Pan1llhnioy Syn1drioy akadhmaikvn bibliouhkvn, Podo6, 20-22 Oktvbrioy 1999. Praktika, Panepistimiakes Ekdoseis Aigaiou, Mytilene, 2000, 57-70. Changing perspectives on national libraries: a personal view, Alexandria, 13(1), 2001, 43-49. Leadership doesn’t have to follow any one pattern (Management musings, 2), Library Management, 22(3/ 4), 2001, 232-233. The future researcher and the future library: from the viewpoint of an independent user, DF-Revy, 24(4), May 2001, 103-108. Translated into Polish: Forum Akademickie,8(11), 2001, 52-55. “Why do – or did – you want to be boss?” (Management musings, 3), Library Management, 22(6/7), 2001, 319. Library resources for the lifelong learner, U3A Sources, (13), 2001, 14-15. The use of citation and other statistics in stock management, IFLA Journal, 27(4), 2001, 247-252. How well are national libraries doing? (Editorial), Alexandria, 13(2), 2001, 67-69. Busyness and profitable activity: how should managers spend their time (Management musings, 4), Library Management, 22(8/9), 2001, 416. Access to documents by the independent researcher (Opinion paper), Interlending and Document Supply, 29(4), 2001, 175-176. Improving surrogate access: desirable and achievable (Editorial), Alexandria, 13(3), 137-138. National libraries, in Stam D. H., and Dearborn F. (Eds), International Dictionary of Library Histories,, Chicago, London, 2001, 116-121. How should managers spend their time? Part 2 (Management musings, 5), Library Management, 23(1/2), 2002, 101102. How do managers learn to manage? (Management musings, 6), Library Management, 23(3/4), 2002, 166-167. No-one will tell bosses what they are like (Management musings, 7), Library Management, 23(4/5), 2002, 252-253. The future of interlibrary loan and document supply: views and comments (jointly with Elda Monica Guerrero and

Globalisation, society, education and libraries, LaserLink, Spring/Summer 1998, 32-34. What exactly is a national collection? (Editorial), Alexandria, 10(1), 1998, 1-2. Cooperation: not the only or always the best solution, in Lee, S.A. (Ed.), The New Library Legacy: Essays in Honor of Richard De Gennaro, K.G. Saur, Mu¨nchen, 1998, 44-58. Designing libraries round human beings, Aslib Proceedings, 50(8), September 1998, 221-229. Also in: Vjesnik Bibliotekara Hrvatske, 41(1/4), 1999, 61-76. Also in: 31. Skup?tina hrvatskoga knji?ni – arskog dru??tva. Me < unarodni skup. Korisnici u 21. stoles < u izizov za knjizn – arsku struku, Zadar, 7.10. listopada 1998. Radni materiali. [Zagreb]: Tisak Kratis, 1999, p.47-59. National libraries: hub, apex, or what? Alexandria, 10(2), 1998, 89-91. Future universities, future libraries: the future of higher education and the implications for libraries, in: Oi akadhmaik16 bibliouhk 16 kai h proolhsh toy 1 ksy gxr onism oy . 60 Pan 1 llhnio Sy v1 dri o Akadhmaikvn Bibliouhkvn, Auhna, 5-7 No1mbrioy 1997. Praktika, EKPA, Athena, 1998, 3-16. Who should head a national library, and how should they get there? (Editorial), Alexandria, 10(3), 1998, 167-169. Maurice’s management maxims, Library Management, 20(l), 1999, 10-11. Types of organisational culture, Library Management, 20(2), 1999, 73-75. Translated into Hungarian: Ko¨ nyv Ko¨nyvta´ri Ko¨nyvyta´ros, 9(l), 2000, 26-28. Critical issues facing LIS journals: a reader’s view, IFLA Journal, 25(l), 1999, 12-15. Translated into Hungarian: Tudoma´nyos e´s Mu˝szaki Ta´je´koztata´s, 46(4), 1999, 142-145. Translated into Russian: , (12), 1999, 12-22. National libraries and service to the general public (Editorial), Alexandria, 11(l), 1999, 1-2. Making sure that national collections continue to be available (Editorial), Alexandria, 11(2), 1999, 81-83. Do national libraries have a future?, Logos, 10(3), 1999, 154-159. Making the nation’s whole cultural heritage accessible (Editorial), Alexandria, 11(3), 1999, 145-146. Social science information – the poor relation, INSPEL, 33(3), 1999, 131-136. Also in: IFLA Journal, 26(3), 2000, 177-179. Translated into Hungarian in a reduced version: Tudoma´nyos e´s M?szaki Ta´je´koztata´s, 48(4), 2001, 171172. The loneliness of the long-distance information ranger, Managing Information, 7(2), 2000, 58-59. The modem national library: a post-war invention (Editorial), Alexandria, 12(l), 2000, 1-2. Les bibliothe`ques dans une e´conomie d’information: des bastions de la liberte´ d’information et de la culture, Bulletin des Bibliothe`ques de France, 45(2), 2000, 17-25. ˝ szaki Translated into Hungarian: Tudoma´nyos e´s MU Ta´je´koztata´s, 47(6/7), 2000, 285-292. 128

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

Going gently into the dark night of retirement (Management musings, 19), Library Management, 25(8/9), 2004, 399400. From being managed to managing: a personal odyssey (Management musings, 20), Library Management, 25(3), 2005, 156-158. A lifetime’s change in LIS, Interlending and Document Supply, 2005

others), Interlending and Document Supply, 30(2), 2002, 60-65. Bibliothe`ques nationales, in Dictionnaire encyclope´dique du livre, sous la direction de Pascal Fouche´ [et al.], E´ditions du Cercle de la Librairie, Paris, 2002, Vol.1, pp. 314-316. Library buildings: a user’s viewpoint, LIBER Quarterly, 12(1) 2002, 73-87. To see ourselves as others see us . . . (Management musings, 8), Library Management, 23(6/7), 2002, 338-339. A crisis of national library leadership? (Editorial), Alexandria, 14(2), 2002, 59-60. Extracting pearls from rotten oysters (Management musings, 9), Library Management, 23(8/9), 2002, 435-436. Interlibrary services in the UK [comment on article with same title by D.J. Urquhart published in 1970], Interlending and Document Supply, 30(4), 2002, 190-192. Farewell to Alexandria: the first 14 years (Editorial), Alexandria, 14(3), 2002, 131-132. Everyone can be difficult at times (Management musings, 10), Library Management, 24(1/2), 2003, 86-87. Credo, Logos, 13(4), 2002, 221. Measurement vs performance (Management musings, 11), Library Management, 24(3), 2003, 164-165. A matter of terminology: from ILL and DD to RDS, Interlending and Document Supply, 31(2) 2003, 147-148. Top dogs need not be fat cats (Management musings, 12) Library Management, 24(4/5) 2003, 252-253. Making do with what we have (Management musings, 13), Library Management, 24(6/7), 2003, 360-361. The potential role of e-books in remote document supply, Interlending and Document Supply, 31(3), 2003, 184-186. Remote document supply in the future: an overview [of national library visions], Interlending and Document Supply, 31(3), 2003, 210-212. We all need approval – even bosses (Management musings, 14), Library Management, 24(8/9), 2003, 441-442. Democracy and information: transmitters and receivers, Library Management, 24(8/9), 2003, 386-392. Looking ahead: how far? (Management musings, 15), Library Management, 25(1/2), 2004, 62-63. A farewell to ILDS: the end of a long and happy relationship, Interlending and Document Supply, 32(1), 2004, 60. Must good theory be defeated by external pressures? (Management musings, 16), Library Management, 25(3), 2004, 146-147. An agenda for overdue change, in Hilgemann, K. and te Boekhorst, P. (Eds), Die effektive Bibliothek: Roswitha Poll zum 65. Geburtstag, K.G. Saur, Mu¨nchen, 2004, 47-53. An expiry limit for qualifications? (Guest editorial), Alexandria, 16(1), 2004, 1-2. Changing attitudes (Management musings, 17), Library Management, 25(4/5), 2004, 230-231. Les bibliothe´caires et la connaissance: gardiens, fournisseurs, interme´diaires, guides, ressources?, in: Calenge, B. (Ed.) Bibliothe´caire: quel me´tier? E´ditions du Cercle de la Librairie, Paris, 2004, 41-51. (Collection Bibliothe`ques). Organisations as families, happy or otherwise (Management musings, 18) Library Management, 25(6/7), 2004, 316-317. Is hope necessary?, U3A Sources, (23), November 1004, 12.

2.1 University and Research Library Notes (some jointly with A. Anderson) Library Association Record, 64(9), September 1962, 335-338. Library Association Record, 65(2), February 1963, 76-78. Library Association Record, 65(4), April 1963, 170-172. Library Association Record, 65(8), August 1963, 305-307. Library Association Record, 66(l), January 1964, 33-35. Library Association Record, 66(3), March 1964, 120-123. Library Association Record, 66(5), May 1964, 229-231. Library Association Record, 66(8), August 1964, 400-404. Library Association Record, 67(l), January 1965, 21-24. Library Association Record, 67(3), March 1965, 98-100. Library Association Record, 67(7), July 1965, 235-239. Library Association Record, 67(12), December 1965, 449-452.

3. Research reports The Bath Mini-catalogue: A Progress Report (jointly with Philip Bryant and Gillian M. Venner). Bath University Library, February 1972. (BATH/LIB/1). vii, 41, [43] Patterns of Citations to Articles within Journals: A Preliminary Test of Scaiter, Concentration and Obsolescence (jointly with A. Sandison and Jean MacGregor), Bath University Library, October 1972. (BATH/LIB/2). [v], 33 Interlibrary Lending in the United Kingdom: Report of a National Survey carried out in February 1977 (jointly with R.J. Steemson), British Library, London, 1978. (BL R&D Report 5417). [v], 37 Document Supply in India: With Special Reference to Science and Technology and to a Centralised Supply Facility, January 1978. (Unpublished report to the Government of India Department of Science and Technology. iii, 58, [12] A National Document Centre for India. Report to the Government of India Department of Science and Technology (jointly with E.S. Smith). January 1979. iii, 51 The International Provision and Supply of Publications (jointly with A.A. Briquet de Lemos, S.C.J. Vickers and E.S. Smith, Unesco, Paris, November 1981. (PGI-8UWS/ 30). (Also Spanish and French versions). 86 Commercial Book Supply: The Availability of Book Materials Through Commercial Channels, with Particular Reference to Developing Countries (jointly with J. Clews, B. Kefford and P. Oakeshott), IFLA International Office for UAP, Wetherby, 1983. 514 (microfiche). Measuring the Performance of Document Supply Systems, Unesco, Paris, 1987. (PGI-87/WS/21). vii, 99 National Library and Information Needs: Alternative Ways of Meeting Them, with Special Reference to the Role of National Libraries, Unesco, Paris, 1989. (PGI-89/WS/ 9).62

129

Publications of Maurice B. Line

Interlending & Document Supply Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 117 –130

3.1 Research reports produced by teams headed by M.B. Line 3.1.1 Investigation into Information Requirements of the Social Sciences (INFROSS) Report on the Preliminary Stage, September 1967 - March 1968. April 1968.

No. 5: Citation patterns in the social sciences: results of pilot citation study and selection of source journals for main citation study. October 1972. No. 6. The use of citation linkages and networks for information retrieval in the social sciences. March 1971. No. 7: Size and growth of monograph literature, with special reference to the social sciences. April 1974. No. 8: CLOSSS: a machine readable data base of social science serials. Progress report 1971-1972. March 1973. No. 11: Clustering of journal titles according to citation data. Report on preparatory work design, data collection and preliminary analyses. September 1973. [NB there are no numbers 9 and 10]

Research reports: No. 1. Information Requirements of Researchers in the Social Sciences, 2 vols. May l971, (OSTI Report 5096). No. 2. Information Requirements of Social Scientists in Government Departments, March 1971. (OSTI Report 5097). No. 3. Information Requirements of College of Education Lecturers and Schoolteachers, February1971. (OSTI Report 5098). No. 4. The Information Needs of Social Workers, February 971. (OSTI Report 5099). No. 5. Research Procedures of Social Scientists, November 1971. (OSTI Report 5106).

3.1.5 Research reports, series A: No. 1: Towards the improvement of social science information systems: overview of research carried out 1970. February 1980. (BL R&D Report 5527). No. 2: Size, growth and composition of social science literature. March 1975. (BL R&D Report 5224). No. 3: The structure of social science literature as shown by citations. September 1979. (R&D Report 5524). No. 4: The evaluation of operational effectiveness and its use in the design of information systems.February 1975. (BL R&D Report 5222). No. 5: The planning of published indexing and abstracting services: coverage, overlap and contents. April 1976. (BL R&D Report 5290).

3.1.2 Experimental Information Service in the Social Sciences (EISISS) Report on Work Carried Out in 1969, February 1970 (OSTI Report 5066). Report on Work Carried out in 1970, January 1971 (OSTI Report 5085). Final Report, January 1972 (OSTI Report 5118). 3.1.3 Department of Education and Science The Scope for Automatic Data Processing in the British Library. 2 parts, HMSO, London, 1972.

3.1.6 Research reports, series B: No. 1: User evaluation of an information service in social welfare. Report of an interview and questionnaire study of the Wiltshire Social Service Staff Digest. November 1973. (OSTI Report 5213). No. 2: Analysis of requests made to the National Children’s Bureau question and answer service. November 1973. (OSTI Report 5213). No. 3: The relationship between usefulness and style of secondary publication. November 1974. (OSTI Report 5214). No. 4: Characteristics of social science serials: the construction and analysis of a file of social science serial titles. 1975. (OSTI Report 5217). No. 5: The collection and construction of a file of citation data 1976. (OSTI Report 5269). No. 6: The application of clustering techniques to citation data. October l977. (OSTI Report 5450). No. 7: Literature usage and interrelationships in the social sciences, as shown by citations in monographs. 1978. (OSTI Report 5478).

3.1.4 Design of Information Systems in the Social Sciences (DISISS) Progress Report 1971, December 1971. Progress Report 1972, January 1973. Progress Report 1973, January 1974. Working papers: No. 1: Comparison of results of science user studies with Investigation into information requirements of the social sciences. July 1971 No. 2: A machine readable data base of social science serials. November 1971. No. 3: The relationship between primary and secondary literature in the social sciences: a study of secondary literature in criminology. June 1972. No. 4: Characteristics of citations in social science monographs. June 1972.

130

A biography of Maurice Line

awarded him an Honorary D. Litt. in 1980; Southampton University awarded him an Honorary D. Sc. in 1988; he became a Fellow of Birmingham Polytechnic in 1992 and was awarded the Medal of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) in 1990. He is also a Companion of the Chartered Management Institute and a Fellow and an Honorary Fellow of CILIP. His contribution to the world of librarianship was recognised in 1990 when he was elected President of the Library Association. Maurice’s library career has been devoted to making libraries much more user-focused and over the years he has conducted many studies and led numerous programmes aimed at making libraries more accessible and easier to use. He was a great believer in designing libraries around human beings. Some of us might recall from library school days Ranganathan’s Five Laws of Library Science, which were published in 1931 – Maurice turned them on their heads to describe what he believed to be the reality of too many libraries:

Stella Pilling I first met Maurice Line in late 1979, not long after having joined the British Library Lending Division – as it then was – where he was director. My contact with him was initially fairly infrequent, but over the years I came to know him better from meetings, from his copious writings and conference papers, and from his regular staff “tea-parties”. During the years I worked for him I never really knew very much about Maurice’s personal and professional background and it is only more recently that I have begun to learn more about his life and his career. So . . . a few facts. Maurice was born in 1928 and attended Bedford School from 1939 to 1947. He went on to read English language and literature at Exeter College, Oxford, obtaining his MA in 1954. His library career began in 1950 when he became a trainee for a year at the Bodleian Library, Oxford, before moving north in 1951 to become a library assistant at Glasgow University for three years. He then moved south again to take up the post of Sub-Librarian at Southampton University Library, staying there till 1965. From 1965-1968 he held the post of Deputy Librarian at Newcastle-upon-Tyne University and in 1968 he became University Librarian at Bath. During his time at Bath, the Library was moved into a new building and it is said that Maurice bribed students to help move books by offering to buy each volunteer a pint of beer! In 1971 Maurice became a member of the body carrying out the preliminary planning for the British Library and was also involved in a study of the potential for automation in the BL. At this time he also moved out of the university library sector to become the Librarian of the National Central Library. The NCL had started life in 1916 as the Central Library for Students, becoming the National Central Library in 1931. Originally the NCL was a library concerned with supplying books to adults and students who could not reach a public library. Later it developed into a national clearinghouse for interlibrary lending, and became part of the newly formed British Library in 1973, when its collections were moved to West Yorkshire. Maurice moved with the NCL and from 1974 to 1985 he held the post of Director-General, British Library Lending Division, on the retirement of Donald Urquhart. From 1985 till 1988 he was Director-General of the British Library’s Science, Technology and Industry Directorate from 1985 till 1988, when he retired. For the next 12 years Maurice worked as a consultant specialising in the management of change, and advising organisations in many parts of the world. He carried out over 50 consultancies in 16 different countries and visited more than 40 countries in a professional context. Amidst this globetrotting, however, his interest in the education of future librarians also continued undiminished in his capacity as Professor Associate at Sheffield University’s Department of Information Science, and as External Professor at Loughborough University’s Department of Information and Library Studies. During the course of his long career, Maurice has been awarded a number of honours. Heriot-Watt University

S.R. Ranganathan: 1 books are for use; 2 every reader his or her book; 3 every book its reader; 4 save the time of the reader; 5 a library is a growing organism. Maurice B. Line: 1 books are for collecting; 2 some readers their books; 3 some books their readers; 4 waste the time of the reader; 5 the library is a growing mausoleum. He was particularly interested in redesigning catalogues, but other topics such as citation analysis, the problems of music documentation, the information needs of social scientists and obsolescence in scientific literature all captured his interest, as can be seen from the lengthy list of his publications. Even the most cursory of glances is enough to show the immense range and diversity of his professional involvement. His very first journal article appeared in the Library Association Record in 1952: “A classified catalogue of music scores: some problems”. His first book was A Bibliography of Russian Literature in English Translation to 1900, published in 1963 by the Library Association. From that point onwards Maurice’s written output has not stopped. Some of his 420 journal articles have fascinating titles – a few of my favourites include: . On the construction and care of white elephants; . White elephants revisited; . Some notes on book stealing; . How golden is your retriever?; . Ignoring the user: how, when and why; . The shoulders of giants, or the backs of mice?; . How to demotivate staff: a brief guide; . The bonfire of the author’s vanity; . Chaos, strategy and planning: can they be reconciled?; . The loneliness of the long-distance information ranger; . Does low pay have to be associated with high boredom? . Extracting pearls from rotten oysters . . . . . . and the list could go on. The titles themselves make you want to read – and reread – the articles. I have always admired Maurice’s prose style – spare and concise, humorous and to the point. In my view his

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 [2005] 131–132 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615]

131

A biography of Maurice Line

Interlending & Document Supply

Stella Pilling

Volume 33 · Number 2 · 2005 · 131 –132

outstanding ability to express himself clearly on the page makes him an excellent role-model for present day and future library professionals, brought up as so many are in a world where grammar and punctuation are disregarded and where jargon and sloppiness rule. Now finally retired, Maurice remains as intellectually alert as ever, and he continues to read extensively, with occasional forays into print in the form of letters to the local paper. The points he makes are always worth listening to, even if one does not agree with them, and his wide-ranging and eclectic interests can put lesser mortals to shame. Colleagues who, over the years, had the opportunity to work alongside

Maurice, will not forget his boundless energy and professional commitment to improving the library experience for users. Maurice is a one-off and, as the saying goes, when they made Maurice they broke the mould! Stella Pilling

132

Memories of Maurice Line: 1 Frances Hendrix Frances was the Director of LASER (The London and South Eastern Library Region), from 1988 to 2002. She is currently Chief Executive of the LASER Foundation, and a Director of Ufi/Learndirect I have been in the Library profession for over 40 years and during that time Maurice Line has been part of the landscape. When I started out as a new recruit Maurice was already a name, and it was while I was at one of my first jobs, in the university sector, and involved in UDC, that I first met Maurice who was then a university librarian. I never actually worked for Maurice, but of the many colleagues who did, he was reported as being a wonderful and inspiring boss. There are so many occasions to recall, where Maurice was present, either he was guest speaker, chair or delegate at meetings, conferences, seminars etc. that I attended or organised, and was always worth the money, always had a fresh point of view, a totally new idea, a controversial suggestion, but always in the best possible taste. He was, and remains one of the international giants, of the library and information profession. The word brilliant has been used about Maurice (Newsletter of the IFLA Round Table of Library Journals, 2000), and it isn’t hard to understand why. He did have an impact on the profession and his work at the British Library was truly innovative and effective. One did not have to agree with Maurice to get on with him, and both in the flesh and in print he and I had differences of view. We were both members of LA Council for a shared period, and I remember in particular an entertaining debate about retired members, and whether if you were a consultant you could really be classed as a retired member? I imagine every contribution to this well deserved feschriften will make mention of Maurice’s prowess (?), on the dance floor, and possibly one of many photos depicting this incredible scene will be submitted. I never had the “privilege” to dance with Maurice, and regret I will never have that experience (it’s OK Maurice it’s too late for me now, the knees won’t stand it). Contributions to this festschriften will cover the many achievements of this

eminent librarian, but one thing all of us should mention is Maurice’s sense of fun. He was simply great company, and never ever dull or pompous. He had time 40 years ago for a young brash librarian, and he has time now I am sure for anyone who is sensible enough to approach him to discuss the latest issues in our profession. I was lucky in my career in two specific ways. It was a time of real development and innovation, the birth of technology in libraries, but also I was able to meet the most talented and effective people working in the profession, these included Joel Downing, David Whitaker, Brenda Moon, Ian Mowat, Lynne Brindley, Derek Law and of course Maurice Line.

Reference Newsletter of the IFLA Round Table of Library Journals (2000), Newsletter, No 2, (15),Vol 15, December 1999January 2000, p. 2.

Memories of Maurice Line: 2 David Bradbury David Bradbury joined the British Library Lending Division in 1974, worked in many departments and eventually became DirectorGeneral for Collections and Services. He left the British Library in 2001 and is now the Director of Libraries and the Guildhall Art Gallery in the City of London Maurice Line has always been a marvellous person to work with – a great leader, a great wit, a prolific writer and thinker, a wonderful talker, a globetrotter admired all over the globe, provocative and thought-provoking, energetic and iconoclastic, but above all a tremendous inspiration to all who have worked with him. I joined the then British Library Lending Division (BLLD) in early 1975 soon after Maurice had become Director-General. For the next 13 years I was proud to be one of Maurice’s staff, and looking back I cannot imagine anyone better to have worked under during the formative years of my career. It must have been a brave step for Maurice to become Director of the National Central Library (NCL) in 1971, knowing that it would be absorbed into the new British Library two years later. With his shining achievements in academic libraries, Maurice could easily have chosen to become one of the great establishment academic librarians in the UK. But he 133

had already been involved with the great ADP study on the automation of the British Museum Library, and I think he just could not resist the challenge. In the British Library Lending Division he would be succeeding Donald Urquhart, another great leader and iconoclast – would there be anything left for Maurice to do? There was a huge amount do, and Maurice did it. Full extension of coverage to the social sciences, the move into the humanities, the amalgamation of the NCL with the National Lending Library, the introduction of a catalogue, the completion of major building projects, implementation of automation, building bridges with the old British Museum Library/British Library Reference Division, and with university and public libraries, helping the new British Library to achieve rapid worldwide acclaim, and introducing democracy to Boston Spa! The success of the BLLD and the brilliance of Maurice’s huge range of articles and books speak for themselves. I will illustrate my enthusiasm for Maurice with a few personal memories. Maurice has always had a great joie de vivre – his brio at dancing and parties is legendary. He pokes fun at people and practices, but he’s also willing to be the subject of other people’s good-humoured teasing. At an early stage in my career, I risked my head by playing King Maurice at the annual BLLD Christmas pantomime (I’m not sure Donald ever allowed them even): Maurice showed no sign of offence. He was more upset when at one of the British Library-wide trade union meetings I as a trade union representative accused him of being autocratic, and failing to consult Boston Spa staff properly over the introduction of flexitime (something which Maurice introduced very successfully decades before many other organisations). The few tensions at Boston Spa involving Maurice which I now look back on with a big smile were over autocracy and consultation: Maurice, like Donald, knew what he wanted and was almost always right, but Maurice unlike Donald wanted to have consulted widely in order to demonstrate his democratic nature. His management meetings often began with “I would like to hear what you all feel about this issue, but let me tell you my view to start with”. And even Maurice ran into problems when he brought in the job satisfaction consultants.

As a young radical I was a huge admirer of Maurice’s challenging approach to the world. But Maurice gave useful advice to young radicals as well as encouraging us to look critically at everything. I well remember preparing a report for the British Library Chief Executive on international exchange arrangements. Maurice’s comment on seeing it was that if one had to clean a baby’s bottom in public, at least don’t clean it with a wire brush. I was more cautious thereafter. Long after Maurice retired I found myself in posts which he had earlier occupied, and I became all the more aware of his tremendous achievement. Although he has been a lifelong enemy of cant and pomposity he has always been a tremendous believer in the importance and power of libraries. The development of libraries of all kinds not only in the UK but also in Scandinavia, Australia, Latin America and many other parts of the world has been fundamentally influenced by Maurice’s thinking, speaking, and writing and through his work in IFLA. No history of twentieth century British or world librarianship will be able to exclude him. For me it has been both a huge privilege and an enormous source of pleasure to have known Maurice as friend and colleague for over 30 years.

Memories of Maurice Line: 3 Maurice Line – through the eyes of his secretary Pam Maher When the vacancy came up for the post of Senior Personal Secretary to the Director General at Boston Spa, I decided that was for me, in spite of the warnings given to me by the retiring secretary, a quiet efficient lady who had worked for Dr Urquhart for years. When Maurice filled the post, her days of tranquillity ceased. She just wanted to retire! Of course I didn’t listen to her. I applied for and got the job. At first everything was great. I was a “breath of fresh air”, Maurice’s words, not mine. I was as noisy as Miss G was quiet, and everything went along smoothly. Maurice had an insatiable appetite for work, and I soon found that, in spite of all the help I got from the typing centre, it was almost impossible to keep up with him. Those were the days when computers were only for the very privileged, and we poor secretaries had to type and retype over and over again until the papers were into their final stage. And Maurice spent hour after hour composing them for the many lectures he gave. When I prepared the draft minutes of the senior

134

staff meeting he would mutilate my efforts, much to my disgust, but I learned from it all and it helped me to become more efficient. Maurice travelled the world over promoting the British Library, and in so doing, he also promoted himself. He was a fun loving man, always ready enjoy himself. On the dance floor he was a sight to behold. He just let himself go with the music, much to the horror of some of his partners! His many escapades were an open book to those who knew him, and as his secretary I listened, somewhat reluctantly, as he poured out his many tales of woe. He was also a “Mickey Mouse” man, that is to say, he was born in 1928, the same year as the famous mouse. He was at one time keen to start a Mickey Mouse Club for all 1928 babies like himself. What a thought. Lastly, although Maurice and I fought from time to time, or was it most of the time, as I struggled to survive in this environment, I always found him to be a gentleman. He was a generous man, who never hesitated to reward endeavour from others. It would be dishonest of me to say that I missed him when he retired – I was so relieved to see him go. When I think of him on the odd occasion however, my memories of him always make me smile, and that cannot be bad. He was OK.

Maurice Line: a curriculum vitae

Editorial work

Born 21 June 1928.

Editor, Alexandria: The Journal of National and International Library Issues, 1989-2002; General Editor, Librarianship and Information Work Worldwide, 1991-2000.

IFLA activities Education

Secretary, Section on International Lending, 1972-1977; Director, Office for International Lending, 1975-1988; Director, International Programme for UAP (Universal Availability of Publications), 1980-1989; Chair, Section of National Libraries, 1985-1989; Chair Round Table of Editors of Library Journals, 1997-1999. Member of Standing Committees of several other sections at various times. One of the pioneers of library automation in the UK. Centrally involved in the development of the British Library from the first stages of planning in 1991.

Bedford School, 1939-47; Exeter College, Oxford University 1947-50 (BA, English language and literature; MA 1954). Companion of the Chartered Management Institute; Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP); Hon. Fellow of CILIP, 1987; President of the Library Association, 1990.

Honours Research

Hon. D.Litt, Heriot-Watt University (Edinburgh), 1980; Hon. D.Sc, Southampton University, 1988; Fellow of Birmingham Polytechnic, 1992; Medal of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), 1990.

Information requirements of the social sciences; design of information systems in the social sciences; application of automation to the national library system; interlibrary lending and document supply; bibliometric studies; etc.

Publications

Posts held

Fourteen books, 40 research reports and 418 articles on a wide range of professional topics; translations have appeared in 20 languages.

Bodleian Library, Oxford (trainee, 1950-1951); Glasgow University Library (Library Assistant, 1951-1954); Southampton University Library (Sub-Librarian, 19541965); Newcastle upon Tyne University Library (Deputy Librarian, 1965-1968); Bath University Library (Librarian, 1968-1971); National Central Library (Librarian, 19711973); The British Library (Director-General, Lending Division, 1974-1985; Director-General, Science Technology and Industry, 1985-1988); Consultant, 1988-2000 (specializing in the management of change). Associate Professor, Sheffield University Department of Information Science, 1977-; External Professor, Loughborough University Department of Information and Library Studies, 1986-1992.

Consultancies Has carried out over 50 consultancies in 16 different countries. Has visited over 40 countries in a professional context.

Personal interests Social issues (penal reform, globalisation, poverty, etc.), music, walking.

Local activities Chair, United Nations Association – Harrogate Branch; Chair, Harrogate University of the Third Age (U3A). Lectures to local groups on social and international issues and other topics. E-mail: [email protected]

Board memberships British Library Board, 1974-1988; Board of Directors, Engineering Information, Inc., 1991-1999. Chair, UK Friends of the Alexandria Library, 1992-2000.

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 [2005] 135 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0264-1615]

135

Maurice Line: a photogallery

Interlending & Document Supply 33/2 [2005] 137–140 ]