1.2 And yet, despite its pre-eminence as a library materials holding institution, the University, because of its piecemeal development over the centuries, its collegiate nature, its largely decentralised structure and geographical spread, and its resulting complexity, does not routinely consider its library holdings as an integral whole. It has never matched the excellence of its collections with a holistic overview of the services which its many libraries (about 100 in all) deliver to the University in particular and to the scholarly world in general. This is not to say that the individual libraries have not been well managed by those responsible for running them. Nor is it the case that there has been no co-operation between them. Indeed, the curators and library committees of the many institutions providing a library service within the University, and the staff of their libraries, have often been assiduous in the past in liaising with others on various aspects of their library provision. (The creation in 1988 of OLIS—the Oxford Libraries' Information System—is a good example of what has already been achieved by co-operative means across the existing structures.)
1.3 But if many of the libraries in the University have been successful in co-ordinating certain elements of their work, it has long been recognised that much more could be done to enhance the quality of the service overall. Though there are many desirable features in the existing system, some resulting from the very fact of its distributed nature, such distribution (of staff effort, of resources, and of services) is ad hoc rather than deliberately planned. The system is expensive overall, by any standards; it contains elements of unplanned duplication; it offers few economies of scale; it lacks strategic direction and does not encourage a sense of corporate purpose among its staff; its governance structures are complex, and militate against systematic co-ordination; it is not linked in any unified way to the planning mechanisms of the University; it is not well placed to make speedy bids for resources from externally funded initiatives, or to respond as effectively as it might to opportunities for co-operative working with external agencies and groups; and above all, it appears to many users—especially to those whose work requires them to consult more than one of the libraries in the system—as fragmented and incoherent, with all the inefficiencies, inconvenience, and confusion entailed.
1.4 On several occasions between 1966 and 1996 the University has given formal consideration to the benefits that might be expected to flow from the development of a more unified and more rationally organised library system involving the many libraries funded by the University. Following the Shackleton Report (1966) [Report of the Committee of Inquiry on University Libraries] and the Nicholas Report (1987) [Committee of Inquiry into the Future of Library Services] a number of changes intended to move the system towards a greater degree of integration were agreed. But it was not until the approval of the principal recommendations of the Thomas and Kenny Reports (1995) [Report of Council's Working Party on Senior Library Posts (Supplement (1) to Gazette No. 4373, 21 September 1995, p. 37; Report of the Advisory Group on the Management Structures for an Integrated Library System (Supplement (1) to Gazette No. 4380, 13 November 1995, p. 339] that changes were introduced which were explicitly designed to lead to the creation of the kind of radically new organisational structure which could make the integrated library system envisaged in the earlier reports a practical reality.
1.5 The changes approved by the University during the course of 1996 were threefold. Firstly, with effect from 1 January 1997, the two bodies directly responsible for the libraries funded by the block grant from the General Board (the Libraries Board and the Curators of the Bodleian Library) were replaced by a single, interim, body—the Libraries Committee—which reports jointly to Council and the General Board. Secondly, the vacancy in the post of Bodley's Librarian was filled from January 1997 by a new officer, with a University-wide remit as Director of University Library Services and Bodley's Librarian. And, thirdly, the new committee and its newly-appointed chief officer were given a clear remit 'to bring forward within three years for consideration by the University proposals for the creation of an integrated library service that will facilitate the following major objectives:
(a) the distribution of resources within the service to meet users' needs most effectively;
(b) the improvement of the capacity of the University's libraries to respond to the needs of their users in the University;
(c) the maintenance and development of, and provision of access to, Oxford's collections as an international research resource;
(d) the provision of University-wide services such as library automation and electronic media, preservation, and library staff development;
(e) the fostering of the qualities of responsiveness, and of flexibility in provision.'
The proposals contained in this report come before the University as a direct outcome of that joint remit.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
2.2 An outline of the consultative procedure and timetable being adopted was published in Gazette No. 4483, 30 July 1998, p. 1510. It was there pointed out that since January 1997 the Libraries Committee and the Director of University Library Services had already been working towards a greater degree of integration in services even within the frame of the three-year interim period. An account of measures recently put in place is given in section 4 below. It was also noted that planning for greater integration of the University's libraries had begun independently of, but would now be informed by, relevant aspects of the Report of the Commission of Inquiry, on the library-related aspects of which the Libraries Committee commented, as it did on the two subsequent reports of the Joint Working Party on Governance. In the case of all three reports, the Libraries Committee was reassured that its own planning direction appeared to be in alignment with what was being envisaged for the governance of the University as a whole.
2.3 During the 1998 Long Vacation the iterative planning process involved meetings with Libraries Committee librarians as a group, as well as a series of meetings between the Director and individual Libraries Committee librarians together with the chairmen of their respective management committees. Meetings of librarians across the University with subject responsibilities were also convened in four broad disciplinary groupings (Humanities, Social Sciences, Science, Medicine) to discuss subject-based approaches to integration and service development.
2.4 On the basis of those consultations, the Director issued a planning document in the autumn of 1998, Framework for the Millennium. This document, which was circulated to appropriate bodies and posted for general comment on the Libraries Committee's website, was designed, firstly, to allow the Libraries Committee to take stock of the position half way through its three-year interim existence; secondly, to inform the University bodies to which the Libraries Committee reports about the steps which had been taken towards integration since June 1997; and, thirdly, to serve as the basis for ongoing discussion about the structure, operation and service benefits of the integrated library system of the future. This framework document gave a clear indication of the strategic direction being taken.
2.5 In Michaelmas Term 1998 relevant faculty boards and other bodies were invited to respond to a set of proposals for an integrated governance and staffing structure, as envisaged in the Framework for the Millennium. During Hilary and Trinity Terms 1999, the proposals were redrafted in the light of detailed comments from faculties etc, and as the result of a further series of meetings of the Director and his Deputy with faculty representatives. At the same time, the Director and Deputy Director undertook a comprehensive round of meetings with library staff, including all staff in libraries which would be affected by the proposals for an integrated staff structure, to whom the proposals were also explained in an individually addressed summary document from the Director. A website 'Ask the Director' facility also provided staff with a further open forum for raising issues with the Director.
2.6 Although the college and departmental libraries lie outside the formal remit of the Libraries Committee (and are not therefore explicitly included within the proposals for managerial integration), the Director and the Libraries Committee have been at pains to consult representatives of those libraries, in order to ensure the closest possible co-ordination and co-operation between the integrated libraries sector and those libraries outside it, as a means of benefiting library users across the collegiate University generally. The college libraries sector is represented on the Libraries Committee itself by the Chairman of the Committee of College Librarians (elected by the Conference of Colleges), the Director attends the meetings of the committee, and a number of college librarians are in membership of existing subcommittees of the Libraries Committee and participate fully in the subject groupings referred to in para. 2.3 above. By these and other means, valuable input has been made by the college libraries sector to the integration planning process. In similar ways, close consultation has been maintained with the departmental libraries sector, with the departmental library representatives in membership of the Advisory Subcommittee of Librarians commenting routinely on the emerging plans for integration, and through the involvement of departmental librarians in the Science and Medicine subject groupings. During the 1999 Trinity Term, too, the existing Science Libraries Committee—which has sought for some years to co-ordinate library provision for the Sciences across the University—approved in principle arrangements whereby the many science departmental libraries and their parent bodies would be better able to contribute their advice to the Libraries Committee. During the 1999 Long Vacation, the Heads of Science Departments were formally consulted on these proposals, and general approval was forthcoming.
2.7 Liaison was maintained with the Personnel Section of the University Offices to ensure that the relevant staff unions were kept informed at joint secretarial level.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
3.2 The proposals now put before the University for the formal integration of the Libraries Committee libraries have been designed with the following key principles tested against that important touchstone.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
In the integrated structure, these two units will be managerially merged, with enhanced service benefits. In the meantime, the closer working arrangements which have been introduced, overseen by the Deputy Director of University Library Services, together with the monitoring function of the Subcommittee on Library Automation, are already illustrating the benefits to be had from a shared development approach, from an integrated IT strategy for the libraries sector as a whole, and from integrated support for joint IT applications. An Automated Stack Request Working Party has recently completed the design specification for a system which will bring major service benefits in the Bodleian and elsewhere; and a Digital Library Resources Group has successfully overseen a Mellon-funded scoping study of Oxford's digital collections, amounting to a forward-looking strategic plan which the integrated sector will actively seek to implement as a means of significantly developing the electronic library materials available across the University network and beyond.
Further details of these and other measures will be found in the section of the Framework for the Millennium entitled 'Towards integration: the story so far' (www.admin.ox.ac.uk/oxonly/lib/1998/9834.htm#Tow). The actual and potential benefits of these interim steps will be maximised in the context of the formal integration arrangements now proposed.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
—A single, simplified governance structure, with strong links to the different user communities and direct reporting lines to the central University.
—A senior governing body, representing the University Library Service at the highest levels of the institution, and statutorily responsible for maintaining the international status of the library collections.
—A unified professional management structure for all the staff employed in the libraries directly funded by the University Council through the Curators of the University Libraries.
—A senior library staff management team (the University Library Services Strategy Group) responsible for co-ordinating operational, financial and forward planning across the integrated sector.
—A coherent statement of purpose, with short, medium and long-term strategic and operational objectives clearly delineated.
—The ability to deliver a range of library services appropriate to a world-class institution, embodied in plans approved by the University, closely tied to its planning and resource allocation procedures, and reflecting the aspirations of its current academic constituencies, the wide-ranging needs of the external users of its libraries, and the long-term responsibilities associated with the legal deposit system.
—A systematic approach, to the extent required and feasible, to the whole range of reader services (including opening hours, admissions procedures, lending and reference policies, reprographic facilities, and remote document supply)
—A more explicit and routine input to the strategic goals and objectives of the University, for example, in the formulation of an institutional information strategy, and by directly contributing to the University's strategies for learning and teaching and for research.
—A comprehensive set of service standards.
—The ability to respond flexibly and effectively to users' needs (both internal and external) as they develop and change.
—Clearly stated collection development policies, in which each library in the system plays its designated part in the acquisition of materials and in the provision of access to resources.
—An integrated stock management policy, linked to a system-wide approach to the issues of conservation, preservation, retention, location and storage of library materials.
—A comprehensive staff training and development programme.
—A team-based approach to the subject-specific provision of services.
—An integrated accommodation strategy, tied to local needs, University plans, and long-term archival responsibilities.
—An overarching library IT strategy.
—A comprehensive on-line union catalogue of holdings.
—An integrated approach to the acquisition, support and, where appropriate, the long-term preservation of digital information resources (including networked dataset provision).
—A planned approach to the digitisation of library collections.
—The ability to respond effectively and rapidly to external initiatives and funding opportunities, combined with a libraries-wide fund-raising strategy.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
(In considering the name of the successor body, the Libraries Committee was conscious of historical sensitivities but is persuaded of the importance of a title that reflects the measure of trusteeship invested in a body charged with maintaining the second most important and extensive library collections in the United Kingdom. Having considered a range of more or less plausible alternatives, the Libraries Committee believes 'curators' to be the term that most adequately conveys the duty to care for a part of the University's physical heritage that those responsible for its libraries share with the bodies that superintend, say, the Sheldonian Theatre or the University Parks. The Libraries Committee also believes that the use of the term 'curators' will carry weight with those invited to sit on the body as external members.)
The range of subcommittees proposed for the new Curators of the University Libraries is illustrated diagrammatically at Annexe B. The subcommittees mostly fall into one or other of two types: functional and subject-based. The five functional subcommittees (at the bottom of the diagram) are taken over from the present interim structure, as a means of continuing the important work already being undertaken in key areas of library activity. The remit and membership of these subcommittees would remain largely unchanged.
The thirteen subject-related subcommittees form the major new element in the integration process. Based in most cases on existing library committees within either the faculties or the Bodleian group, and representing, where possible, a considerable rationalisation of the existing complex of largely unco-ordinated committees, they offer the prospect of an integrated subject-based approach to library provision across the University. Most of them will be joint committees of the Curators of the University Libraries and of academic constituencies. All of them, too, will have a dual function, essential to the integrated approach proposed: governance, with each of the subcommittees having local oversight of the administration of a particular library or libraries; and subject advice, by which the Curators of the University Libraries will receive direct input on library provision for a particular subject, or range of subjects, across all the libraries within their remit.
Continued provision is made for a Bodleian Subcommittee, because although the Bodleian staff will be integrally involved in the work of the functional and subject-based committees, the scale of the library taken together with its dependencies can generate issues and items of business which are institution-specific. In particular it is felt that initial consideration of the Bodleian's finances by a subcommittee is advantageous.
Attention is drawn in particular to four matters relating to these proposed arrangements:
(a) the subject-based model proposed has been agreed in principle, as an outcome from the thorough consultation process, with the relevant bodies (faculty boards and library committees), and the remits and membership of the new subject subcommittees have been agreed in detail with those currently responsible for the local governance of the various Libraries Committee libraries involved. All conform broadly to the model described in Annexe B, which sets out the basic principles informing the composition and remits of the subject-based subcommittees. The individual sets of standing orders exhibit marginal variations taking account of local circumstances.
(b) For the sake of clarity and consistency, it is intended that all the proposed subject-based subcommittees be named 'Committee for Library Provision in [name of subject(s)]'.
(c) In the case of Social Studies, a subject-based library committee along the lines envisaged under these proposals has already been established as a joint committee of the Libraries Committee and of the Social Studies Faculty Board. Discussions on integration with the faculty board were already so far advanced when the post of Social Studies Faculty Librarian fell vacant in 1998, that it was agreed to move as quickly as possible to the proposed integrated model for governance and staff management arrangements. The new committee has been meeting since Hilary Term 1999, and the arrangements have been found to work well. If the overall proposals are approved, all that will be required in the case of the Social Studies Libraries Committee is a change of name.
(d) In order to promote co-ordination and co-operation between the integrated libraries sector and the college and departmental libraries, it is proposed that these constituencies should continue to be represented on the functional subcommittees in the new structure, and that their input to the subject-related aspects of the other subcommittees should be enabled by their representation on such collection development committees as the new subject subcommittees may wish to establish. It is envisaged, for example, that the so-called CLIPs (Committees for Library and Information Provision), which already exist in a number of subject areas, will be annexed to the appropriate subject subcommittees, and it is deemed appropriate that college and departmental library interests should be included in the work of these groups, mostly, but not solely, in the area of library materials selection. In the case of the Committee for Library Provision in the Sciences (the remodelled Science Libraries Committee), it is proposed, in view of the fact that so much library provision in this broad area is made by a multiplicity of scientific departmental libraries, that both the Heads of Science Departments and their librarians should be represented on the new committee itself.
This proposal, to create an integrated staff structure in which all the Libraries Committee library staff are ultimately responsible to the Director, is made in the context of an organisational approach developed by the Director, which has been discussed and disseminated within the libraries sector and approved in principle by the Libraries Committee. A diagrammatic representation of the approach envisaged for the co- ordinated management of the library staff is attached at Annexe C, for information. The following points are made by way of explanation of the approach to be taken.
(a) Both the functional groups (on the left of the diagram) and the subject groups (on the right) will consist of teams of library staff operating across the various libraries and library departments in the integrated system. Their work will both feed into, and be guided by, the appropriate parts of the formal governance structure outlined in section (i) above.
(b) Each of the groups, or teams, will be co-ordinated by existing senior staff who together will form, with the Director, the basis for a new University Library Services Strategy Group. This latter group will become the mechanism by which the Director will co-ordinate the management of the integrated library system as a whole. The group will necessarily consider only strategic, policy and key operational issues, and its business will feed into and from the Curators of the University Libraries and their subcommittees as appropriate. It is envisaged that the papers of this group will be widely disseminated amongst the ULS staff, and that they will be routinely shared with the Chairman of the Committee of College Librarians.
(c) The day-to-day management of individual libraries and the 'local' delivery of services will remain the responsibility of the librarians whose libraries are represented in the centre of the diagram, and it is intended that the Director will continue to meet with those librarians as a group, as well as with the Bodleian Senior Management Group, which he will continue to convene as Bodley's Librarian.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
7.2 However, whilst the more carefully targeted use of existing resources, combined with the pursuit of external funding opportunities and a more concerted approach to fund-raising and income generation generally, should enable to the Curators of the University Libraries to make more effective provision for users' needs, there will be some marginal restructuring costs (both recurrent and non-recurrent) which the Libraries Committee may not be able to finance from existing resources.
7.3 Provision will need to be made, for example, for payments for extra responsibility for up to half a dozen of the senior staff co- ordinating the work of the functional and subject teams in the new staffing structure. In addition, given the emphasis, inherent in the subject approach to library provision, on increased levels of liaison work (between library staff and users and between library staff), it is likely that two or three additional subject librarians will need to be added to the library staff complement, together with a marginal increase in clerical support, in order to free time for senior staff to undertake more subject-specific work.
7.4 The Libraries Committee will give careful consideration to any cases for such costs, however, and every effort will be made, as hitherto, to contain them where possible within the resources available. It is estimated that the total cost of the additional staff resources mentioned in para. 7.3 would be of the order of £70K-£100K recurrent, towards some of which the Libraries Committee (Curators) would expect to be able to contribute through budgetary reorganisation. The Libraries Committee is comfortable with the suggestion from the General Board's Planning and Development Committee that new resources for integration should be linked to the achievement of related performance targets.
7.5 Less predictable, without actual experience of managing the new arrangements, will be the overall impact on the need for administrative support for the integrated library sector. To take an example, the opportunity will present itself to provide certain routine secretariat and accounting functions from a single base for the integrated sector as a whole. This will involve a redistribution of administrative load, which, while releasing professional library staff in the smaller units to devote more time to reader services and subject specialisms (and therefore representing a gain in staff resources in one part of the system), will put greater pressure on another part of the system. It is not yet clear, though, to what extent, if any, the creation of the new academic support services structure as part of the governance changes, might enhance administrative support for the new University Library Service. It is suggested that a further report on this aspect of resource implications should be made in the light of experience, possibly in advance of the formal evaluation proposed below, on the understanding that it might entail making a case for some further recurrent funding.
7.6 There may also be a marginal increase in the amount of academic staff time required to make the subcommittee system operate as planned; but a good deal of such time is already expended in the libraries sector as it is presently constituted, and both the Libraries Committee and the academic bodies consulted attach a great deal of importance to direct input from the academic community at large.
7.7 In the light of the improved delivery of library services which it confidently expects as a result of the integration now proposed, the Libraries Committee feels able to recommend the revised arrangements for the governance and management of its libraries.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
9.2 The Statutes contain a large body of legislation relating to libraries: the Libraries Committee decree, the suspended statutes concerning the Libraries Board and the Bodleian Curators, and the extensive decrees and regulations concerning the Ashmolean, Bodleian and Taylorian Libraries. The Libraries Committee has begun to consider in detail whether the content of the individual clauses of existing library legislation
—will be superseded by the new arrangements when approved;
—is covered by the new draft statute;
—is now covered by some other legislation (e.g. in respect of the terms and conditions of employment of University staff);
—might be considered for incorporation, either in its present or in some amended form, in standing orders or regulations (irrespective of whether such standing orders or regulations do or do not need to appear in the published volume of Statutes, Decrees, and Regulations);
—is arguably redundant.
It is suggested that, if the General Board, Council, and Congregation approve the draft of the new statute below, work on drafting any related decrees, regulations or standing orders can proceed during Hilary and Trinity Terms.
1 In Tit. VIII (Statutes, 1997, p. 58) delete Sect. III and substitute:
1. There shall be a body called the Curators of the University Libraries consisting of:
(1) the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Academic Services), who shall be chairman;
(2) one of the Proctors or the Assessor as may be agreed between them;
(3)--(6) four persons elected by Council, of whom one shall be a member both
of Council and of its Planning and Resource Allocation Committee, and of whom
two shall be persons not being resident holders of teaching, research, or
administrative posts in the University or in any college or other society
[Office note: there would be an understanding (a) that one of the external
members should be someone with experience of managing a major research
library, and (b) that Council should also appoint a person with experience in
the application of IT to libraries];
(7)--(11) one member from each of the five Divisional Boards, elected by their respective boards;
(12)--(15) four persons elected by Congregation from amongst its members; (16) a person elected by the Conference of Colleges;
(17) a Junior Member elected by the OUSU Executive;
(18) a Junior Member elected by the Graduate Committee of OUSU.
The curators shall have power to co-opt not more than two additional members for such periods as the curators may determine from time to time.
The curators under (3)--(16) shall hold office for four years and shall be re-eligible, and the curators under (17) and (18) shall hold office for one year and shall be re-eligible; provided always that the tenure of office of elected curators shall be subject to their retaining the qualifications in virtue of which they were elected; and provided also that a curator elected to fill a vacancy caused otherwise than by lapse of time shall hold office for the unexpired residue only of the period of office of the curator whom he or she succeeds.
The Director of University Library Services and Bodley's Librarian shall be secretary to the Curators.
No Junior Member shall be present for the discussion of, or receive the papers or minutes relating to, reserved business as defined in Ch. II, Sect. III, cl. 7.
2. The curators shall be responsible to Council for:
(a) ensuring that provision is made for the University's library and information requirements for teaching and research;
(b) making financial provision, from funds made available to them
by Council or from other sources, for such libraries as Council shall from time
to time determine;
[Note: the libraries which Council has already agreed should be funded
through the Curators of the University Libraries are the Bodleian Library and
its dependent libraries, the Sackler Library, the Taylor Institution Library,
the Cairns Library, the Institute of Health Sciences Library, the English,
History, Modern Languages, Music, and Theology Faculty Libraries, and the
Social Studies Libraries]
(c) ensuring that the University's major research libraries, including the Bodleian, Sackler, and Taylorian Libraries, are maintained as a national and international scholarly resource;
(d) advising as necessary on the University's trusteeship of the collections held in its libraries, including, where appropriate, advising on the need for specialist legal or financial advice;
(e) advising on any proposals involving the use of resources in the University for library and information provision for teaching and research;
(f) such other responsibilities as may be determined by Council from time to time.
3. The curators shall have authority under Council to make such arrangements as are necessary to fulfil their responsibilities and shall have such other powers as may be laid down by statute, decree, or regulation.
4. The Director of University Library Services and Bodley's Librarian shall be appointed by an electoral board which shall be chaired by the Vice-Chancellor or his or her nominee, and the other members of which shall be appointed by the curators. The electors in making their choice shall have regard to the direction given by Sir Thomas Bodley, that Bodley's Librarian should be 'one that is noted and known for a diligent student, and in all his conversation to be trusty, active, and discreet: a graduate also, and a linguist'.
5. The Director of University Library Services and Bodley's Librarian shall act for the curators and shall be responsible to them in the exercise of their powers.
6. The curators shall approve arrangements for the delegation of appointments within the University Library Services, provided that the appointment of senior library staff at grade 6 shall be subject to the approval of the curators on the recommendation of the Director of University Library Services and Bodley's Librarian.'
2 Ibid., delete Sect. IV (p. 60) and renumber existing Sectt. V--VI (pp. 62--3) as Sectt. IV--V.
3 This statute shall have immediate effect, provided that until such time as the membership of the curators is constituted their powers shall be vested in the Libraries Committee; and provided also that the initial periods of appointment of the first elected curators shall be so varied as to procure a regular rotation of subsequent appointments.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement
—Strong faculty/divisional representation.
—Undergraduate and postgraduate student representation.
—Staff from relevant libraries, including, ex officio, Director of University Library Services or nominee.
—Member appointed by the Curators of the University Libraries.
—Provision for co-optation.
—Provision of strategic advice to the Curators of the University Libraries on library and information provision for a particular subject or range of subjects across all libraries within its subject remit.
—Reporting jointly to the Curators of the University Libraries and the relevant faculty board or other parent body.
—Power to establish such subcommittees as it may from time to time determine are needed to conduct its business effectively.
Note: Annexes B and C are not reproduced here.
Return to List of Contents of the supplement