- Email: [email protected]
A manual for the investigation of local government information needs
Book reuiews
53
should have been razored out, relies too heavily on quotation, and contains too little of concise, formal, management centred discussion to be recommended highly. I would, nevertheless, recommend to students that they read it-for its the conscientiousness with which its authors have breadth of coverage, and especially for the treatments of attempted to cover relevant literature, individual research methods and introductory statistics. But I would ask them to read Rein too. M. H. Heine School of Librarianship and Information Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic
Studies
REFERENCES M. F. ( 1979). Measurement and modelling methods for computer systems performance studies. Input Two-Nine/Student Litteratur. (e.g. Chap. 7 ‘Queuing models’) HALPERIN, M. and STRAZDON, M. (1980). Measuring students’ preferences for reference service: a conjoint analysis. Library Quarterly, 50, 208-224. HOINVILLE, G. and JOWELL, R. (1978). Survey research practice. London: Heinemann
BARNES,
Educational. c. A. and KALTON, G. (197 1). Survey methods in social investigation. 2nd ed. London: Heinemann Educational. REIN, M. (1976). Social science andpublicpolicy Harmondsworth: Penguin Education. MOSER,
C. Mullings,
G. M. Francis
A manual for
the investigation
Research and Development ISBN 0 905984 61 7 flO.00
and T. D. Wilson. of local government
Report
information
No. 5585, January
needs. British 1981. 162 pp.
Library
This is a useful document. Although produced as a research report, and as one of the major outputs of a highly successful research programme, it is essentially a practical tool. As the authors state in the abstract it is aimed at those working in local government information services ‘who wish to know more about the needs of their users’. Of course many of those involved at the practical level will protest that they already know what those needs are and that in any case they are far too busy providing services to have time to investigate needs. And in times when resources are hard to acquire and have to be stretched to meet growing demands this can be, on the surface at least, a reasonably valid excuse for inaction in this area. It is, however, a myopic view since even those providing highly professional, and probably efficient, services are certainly not fully aware of the real needs of their user groups and especially of how these are changing and evolving. Ignorance of these needs will, in the fullness of time, bring about an increasing risk of reductions in resources as the information service loses touch with the real issues faced by these users. The dangers to the information service, and more importantly to its parent organization, are not always perceived in time to avert a downward spiral which often produces less cost-effective and less optimum options. This phenomenon is by no means confined to local government information services: indeed it is common in many service areas, where intangibility and poor performance measures create particular problems. What is interesting and important is that in local government, which is a relatively new sector for large scale and systematized information provision and where the main growth has been within the past
54
Book reviews
fifteen years, there has already been generated an impetus towards more rigorous self analysis. Much of this impetus has come from the talented Sheffield team of investigators and this manual is the latest manifestation of their efforts. In producing it they have provided an invaluable and time saving tool quite unlike the more usual end-products of academic research. Its principal strength for the hard-pressed practitioner is that it can be taken out of the file and actually put to use in most ‘user survey’ situations with a minimum of modification for local circumstances. The case study carried out by librarians at the Greater London Council and reported in chapter five of the report shows this clearly. In this most interesting section the use of the questionnaires, which are so well set out within the pages of the report, is described. Although the questionnaires were then only at an advanced draft stage they provided the basis for a study of the information needs of the London Fire Brigade. The Brigade, the largest in the United Kingdom, is administratively part of- the Greater London Council’s activities, though it seems it does not always recognize itself as part of the local government framework. Such a body cannot really be described as being particularly typical of local government’s information problems if typical is taken to mean the provision of services to elected members, and to officers within the ‘mainline’ departments such as architects, planners, social services and the like. Certainly much of the thrust in local government information provision has been in those sectors often to the obvious neglect of equally important, but perhaps less politically demanding, departments in more technical sectors. Perhaps this is because ‘technical information’ (however that may be defined) is felt to be more organized and therefore, in theory at least, more accessible. Whatever is the truth of this marter it is often discovered that a genuine COI~IIIOI~ core of information can be identified and this seems to have been the case with the London Fire Brigade. As is pointed out in the report there are certain categories of ‘procedural, legal and training’ information Lvhich constantly recur in studies carried out and the authors say they ‘are coming to the conclusion that, almost regardless of the nature of the department, very similar patterns of information need exist throughout local government’. They go on to make the very significant comment (to this reviewer at least) chat ‘the dominant needs are often fb1 information of kinds not readily provided by libraries’. Does this mean, if true, that libraries and information units cnnnot or will not provide these types of information? It bodes ill for the professional information provider if‘either of these applies and of course if he or she has not clearly identified what these needs are, how can they be met? All of‘which points up the need for a much closer analysis of’users and their needs on a continuing basis. This manual is therefore timely. As a neatly structured piece 01’ work with lucid instructions it is well designed for the purpose it is aimed at. A usefirl index also helps; this is not always found in research reports of‘this type. Alan Gomersall, of’ the Greater London Council, in his foreword sees the manual as a do-it-~ourself‘suI-vet tool. He also sees it as part of the much wider process of ‘selling’ an information service to the existing and potential users ofthat service and through them to those responsbile for the management decisions which decide whether the local authority maintains such a service at all. Ckmainly ttic opportunities provided by such usu research, especiall) whe~-~ personal interviewing is possible, do provide invaluable contacts which
Book reviews
55
can create ‘new business opportunities’ if followed up promptly and effectively. The only danger may be a tendency to ‘over survey’. This might be counterproductive and as all researchers and many forward-looking librarians know, there are other techniques which can and should be used to provide supplementary information without asking too many people too many questions too many times. There are still many faced with difficult choices in managing information and library services in local government who have failed to ask any of these questions to any of their customers on any occasion. To these this report can be especially recommended as urgent and essential reading from which action as outlined in the manual should undoubtedly follow. Don Kennington Capital Planning Information John R. Rizzo. Management for librarians: fundamentals and issues. Westport (Conn.1: Greenwood Press, 1980. 339 pp. ISBN 0 86172 009 1. f19.95.
London:
Aldwych
Press;
The mild boredom which I experienced as I traversed the 324 pages of text led me to ask myself whether I was being ‘unreasonable’ in my expectations. It seemed helpful, therefore, to organize my review in terms of my criteria of a library management textbook. is to say, does it cover all the main concerns of 1. IS it comprehensive-that ? Rizzo’s book is aimed at ‘aspiring and practising the librarian-manager librarians’, for ‘novices as well as seasoned practitioners’, but it does not claim to be comprehensive. It does not address itself to all the problems library managers must face. Its bias is in ‘the direction of organizational effectiveness and efficiency, structural design and dynamics and the components of working life described in the fields of behavioural and organizational psychology’. Nearly one-third is concerned with planning, objectives, systems theory, accountability, control and organizational design, and the remainder with staff motivation, groups in organizations, appraisal, training, organization development and leadership. ‘Certain speciality areas are not covered with the attention they deserve, e.g. personnel selection’ and the author steers away from quantitative methods, operations research and ‘only briefly discusses budgetary and financial matters’. A reviewer cannot find fault with an author for not doing what he does not claim to do. On the other hand, this book is written very much in the style of a textbook, and it appeals-if at all-as a textbook, rather than as a linked series of innovative, controversial and strategically selected topics (which, unhappily, it is not). Therefore, if the reader wants a textbook, he would surely prefer a relatively comprehensive one, such as those by Stueart and Eastlick ( 197 7) and Evans (1976). Furthermore, only when we come to write about it does management become a series of ‘topics’, like eggs on a shelf. In practice, it is always scrambled eggs. Perhaps the biggest problem in teaching management (and writing textbooks) is to help students to move beyond the successively introduced topics to some understanding of the real life complexity. One bit of string is knotted to every other bit of string in a mutually dependent network-or tangle. Therefore, each textbook topic needs to be presented so
53
should have been razored out, relies too heavily on quotation, and contains too little of concise, formal, management centred discussion to be recommended highly. I would, nevertheless, recommend to students that they read it-for its the conscientiousness with which its authors have breadth of coverage, and especially for the treatments of attempted to cover relevant literature, individual research methods and introductory statistics. But I would ask them to read Rein too. M. H. Heine School of Librarianship and Information Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic
Studies
REFERENCES M. F. ( 1979). Measurement and modelling methods for computer systems performance studies. Input Two-Nine/Student Litteratur. (e.g. Chap. 7 ‘Queuing models’) HALPERIN, M. and STRAZDON, M. (1980). Measuring students’ preferences for reference service: a conjoint analysis. Library Quarterly, 50, 208-224. HOINVILLE, G. and JOWELL, R. (1978). Survey research practice. London: Heinemann
BARNES,
Educational. c. A. and KALTON, G. (197 1). Survey methods in social investigation. 2nd ed. London: Heinemann Educational. REIN, M. (1976). Social science andpublicpolicy Harmondsworth: Penguin Education. MOSER,
C. Mullings,
G. M. Francis
A manual for
the investigation
Research and Development ISBN 0 905984 61 7 flO.00
and T. D. Wilson. of local government
Report
information
No. 5585, January
needs. British 1981. 162 pp.
Library
This is a useful document. Although produced as a research report, and as one of the major outputs of a highly successful research programme, it is essentially a practical tool. As the authors state in the abstract it is aimed at those working in local government information services ‘who wish to know more about the needs of their users’. Of course many of those involved at the practical level will protest that they already know what those needs are and that in any case they are far too busy providing services to have time to investigate needs. And in times when resources are hard to acquire and have to be stretched to meet growing demands this can be, on the surface at least, a reasonably valid excuse for inaction in this area. It is, however, a myopic view since even those providing highly professional, and probably efficient, services are certainly not fully aware of the real needs of their user groups and especially of how these are changing and evolving. Ignorance of these needs will, in the fullness of time, bring about an increasing risk of reductions in resources as the information service loses touch with the real issues faced by these users. The dangers to the information service, and more importantly to its parent organization, are not always perceived in time to avert a downward spiral which often produces less cost-effective and less optimum options. This phenomenon is by no means confined to local government information services: indeed it is common in many service areas, where intangibility and poor performance measures create particular problems. What is interesting and important is that in local government, which is a relatively new sector for large scale and systematized information provision and where the main growth has been within the past
54
Book reviews
fifteen years, there has already been generated an impetus towards more rigorous self analysis. Much of this impetus has come from the talented Sheffield team of investigators and this manual is the latest manifestation of their efforts. In producing it they have provided an invaluable and time saving tool quite unlike the more usual end-products of academic research. Its principal strength for the hard-pressed practitioner is that it can be taken out of the file and actually put to use in most ‘user survey’ situations with a minimum of modification for local circumstances. The case study carried out by librarians at the Greater London Council and reported in chapter five of the report shows this clearly. In this most interesting section the use of the questionnaires, which are so well set out within the pages of the report, is described. Although the questionnaires were then only at an advanced draft stage they provided the basis for a study of the information needs of the London Fire Brigade. The Brigade, the largest in the United Kingdom, is administratively part of- the Greater London Council’s activities, though it seems it does not always recognize itself as part of the local government framework. Such a body cannot really be described as being particularly typical of local government’s information problems if typical is taken to mean the provision of services to elected members, and to officers within the ‘mainline’ departments such as architects, planners, social services and the like. Certainly much of the thrust in local government information provision has been in those sectors often to the obvious neglect of equally important, but perhaps less politically demanding, departments in more technical sectors. Perhaps this is because ‘technical information’ (however that may be defined) is felt to be more organized and therefore, in theory at least, more accessible. Whatever is the truth of this marter it is often discovered that a genuine COI~IIIOI~ core of information can be identified and this seems to have been the case with the London Fire Brigade. As is pointed out in the report there are certain categories of ‘procedural, legal and training’ information Lvhich constantly recur in studies carried out and the authors say they ‘are coming to the conclusion that, almost regardless of the nature of the department, very similar patterns of information need exist throughout local government’. They go on to make the very significant comment (to this reviewer at least) chat ‘the dominant needs are often fb1 information of kinds not readily provided by libraries’. Does this mean, if true, that libraries and information units cnnnot or will not provide these types of information? It bodes ill for the professional information provider if‘either of these applies and of course if he or she has not clearly identified what these needs are, how can they be met? All of‘which points up the need for a much closer analysis of’users and their needs on a continuing basis. This manual is therefore timely. As a neatly structured piece 01’ work with lucid instructions it is well designed for the purpose it is aimed at. A usefirl index also helps; this is not always found in research reports of‘this type. Alan Gomersall, of’ the Greater London Council, in his foreword sees the manual as a do-it-~ourself‘suI-vet tool. He also sees it as part of the much wider process of ‘selling’ an information service to the existing and potential users ofthat service and through them to those responsbile for the management decisions which decide whether the local authority maintains such a service at all. Ckmainly ttic opportunities provided by such usu research, especiall) whe~-~ personal interviewing is possible, do provide invaluable contacts which
Book reviews
55
can create ‘new business opportunities’ if followed up promptly and effectively. The only danger may be a tendency to ‘over survey’. This might be counterproductive and as all researchers and many forward-looking librarians know, there are other techniques which can and should be used to provide supplementary information without asking too many people too many questions too many times. There are still many faced with difficult choices in managing information and library services in local government who have failed to ask any of these questions to any of their customers on any occasion. To these this report can be especially recommended as urgent and essential reading from which action as outlined in the manual should undoubtedly follow. Don Kennington Capital Planning Information John R. Rizzo. Management for librarians: fundamentals and issues. Westport (Conn.1: Greenwood Press, 1980. 339 pp. ISBN 0 86172 009 1. f19.95.
London:
Aldwych
Press;
The mild boredom which I experienced as I traversed the 324 pages of text led me to ask myself whether I was being ‘unreasonable’ in my expectations. It seemed helpful, therefore, to organize my review in terms of my criteria of a library management textbook. is to say, does it cover all the main concerns of 1. IS it comprehensive-that ? Rizzo’s book is aimed at ‘aspiring and practising the librarian-manager librarians’, for ‘novices as well as seasoned practitioners’, but it does not claim to be comprehensive. It does not address itself to all the problems library managers must face. Its bias is in ‘the direction of organizational effectiveness and efficiency, structural design and dynamics and the components of working life described in the fields of behavioural and organizational psychology’. Nearly one-third is concerned with planning, objectives, systems theory, accountability, control and organizational design, and the remainder with staff motivation, groups in organizations, appraisal, training, organization development and leadership. ‘Certain speciality areas are not covered with the attention they deserve, e.g. personnel selection’ and the author steers away from quantitative methods, operations research and ‘only briefly discusses budgetary and financial matters’. A reviewer cannot find fault with an author for not doing what he does not claim to do. On the other hand, this book is written very much in the style of a textbook, and it appeals-if at all-as a textbook, rather than as a linked series of innovative, controversial and strategically selected topics (which, unhappily, it is not). Therefore, if the reader wants a textbook, he would surely prefer a relatively comprehensive one, such as those by Stueart and Eastlick ( 197 7) and Evans (1976). Furthermore, only when we come to write about it does management become a series of ‘topics’, like eggs on a shelf. In practice, it is always scrambled eggs. Perhaps the biggest problem in teaching management (and writing textbooks) is to help students to move beyond the successively introduced topics to some understanding of the real life complexity. One bit of string is knotted to every other bit of string in a mutually dependent network-or tangle. Therefore, each textbook topic needs to be presented so