"Missing or incomplete information plagues many projects. One
of the most visible examples happened in summer 2001 when a
volunteer on a Johns Hopkins research project died when she was
give hexamethonium to inhale. Researchers had done a search on
PubMed and the Web to find out if there were adverse effects
associated with its use. What the researchers didn't know was the
PubMed only goes back to 1966. The research on hexamethonium was
done in the 1950s. They also missed standard professional sources
of information like Toxline." ~ Susan Feldman
"Information disasters are caused not by lack of information,
bur rather by not connecting the right information to the right
people at the right time." ~ Susan Feldman
There is no question, at least if you are a librarian, that libraries are important. U.S. libraries "purchase about $14 billion in goods and services annually, exceeding U.S. spending on videos and athletic foot ware." U.S. libraries circulate about 5.3 million volumes per day which is about the number of FedEx shipments each day. "Five times more people visit U.S. public libraries each year than attend U.S. professional and college football, basketball, baseball and hockey games combined."
Libraries usually provide good return on investment. For example, the Baltimore County Public Library provides $3.00 worth of benefit for each tax dollar invested.
There are about 203,000
librarians in the United States and each makes a contribution to
the quality of life in the community as well as purchasing goods
and services.
It is clear that libraries and other information agencies are
built around collections. Collecting is the reason for their
existence.
While most of the evidence involves school library media
centers, it is clear that a well-developed collection makes a
difference. A variety of
studies in different states demonstrate that school library
media centers contribute directly to improved academic
performance, including higher scores on standardized
tests.
As in the example quoted above, failure to find the right
information can have terrible consequences. Information disasters
come in different forms. For example:
"Some studies suggest that 90 percent of the time that
knowledge workers spend in creating new reports or other products
is spent in recreating information that already exists. Thus,
there is no question but that collections with the right content
are an integral part of the success of any organization.
Obviously, the right collection must be developed and then that
collection must be connected to the right person at the right
time [public service].
Change in information technology and in the practice of collection development have raised questions about the need for professionally developed collections. Some have suggested that users may easily develop their own collections. Faculty have developed the collections in academic research libraries for years, but they are subject specialists.
It is not clear how many users
know enough about a topic or have the identification and
evaluation skills to locate the most appropriate material. It is
certainly easier for users to develop their own collections with
so much information easily available on the WWW. Given the
dramatic importance of user convenience, libraries and other
information agencies are challenged to demonstrate and persuade
users, actual and prospective, that professionally developed
collections are superior to those developed by
amateurs.
If professionally developed collections are associated with particular information agencies, then the obvious additional question is whether or not these agencies will prosper in the future. If consumers go directly to a website for information, there may be little need to access a collection in the local library, archive, or museum. While many collections of server-based resources on the web are being developed, most are not being developed by information professionals, at least not as traditionally defined.
Several variables are associated with the importance of professionally developed collections. A few will be mentioned below.
Collections developed by information professionals are less
important when the audience includes subject specialists who are
able to find and select useful items themselves. While not all
subject specialists are familiar with their current literature
(includes a variety of formats), many are better informed than
the average information professional. The evidence does indicate
that subject specialists often don't give their full attention to
collection development, may develop collections that are spotty,
and generally develop collections useful for themselves or
similar subject specialists. Subject specialists are likely to be
familiar with a relatively narrow part of the subject. This is a
problem when researchers move into multi- or cross-disciplinary
research areas where they lack familiarity and
experience.
Highly visible, popular material is relatively easy to identify and select. Almost anyone should be able to select New York Times best sellers. However, it may take professional training and experience to identify and select the best new books by small, specialized presses, or new books on less popular hobby or leisure time interests, or English language material published abroad.
It may be useful to divide current intellectual products into two tiers with tier one being the obvious products that receive considerable visibility in popular culture and news media. Tier two would consist of the less obvious products visible in specialized sources and likely to appeal to a class rather than a mass audience. Professional selection is most needed for the tier two items, both in their identification and their evaluation.
Visibility also relates to proxy selection since material widely reviewed in popular sources is easy to select. Material less likely to be reviewed or reviewed in small audience, specialized sources is more likely to demand professional attention.
The more expensive an item, the more likely that professional
intervention/judgment is needed. An inexpensive paperback for the
genre fiction popular reading collect presents little risk. A
$3000 software package may require both professional judgment and
some reasonably difficult testing before the purchase decision is
made. While nearly anyone can access free content on the web,
access to a full-text database is likely to be limited to
institutions and their members.
Cost, as mentioned above, is an obvious risk. Risk may also result from selecting controversial material (challenge-bait) or material thatrequires a substantial investment in hardware, related software, and connectivity. The more risk associated with the purchase of an item, the more important that professionals be responsible for the selection, including preparing appropriate specifications if those are needed. Those professionals might include subject specialists, format or IT specialists, or the more generalist information professionals.
Professionally developed collections are more likely to be
used when they are convenient, easy to use, current, and contain
needed content. Such collections must be highly visible, easily
found, and easily searched. The nature of access, both in finding
and retrieving, is crucial.
When collection development and management is seen as somewhat complex and difficult, professional help is likely to be sought. If collection development is seen as simply scanning Library Journal and selecting items with * or positive reviews, then it is not likely to be seen as an activity requiring a professional. Thus, specialized collections are more likely to be seen as requiring professional intervention than popular ones. The collections in chain book and video stores are good examples of collections that are reasonably successful without requiring an information science professional.
It seems reasonable to measure the importance of an activity by measuring the time given to it. Important activities receive more "company" time while less important activities receive much less time. In many information agencies, collection development and management is a secondary or tertiary activity to be done only after more important tasks are completed. If collection development is normally done by reference librarians when their reference work is done, that indicates a low priority. Few information agencies have full-time collection developers and managers. How much time does collection development receive in the agencies where you have worked?
If properly done, collection development and management require substantial resources. A variety of current and retrospective awareness resources, for example, are needed as well as current awareness information about collection development and management, information technology, the publishing business and related concerns. If collection development is important, professionals will be given the tools to do it properly. A "tool bound" selector with just a few selection tools indicates that collection development is not important.
As mentioned earlier, agencies do not outsource a core competency. Where collection development is outsourced via standing orders, approval plans, consortial purchasing, leased books and the like, this is an indication that collection development is not important enough to be part of the core competency set.
In a nutshell, automated collection development is based on the notion that human collection developers can reveal the several steps involved in making a selection decision, that those steps can be reduced to specifications or rules, and that a computer can then apply these rules to make an equivalent selection decision. The creation of a profile , which is at the heart of the approval plan, is essentially the development of rules or criteria to allow a machine to make preliminary selections. The difficulty is that many variables, level of difficulty or potential audience for example, are difficult to transform into machine-readable rules. While there is considerable promise, it seems unlikely that automated collection development will happen in the near future. If selection decisions can be made by a machine, then there would be little need for professional involvement except to develop the rules and then monitor software performance. The present state of the art is good enough, however, to reduce a large pool of selection possibilities to a much smaller pool.
One of the most difficult aspects of collection development and management is to understand the relationship between collection use and human behavior. If behavior is changed as a result of collection use, then developing and managing that collection becomes very important. For most of the history of information agencies, it has been assumed that "good" material causes people to be good and do good while "bad" material causes people to be bad and do bad things. Since the consequences of selecting inappropriate material may be substantial, collection development should be done only by trained information professionals. Thus, what one believes about the outcomes of collection use may determine the importance of professionally developed collections, especially those serving young people.
If collection use has meaningful consequences, collection developers might feel some responsibility for outcomes. For example, if we select a cook book with recipes that are unsafe, do we not share responsibility for harm with the author and the publisher? In older times, librarians felt this responsibility acutely and were driven to value-oriented selection. As one librarian said,
"This is the work of civilization. And we librarians should congratulate ourselves that we are thus far engaged in the highest work that falls to the lot of man to do..., ...the lifting up of the great mass of humanity to an understanding of the significance of life, individual and social."
Today, there is much less certainty about the relationship between reading, viewing, listening and behavior. The mainstream belief is that normal people are not affected by what they read or view. Thus, a normal person may play violent, sexist video games for hours, but will not be violent or sexist in his "real" life. The evidence on the degree which collection use may cause a person to behave inappropriately is fuzzy. There is confusion about whether people behave because of some external stimulus or because of some inward trait. Certainly, lmany ay people, especially conservative ones, believe that having certain items in a collection will have very negative effects.
If communities served by particular collections are unique,
it is important to have that collection developed by one
familiar with the local community. If communities are pretty much
the same, then a collection developed for one community would be
suitable for others. Thus, locally developed collections would not be
needed. In theory, a few people could develop collections--lists
of appropriate materials--for a large number of information
agencies. We could have centralized selection just as we have
centralized original cataloging at LC and OCLC. To some degree,
we already have this when hundreds of libraries select the same
titles from BookList or Library Journal.
With its emphasis on waiting until someone requests an item, "just in time" collection development makes selection less important because the information agency becomes more of an order-taker. In contrast, "just in case" collection development which attempts to predict future use, places considerable emphasis on professional collection development that can anticipate future use.
Although no libraries have been found guilty in a federal
court of malpractice or negligence, it is a specter, especially
for medical and law librarians. Ironically, malpractice suits
could illustrate the importance of professionally developed
collections.
There is growing, but limited, concern about information malpractice and liability. A few years ago, ALA issued a tape "Are you liable to be liable?" A 1992 survey found that over half of medical and law librarians felt a moderate concern that they might be sued for malpractice. However, no librarian has been successfullysued for malpractice. Growing expectations, often unreasonable, of users and funders may lead to problems. The increased economic value of timely information means that inaccurate or incomplete information can have substantial consequences. The increase in successful liability suits against other professionals may encourage suits against information professionals.
Curiously, there is some question if courts will
recognize information professionals as professionals. Only
professionals can be guilty of malpractice. Most definitions of a
profession require ethical or performance standards that are
enforced and can result in expulsion from the profession. There
are no such standards for the information professions so legally
they are occupations rather than professions.
Information liability is an action for damages as a result of negligence or carelessness. Usually, such liability means that the information professional provided false and misleading information through lack of care. To prove malpractice, the plaintiff must establish 4 points:
Proving malpractice is difficult. "It is the duty of authors
and publishers to verify the accuracy of information they
produce. Librarians are intermediaries whose connections to the
faulty information are too remote to create a legal duty to
patrons under these circumstances. [Randy Diamond and Martha
Dragich]"
Negligence is action contrary to what might be expected of a reasonably prudent person measured against professional standards. This means that malpractice applies only to members of a recognized profession where there are recognized professional standards. Due diligence and reasonable care must be exercised. Expert witnesses are usually used to decide if defendant acted in accord with acceptable professional conduct. The plaintiff would have to prove that the information was deficient in some material way, that the deficient information caused harm, and that the information professional did not exercise reasonable care. From a trial lawyer perspective, if faulty--inaccurate, incomplete, or dated--information results in physical or economic harm, someone is responsible and must pay damages.
A well known example is that of the credit reporting service which makes an error in a SSAN and presents erroneous information on an individual who is then denied credit. Another is that of a financial reporting service that wrongly reported a firm to be bankrupt. In both cases, the individual and the firm suffered serious consequences. Another example was a firm that used FAA data to create aviation charts. When a plane flew into a mountain which was higher than indicated on the chart, the family of those killed sued. The Federal court found that evidence of quality control is needed when information is transformed or repackaged regardless of the source.
Those who provide information for a fee are most vulnerable. Not-for-profit information providers are more protected. Information agencies with "deep pockets" are more vulnerable. Since information professionals in publicly funded agencies and those agencies have limited assets, they are less likely to be sued. Courts are more likely to find information agencies responsible for the information that they provide when there is intervention or mediation, especially when a recommendation is made. Selectors need to be able to demonstrate that reasonable and professional steps were taken to select material that is accurate and complete. Your actions should compare well with what other competent professionals would do.
Some question the need to warn about information that may be no longer good because it is dated. Disclaimers ("Warning! May contain outdated information. Note publication date) may have no legal standing. Too, using disclaimers creates the expectation that all materials have been reviewed and labeled appropriately. Thus, failure to label an item when others are labeled may create problems.
Don't
Do consider liability insurance, especially if employed in a medical or legal library or information center. While few information agencies have it, it is available for institutions and individuals.
Who is really responsible for developing the collection? Authors or creators of intellectual property? Those who acquire and edit it? Those who review it? Those who supply it? The subject specialist who requests an item? We make our decisions only after many other decisions have been made. How qualified are these people to develop your collection?
Select an information agency of your choice. How much time and effort should be devoted to collection development and management? Who should do it? Is collection development and management a core competency? Why?
A distraught teen checks out Final Exit from a library collection and then takes her life following directions found in the book. Her family sues the collection developer, the circulation librarian, the publisher, and the author. You are the head librarian. What would you do? Why? What, if anything, might have been done to avoid this situation?
Involved in malpractice litigation, you must demonstrate that reasonable professional care was exercised in selecting a particular work. How would you do that? How might this impact your selection practices?
Select an information agency of your choice. Consider selections typically found in this collection. To what degree does it require professional time and effort? Why?
Select an information agency of your choice. Consider the probability that professionally developed collections will no longer be needed because end users will develop their own collections from work stations at home or at work. Which variables are likely to facilitate such an outcome? Which variables are likely to inhibit such an outcome?
