About a
year ago I had The Most Humungous Clearout of around 15yrs of professional
activity (paperwork relating to) that took up a lot of space in my flat. As
part of that I filled a fair amount of space in a bin bag with upteen Reviews and
Consultations and Evidence Gathering on the role / operation / function /
purpose of the public library service in England.
These were
usually issued by different governments, and government departments, and a few
responses to them too. Most of these reviews, in hindsight, had ended up being
a waste of photocopier paper printing off and spiral-binding in the first place
never mind sitting in a darkened pile on the floor of my living-room for years.
They seem
to come around about every 2 years, and, like the in-coming tide, each one
washes away the one before it that didn’t quite reach implementation or came to
a narrow range of conclusions which were implemented. Before it all started
over yet again…So last
week I groaned aloud at seeing the latest Review announced of the EnglishPublic Library service, naturally announced on National Libraries Day.
So, the
below is just some generic general completely personal thoughts that have occurred to me down the
years based on reading through, discussing, and watching, a fair amount of England
public library service reviews pass by…
Make use of the past, don’t ignore it.
It should be mandatory that all new Reviews are forced to read through
the last three issued on the subject and all the evidence submitted and
findings it made. This is very recent history, not ancient. THEN decide what
you’re going to ask everyone to fill gaps and up-date what you have. Also, pay
particular attention to asking why things didn’t get implemented or timescales
slipped or what went wrong. That’s educational.
A ‘first principles’ approach is often popular,
but perhaps over-rated. The whole approaching the issue from ‘first principles’thing tends to
come up often. It has a superficial charm to it, there’s an air of neutrality,
impartiality, firm foundations, weighing up the evidence… So, let me put it another way, long ago some
very kind person invented the wheel for me. I use it fairy often. Now, you can
argue that’s a extreme example, that it’s not the same thing. I’m simply pointing out there’s something to
be said for accepting basic principles in life or we’d never progress anything
from them. Test them, fine, but then start from what already exists that works.
The English public library service Does Not
Exist In A Vacuum. Yes, structures, policy drivers, cultures,
local circumstances are different around the UK. So, for goodness sake, look at
what all the other parts of the UK are doing and why. Some of it will be of no
use or interest whatsoever, other parts might bear some real thought and
consideration (e.g look at the current welsh review).
Select Review Members For Diversity of Opinion
and Experience or Select Experts And Back Them. If you can get a group of people in a room who
are diverse, have not that much in common, and between them and they can thrash
out something that they can all agree on re main points… then all to the good. If
they can’t agree on basics, then admit it (yes, I know, horrifying concept, but
brave really, admit it’s actually really complicated and you don’t have all the
answers). The other option is sit experts around the table and back them to
best of your ability whatever conclusion they come to whether it suits
political principles and expediency or not and keep that up.
Do you have a compelling vision of the future? Most recent library reviews are very
persistent indeed on the ‘future’ and ‘strong vision’ or ‘re-imagining’. But
maybe in a world of huge change asking for a compelling vision is actually pie
in the sky guessing rather than meaningful horizon scanning. Sort a vision for now,
sort the next few years. A good vision just might be one that is practical and
can be implemented and will gather support. ‘Re-imagining’ and ‘visioning’ are
not the same thing.
Finding a ‘direction’. There are always multiple possible
options (even if lots of them could have unpalatable elements), multiple paths,
different views. A co-ordinated group
direction that folk can buy into that isn’t too radical but achievable would
not be a major crime as an aim. It’s also not quite a miracle or a dictat. Which
means it might be able to be done. A direction doesn’t have to be a structure
or the latest position in a shifting sandscape. It can be ‘we agree these are
the priorities’ and we all work towards them in our own ways to fit our own
circumstances, ability and constraints.
Acknowledgement that it’s complicated and cross-cutting would be lovely.
Public libraries do just about everything, can be used by anyone, for a
vast range of purposes. The reach is vast, as are the possibilities for ways
they can connect into different agendas and needs. They are delivered by local
government, but that doesn’t mean they’re solely about community issues and
agendas. They’re e.g. economic, research, education, business, culture. Public
libraries are for everyone, yes, but they’re also cross-cutting, that bit tends
to get forgotten for all it should speak to the heart of government agendas,
they tend to get automatically categorised by the delivery mechanism and the
name.
If It’s Going Wrong Then Please Stop and
Re-Consider. Theory
is a very wonderful thing, practice is something else. So piloting and gradual
roll-outs are nice, they allow some evaluation to be built in. Trying to encourage
it all being brought in before the relevant administration changes doesn’t
work. Whether it’s already in or not the next lot can still choose to dismantle
it if they think it doesn’t work or policy has shifted sufficiently.
