‘CATASTROPHIC MISUNDERSTANDINGS’

The University sees the changes to its library system as fundamental to maintaining Harvard’s preeminence as an institution of academia. But throughout the process, faculty and staff say that administrators have struggled to communicate that message to the community effectively as attempts to articulate the objectives behind the restructuring have been overshadowed by talk of potential layoffs.

In an interview with The Crimson in March, Faust said she thought more attention should be paid to the goals of the reorganization.

“The higher purposes of the library reorganization [have] not been articulated forcefully enough,” Faust said. “We [have] to keep in mind why we are doing this.”

Shenton’s January statement about staff layoffs was the first in what University Librarian Robert C. Darnton ’60 has described as “a series of catastrophic misunderstandings” throughout the reorganization process.

Since her initial announcement, library workers have perpetually requested specifics regarding the extent of the layoffs. The administration has kept its responses at a minimum.

“The lack of answers to these important questions has created a great deal of anxiety and frustration for you, and for our faculty and students,” said Senior Associate Provost for the Harvard Library Mary L. Kennedy on Jan. 19, according to Library Transition iSite. “We simply did not have the answers.”

On Tues. Shenton maintained in an emailed statement that the University had still not determined “what the impact on individual positions will be.”

“We are still in the process of working through the needs of the new structure and are assessing the results of the voluntary early retirement incentive program, which is just concluding, so it is too early to say,” wrote Shenton.

The University has sought to maintain an open dialogue with its employees, holding more than 70 meetings with senior administrators.

But these attempts have often been plagued by bad luck and met with frustration by employees.

In February, the University held a moderated online discussion for Garber and Shenton to respond to workers’ concerns.

Days before the scheduled virtual chat, a transcript alleging to show the University officials responding callously to questions from a concerned library worker circulated among staff.

In the chat, the account claiming to be Garber and Shenton wrote, “life is full of risk. accept and move on,” in response to a question asking how library staff can decide whether to accept the University’s early retirement offer without hearing full details of the future of their current library jobs. Library workers who saw the chat were outraged.

Days after the incident, administrators explained that the transcript came from a test run of the system conducted by employees—not Garber and Shenton.