LEANER AND MEANER

Above all, the Task Force report and subsequent statements by Harvard administrators have emphasized centralization in order to increase efficiency.

This focus on consolidation to foster an improvement in services has been a goal at academic libraries across the country, according to Paula T. Kaufman, university librarian and dean of libraries at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Illinois—whose library boasts the second-largest collection among American universities, behind only Harvard’s—has undergone many tune-ups in the past half-decade. As the library system at Illinois grew over the course of the 20th century, the network began to include many departmental libraries.

“In 2007, we realized that we were not providing service in the best way possible and not making use of the resources in the best way that we could,” Kaufman said.

Much like at Illinois, Harvard’s reorganization seeks to consolidate the University’s currently separate 73 libraries. The Task Force report recommended the creation of shared administrative services, advice that library leadership followed.

Last year, Garber announced the creation of five affinity groups around which the new, unified Harvard University Library would be organized. In a statement at the time, he said that the system would group individual libraries based on collection needs, content, and special activities. Each library would report not only to the centralized library administration but also to the leadership of its group.

“It gives Harvard the opportunity to act cohesively while also preserving the distinct contribution of the schools,” Harvard Library Executive Director Helen Shenton said in an emailed statement. “This will enable Harvard to set an even higher standard for service, leverage buying power, and pursue opportunities that benefit faculty and students University-wide.”

THE LABOR QUESTION

The drive for efficiency led the library to decide to streamline its workforce. On Jan. 19, Shenton provoked confusion and skepticism among library workers when she announced that “the library workforce will be smaller than it is now,” through either voluntary or involuntary staff reductions. Some workers and student activists protested.

Despite the University’s claim that staff reductions are necessary for modernization, observers at Harvard say that the connection between a smaller staff and a modernized library is not immediately evident.

“I don’t see how they’re going to build a new library system with a demoralized staff,” Asani said. “They’ve confused the chain of command.”

Outside experts tend to say more often that updating the staff naturally comes along with updating the library.

Thomas C. Leonard, university librarian at the University of California, Berkeley, said he is thankful that Berkeley has been able to avoid layoffs.

“In any institution, there are people who have been around for a long time and who are wonderful,” he said. “However, it’s in taking on new people with new skills that we probably have the most to gain from.”