The changing Nature of library budgeting

Samnath, Kayla

Rossmann, D., & Arlitsch, K. (2015). From acquisitions to access: The changing nature of library budgeting. Journal of Library Administration, 55(5), 394-404.

Summary:

The focus of this article was to explore the shifts in library budgets. Due to the shift the digital environment, the authors argue that there should also be a shift in budgets and in materials in which libraries provide its patrons. Typically library budgets include a separate budget for IT services. These budgets are also normally small, which really puts libraries who have began shifting towards digital resources in a tight spot. With small budgets, and many cuts, libraries find themselves with a print collection that has had no growth, or even reversed (2015, p.396).

Rossmann and Arlitsch use Montana State University as an example of an old acquisitions model in which is now criticised. Montana State University’s old model consisted of:

• Books, videos, maps
• Journals
• Microforms
• E-books
• E-journals and databases
• Interlibrary loan/document delivery
• binding

(2015, p.398). The authors critique this type of model because it really doesn’t take into consideration the libraries ever changing role as providers of not only information, but of technologies as well. The authors instead provide a new acquisitions model, one that focuses on offering tools and services to patrons. Rossmann and Arlitsch suggest that vision statements should be adjusted based on the observation of shifting to libraries providing technological tools rather than just information. They suggest vision statements change focus in the following ways:

• Teaching and Learning
• Research Services
• Engagement

(2015, p. 398).

Adopting these into vision statements for acquisitions allows much more room within the budget to focus on more IT factors. This presents a unique opportunity for libraries, taking into consideration the impact of technology, and shifting in materials to provide more tools and services to access materials versus a physical print collection.

Evaluation:

This article presented a new idea in which libraries can try to merge certain budgets. The focus is that libraries should change the services they offer their patrons. It is not a negative change, and it by no means discusses eliminating a print collection. Instead it suggests that with technological shifts, libraries are shifting as well. The digital realm offers patrons a lot, however this technology is still costly.

Budget is a serious issue that all libraries are struggling with. There have been massive cuts, which has an impact on what libraries can acquire for their collection. I would recommend this article for students interested in exploring how library budgets can be modified, as well as exploring vision statements to further define their acquisitions process.