TO: ALA Executive Board
FROM: Liz Bishoff and Sally G. Reed
DATE: January 12, 2001
SUBJ: Outsourcing/Privatization: A Proposal
Introduction and Background: Over the course of the past three years, the Association has been paying particular attention to the practice of outsourcing library functions as well as the shifting of management to the private sector in publicly funded libraries, particularly public libraries. This issue became of significant interest when the State Library of Hawaii decided to outsource all aspects of collection selection, acquisitions, processing and cataloguing for the Hawaii Public Library System to Baker and Taylor, a for-profit company.
Due to increasing interest and concern among members, the ALA Council directed then ALA President Barbara Ford to appoint an Outsourcing Task Force (OTF) in 1997 to study the issue, make recommendations and report back. The OTF held membership hearings at both ALA Midwinter Meeting and ALA Annual Conference in 1998. They reported back to Council with recommendations in 1999.
Though the Council supported the OTF premise that "libraries are an essential public good and are fundamental institutions in a democratic society," they did not agree that ALA should adopt the policy statement, "ALA opposes privatizing core library services [emphasis added] to for-profit companies.
Several OTF proposals were referred to ALA divisions or ALA management for further study through research. Additionally, divisions and units were asked to report back on checklists, guidelines, and other recommendations developed under their area of expertise. Specifically, Council directed that, "The Intellectual Freedom Committee (IFC) be directed to review the Library Bill of Rights as it relates to outsourcing and privatization. The IFC did so and presented a checklist to Council at the 2000 Annual Conference.
In response to the Council motion to analyze the impact of outsourcing on the operation of libraries, ALA contracted with Texas Woman's University (TWU) to study the practice of outsourcing in libraries and elsewhere and report back their findings. A report was presented to ALA Council at the 2000 Annual Conference. After extensive discussion, Council moved to "accept" the report and asked the President to establish a small task force to continue the discussion and help frame the issues involved in outsourcing and privatization.
Analysis: In both the OTF report and the TWU report, discussion and debate centered around two areas primarily:
- Common agreement on what constitutes "core services" in
a library
- Clear definition of outsourcing v. privatization.
A review of Council discussion and debate for the OTF report and for the TWU report reveals that there are widely varying beliefs about what services are core to libraries. Because of this dispute, it was impossible to reach consensus on what or whether and service should be considered inappropriate for outsourcing.
The review of Council discussion also revealed confusion regarding what is meant by the term "outsourcing" and what is meant by the term "privatization." These terms were often used inter-changeably in the discussions and debates making it more difficult for the Council to come to an agreement or stand supporting or opposing "outsourcing" or "privatization."
Definitions offered by the OTF:
Definition of "Privatization" offered by the TWU report:
- Privatization is contracting out for services in a way that shifts control over policies for library collections and services from the public to the private sector."
In both definitions for "Privatization" there is emphasis on "services" or "core services." In fact, the TWU study reported that "there appears to be a complete lack of consensus about what constitutes a `core service' - and what is core in one institutional context may well be considered to be peripheral in another."
What appeared to have consensus in the discussions, debates and reports is that "libraries are an essential public good" and that responsibility for policies should not be shifted to the private sector in publicly funded libraries.
Findings and Recommendations: We believe that there is general consensus that:
- It is difficult or impossible to define "core services"
for any single library
- The responsibility for policy development and management should not be shifted to the private sector in a publicly funded library.
Therefore, we propose the following recommendations:
- Recommendation 1) Accept the OTF definition of privatization with an important modification as follows:
Privatization is the shifting of policy making and the management of library services from the public to the private sector.
[The important modification—Struck through on the above original definition were these words, formerly between "Privatization is the shifting of policy making and the management of library services" and "from the public to the private sector": "or the responsibility for the performance of core library services in their entirety."]
- Recommendation 2) Generate Association-wide discussion on this definition with a view to ALA eventually taking a stand against the "shifting of policy making and management of library services from the public to the private sector.
It is our belief that a more narrow definition of "privatization" will enable the Association to take a stand in support of keeping publicly supported libraries safe from full privatization. We believe this stand and approach is consistent with the will of the membership.
Next Steps: We ask that the Executive Board of the American Library Association endorse this report along with Recommendations 1 and 2 above and that this report be forwarded to Council for further discussion. We further recommend that this report be placed on the agenda of Council at the 2001 Annual Meeting for action as indicated in Recommendation 2.
Links to non-ALA sites have been provided because these sites may have information of interest. Neither the American Library Association nor the Office for Intellectual Freedom necessarily endorses the views expressed or the facts presented on these sites; and furthermore, ALA and OIF do not endorse any commercial products that may be advertised or available on these sites.
