Preparing the Fall: Dartmouth's Library Crisis

By Alston B. Ramsay | Sunday, June 8, 2003

Editor's note: Due to the sensitive nature of this article, most sources consulted wished to remain anonymous.

When Head of Libraries Richard Lucier arrived at Dartmouth, his charge was to bring the College Library into the 21st century by seamlessly integrating the old collections with a digital library already in its early planning stages. Despite exterior appearances of normalcy, two years later the library is in shambles; the staff is miserable, the faculty is worried, and the recent budget woes have dramatically altered the face of the system, necessitating library closings and staff rearrangements that threaten the core of Dartmouth academia. While the cause cannot be attributed to any single event, most of the library staff and faculty point to two interconnected causes: library management and mounting budget cuts.

Management

To listen to the library staff discuss their current plight is to hear a tale of gut-wrenching heartbreak. 'We are peasants,' explained one disgruntled employee. The Library Administration 'does not tolerate any kind of discussion.'

The flagging morale is difficult to describe, but the overwhelming sense of loss and tension is palpable. Many are heartbroken by recent changes and shifts, but most divisive is the randomness with which jobs have been terminated and rearranged, often without reason. Some have been moved from department to department with scant, if any, explanation. Add to this the omnipresent feeling of powerlessness, and the sinister atmosphere in which most library staff feel they work, and a human resources disaster is inevitable. One likened his/her job security to that of a 'sitting duck.' Others were fearful to even speak of their present situation: '[The library administration] can make your life miserable.' While sadness is pervasive, so too is anger: 'I think Lucier's a disaster for the College.' The tales were endless: staff breaking down sporadically, depression throughout the system, and, worst of all, utter fear and loathing of the upper management levels.

But the vitriol and invectives are not just the idle words of a few angered employees. Almost everyone consulted agreed there are serious problems within the system, and most of these emanate from administrative decisions and policies that have made communicative recourse impossible.

Richard Lucier came to Dartmouth by way of California, where he worked his way through the ranks, starting as Head Librarian in 1991 at the University of California's San Francisco campus. In 1997 he became the Special Assistant for System-wide Library Planning and Development which rolled into a position as the Founding Librarian of the Digital Library of California. Two years ago, after an exhaustive search to replace former College Librarian Margaret Otto, a search committee settled on Mr. Lucier, whose greatest draw was his work with the digital library. Although the pool was smaller than ideal, even the library staff thought the change would benefit the library: '[There were] high hopes he would be the best and the brightest moving us into the digital age.' In retrospect, the same individual said simply, '[The committee] screwed up;' it was a 'grievous error.'

When Mr. Lucier arrived at Dartmouth, he quickly ordered the dismantling of a number of committees and sub-committees within the library. While one member of the staff agreed that these could be 'cumbersome,' the result was that 'everyone could buy into [policy] decision[s].' For the previous 21 years under Margaret Otto, the staff grew accustomed to this system. Her tenure was marked by a 'sense of solidarity among the library administration and staff,' explained History Professor Richard Kremer. Even if the library was not always 'as open to thinking about change,' everyone 'felt they were listened to.' When anyone had questions or problems, there were numerous channels to air grievances, no matter how small.

But this first move portended future actions. Quickly it became apparent that Mr. Lucier ran the library using a 'corporate model.' Those at the top make the decisions, tell their subordinates what to do, and expect policies to be instituted. One described this shift as 'very clever on [Lucier's] part. Divide and conquer.' This description of Mr. Lucier as 'Machiavellian' surfaced time and time again. For his work in California, one librarian explained, this was necessary; Mr. Lucier had to enter the individual libraries and siphon off funds for the over-arching digital library. While this may work in an insulated environment, most in the library differentiated between academic endeavors and corporate governance: One 'can't make truly rational decisions without staff input' in an academic environment. The strategy, then, is a familiar one: 'announce, watch what happens, then back peddle.'

For those bold enough to speak out or to disagree on a specific policy, Mr. Lucier has at times called them into his office, saying they are 'insubordinate.' Dissenters—even on mundane issues—have been told they are not 'loyal' to the libraries; this insult even hurdled at library staff with decades of work for the College. Mr. Lucier has also eviscerated librarians in committee meetings—in front of their peers. Tales like these have earned Mr. Lucier the widespread nickname 'Lucifer,' and many quickly point out the mere one-letter variant from 'Lucier.'

Other factors have made the situation even worse. Shuffling various people through the different departments has led the staff to 'feel terrified for their jobs,' since many of the moves seem arbitrary. Numerous sources also pointed to Berry's dismal environs as yet another cause of the dissatisfaction. For example, the entire Acquisitions Department is house in the subterranean labyrinth that has no windows at all. Considering the pervasive utilitarian gray dominating Berry's interior, working in the building is difficult at best. Although the library staff was consulted, their suggestions on the most efficient arrangement of workspace was mostly ignored by the contractors. One professor said all factors combined led to a 'demoralized' staff and services that have been 'diminish[ed] in many ways,' especially reference, although he/she also noted Interlibrary Loan, Circulation, and Filing.

With library morale falling to new lows, one staff member recently initiated a seminar through Dartmouth's human resource department. The presentation, delivered by Dr. Harvey Slaughter, a specialist in strategic planning and complex management, and Jim Platt, Director of Faculty and Employees Assistance Program, aimed to address how best to identify and deal with change and its inherent stress. Change, according to Dr. Slaughter, infuses rancor into any system: 'When you bring change into an organization, there is a form of tension involved bringing people up to speed.'

The speech focused on twin goals: 'How can I, [Dr. Slaughter], make it good for the employee, and what's good for Dartmouth.' While Dr. Slaughter's and Mr. Platt's goal is to move people forward, the library staff was still concerned with the root cause of the current malaise. The first meeting, which drew approximately fifty of one-hundred seventy total staff, ended with a group discussion that only scratched the surface. People interrogated the two presenters, asking how they were supposed to move on and accept changes from an administration they felt was 'ethically challenged' and heeded no one's recommendations. The next week, another meeting was held on the same topic; approximately forty attended, and many left desiring a more in-depth discussion on the management.

Dr. Slaughter's work with complex management allowed him to explain sweeping change in general terms, especially in the first few months. 'An employer has a window of time to show authenticity,' he said. 'The group is lost if consensus isn't acted upon.' Mr. Platt further elaborated on situations where management and employees differed: 'The ideal situation is cooperation.'Mr. Platt added that one cause of the current situation was certainly the 'highly visible,' hesitant manner with which policy had been debated and proposed, creating 'significant financial worry.' Further, he explained that a work environment would only function if it is 'a system where people feel their thoughts, values, [and] opinions will be heard.'

The library staff generally felt Parkhurst was partially aware of the current situation and trying to figure out a solution, although the hope expressed seemed tentative. One person consulted said that administrators both above and equal to Mr. Lucier had spoken with him, explaining that he needed to alter his communication structure. The staff, however, has noticed no changes to the corporate model running the library. According to many, he continues to 'treat people with great intellectual contempt.'

Ever-Shrinking Budgets

In the past decade, purchasing power for books has dropped almost forty percent due to escalating publishing costs well above inflation. Nowhere has this been felt as hard as at college and university libraries. At Dartmouth, the fiscal reality has been exacerbated by the recent school-wide budget cuts, but the libraries have been hit particularly hard. In the past year, there has been a one-million dollar cut from a fifteen-million dollar budget. The Provost recently released an extra one-hundred thousand dollar and two-hundred fifty thousand dollar stipend to preserve the collections. Even so, the financial realities add excess stress to an already ailing library. Last year the library was partially spared by a one-time emergency relief, in the hopes that the crunch would pass. The crisis, however, continued to build, forcing more cuts that, according to Mary Gorman, Executive Officer to the Provost, harmed the library more than most divisions since it had been saved in the first round of cuts.

The decision to consolidate the library system was only communicated piecemeal. On one hand, departments were told it was yet another result of budget cuts, but on the other, ideological reasons were cited by top administrators. College President James Wright even explained to a meeting of chairs of academic departments that the eliminations were a shift in the College's vision of the libraries; no faculty were consulted for this strategic change, despite being directly affected. The vision is a central, autonomous library that will ideally serve as the focal point of the college. Many assumed Mr. Lucier entered the College hoping to rein in the satellite libraries, and the budget crisis played into his hand. For an administrator whose past dealt with consolidation, they explained, it only makes sense to draw all circulating material to Baker/Berry.

When Mr. Lucier arrived two years ago, English Chair Peter Travis asked him specifically how he felt about the satellite libraries.Mr. Lucier responded, '[Sanborn] is a luxury. But it's one we can afford.'At some point in the fall, the English department was given three choices: eliminate Sanborn as a circulating library, curtail English acquisitions, or leave the current bibliographer position —the individual responsible for buying departmental books for the general collections—vacant. The choice was , according to Professor Travis, 'pretty self-evident.' And so Sanborn went, and with it the two part-time librarians and their extensive knowledge of Sanborn's collections.

The Art History department suffered a similar fate, although Sherman Art Library will continue to offer some services, albeit with half as many staff positions. Sherman circulation will be transferred to Berry and all reserves carted away to Baker, leaving only reference help during specified hours—a far cry from the fully autonomous library most Art History students and professors have relied upon since Carpenter Hall's completion in 1929. Despite repeated explanations that the proposed changes would dramatically alter the department's academic program, the cuts stood. One professor explained, 'Student research will be impacted in various ways, and it just didn't seem to make a difference...That's what we tried to articulate.'

Cook Library, home of the Math Department's collections, was eliminated without much fanfare. Mr. Lucier even explained at a library staff meeting that the Math Department found this perfectly acceptable. Only the math department tells a different story; many expressed angst and anger. One member of the library said this doublespeak was nothing rare: '[Richard Lucier] will outright lie, and has done so to faculty and staff.'

Chair of the Council on Libraries and Classics Professor Jeremy Rutter, however, agreed with the decision to consolidate the libraries. 'In terms of the institution, I think those were the right choices,' he explained, noting that most research universities did not have a complex satellite system like Dartmouth's.

Cuts have been felt elsewhere within the system. The history department's bibliographer recently ran out of money, so the department can purchase no more books for the general collections until summer. This is the first time this has ever happened.

And of course the budget has severely affected the library staff. A number of positions have been eliminated—a few through attrition, and others through reorganizations that have pilfered staff members of their long-held jobs, sending them to areas where they have little experience. The choice is stark: either accept the new position, or start looking for a new job. According to some, the new management attitude and work environment have led to an increased attrition rate this year, but queries to the library on exact numbers went unanswered.

While the extra money released to the library was useful, it has in no way curtailed the seismic ripples felt among staff, and most departments are feeling a crunch with their collections budget. Some assumed the extra three-hundred fifty thousand dollar sum was pumped into the digital library, which recently created two part-time positions.

The Digital Age

The coming of digital technology presents complex issues in and of itself—yet another factor in the library debacle. While many praised the new technology, others took a more cautious approach.

'Digital technology has led to a flattening of information,' explained Professor Kremer. He drew the distinction between information, for which digital technology allows unfettered access, and knowledge, the more specific application and analysis of information that gets validated by scholarship. Librarians, now more than ever, play the 'role of gate-keeper.' Professor Kremer noted further that 'For many, many fields most of the repertoire for the scholarly enterprise is in print, only print.' This focus on information, he believed, has led to fears among some faculty that the staff situation could adversely impact student and faculty research, since there will be fewer people available for reference. Recently Daniel J. Boorstin, Librarian of Congress emeritus, echoed this sentiment: 'Technology is so much fun but we can drown in [it]. The fog of information can drive out knowledge.'

Mr. Platt noted the advent of digital technology as a potential point of contention in the library: 'Sometimes [resistance to change] may be based on 'this is the way we've always done it.'' But most members of the library actually expressed enthusiasm for the new technology, explaining that librarians felt the new information was useful, but needed to be streamlined and conceptualized—a job they were eager to accept.

The nascent digital library here received varying reviews. Many claimed that in its present state it remains clunky and difficult to navigate, but more feedback should alleviate the flaws. Since this was Mr. Lucier's main charge, the burgeoning digital library bodes well. Professor Rutter explained that many of the features and schools with which it is connected were solely due to Mr. Lucier's professional affiliations and his grasp of the technology available. 'Lucier has a very good grasp of what knowledge is.' He is 'flexible and imaginative and wide-open.'

One member of the library explained that Mr. Lucier had done a phenomenal job in California creating a 'digital library for a multi-campus system focusing on graduate students.' Even so, he/she questioned who deserved credit for Dartmouth's digital library, claiming that most everything in the digital library had either already been purchased or was slated to be. Mr. Lucier even expressed surprise with how much the library had already done with its digital collections. This individual claimed that, in essence, the new digital library was nothing but 'the emperor's new clothes.'

Is There Hope?

'There has been a long tradition of dedication and service in the Library, and now such loyalties seem to count for nothing at all,' said Classics Professor James Tatum, one of the more vocal professors dismayed by the current library crisis. For the library staff, Professor Tatum even advocated a union as a possible recourse: '[There are] a lot of really unhappy people who think they've been treated unjustly...What else are [they] going to do?'

Even among Mr. Lucier's defenders, the staff issue is troubling. Professor Rutter, who works closely with Mr. Lucier, pointed to the 'rather peculiar historical circumstances' with the budget, facilities, and dawning digital technology. 'I want to help him hold onto his staff...the circumstances make it tough,' he said. 'If [Mr. Lucier's] given the chance to institute many of the changes he'd like to, they will have a significant and positive long-term impact.'

No doubt, Mr. Lucier's tenure thus far has been marred by unforeseen circumstances; the budget crisis has placed extra burdens on a staff already stretched thin in its new facilities, and the digital library has complicated matters further. The conflation of problems, though, has gone largely unnoticed and ill-addressed. Certainly there have been no serious steps taken to completely protect the libraries from budget cuts, as many—especially among faculty—believe should have occurred, since libraries are the veritable heart of Dartmouth academics. While Dartmouth students may only register the effects slightly, the library staff is left reeling from internal strife and turmoil. They have no guarantees, and each day brings a different tale of what may or may not happen to the libraries, individual positions, and even salaries. Left in a state of purgatory, the staff awaits a concrete outcome or a change for the better, but for two years this has proved elusive.

In its present condition, the Library will limp forward, crippled by poor management, monetary deficiencies, and a staff that cannot imagine amelioration. 'An academic library is an incredibly delicate ecosystem,' one librarian said. 'It will take decades to recover.' The question is when, how, and if this recovery will begin.

Preparing the Fall: Dartmouth's Library Crisis

Article Tools

Related Articles