Doing Better with Less?

Libraries don’t often speak in defined ways about productivity. In any job after a time you get a glimpse (or more likely “feel”) when there is a greater workload or activity. The questions you have to ask yourself after accounting for all of the variables are “Did I actually do more or better work or did I add any value to the organization or to the life of the library patrons?”


At PPL, which is first and foremost a service organization, we have to start with some broad measures that make an effort to quantify effort and activity and cost. One way to look at the overall return on the investment of people is to look at the relationship between the number of staff and the amount of lending or visits the library system experiences in a year and which must be “serviced.” This is an important question for an organization whose staffing has declined roughly 10% since 2008 and is significantly lower than any year since 1990. It also important to state that other infrastructure costs associated with library service need to be accounted for to the point that staffing – all associated costs – account for under 68% of the budget which, depending on your point of view is either low or very efficient - for a service organization.

The graph above reveals some interesting things and points toward a bright library future in the service of our users. The years 1990 – 1996 show a flattening in terms of lending and visitation per FTE * (Full Time Equivalent). In 1996, the first full year of operation of the Burbank Branch, lending and visitation begin to rise per FTE which is a measure of more activity per staff member. It also argues for investment in service locations that have a critical mass in terms of collections and hours. The period 2008 – 2011 reinforces this notion strongly as the Main Library first underwent hours reduction due to budget constraints and then a renovation that resulted in substantial reduction of space. Our system numbers fell accordingly. Once the Main Library came back on-line (April 2010) with improved and expanded spaces and a six day a week schedule (July 2010) the productivity per FTE rose dramatically despite 25% fewer hours due to the closure of the Reiche and Munjoy locations.

In September, we will publicly release the results of our community survey conducted late last spring. One relevant finding however to share now is that respondents indicated to us (in support of critical mass/efficiency) that fewer locations open longer hours and with strong collections was preferred over more locations with short schedules and small collections.

* Total number of staff work hours available divided by 40.