LC21: A Digital Strategy for the Library of Congress

Citation

Line, M.B. (2001), "LC21: A Digital Strategy for the Library of Congress", The Electronic Library, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 443-443. https://doi.org/10.1108/el.2001.19.6.443.1

This document was commissioned by the Librarian of Congress, and arose “from the Library’s own sense of vulnerability and uncertainty at the dawn of the information age”. A high‐powered committee interviewed numerous people in the field, at LC and elsewhere, and a draft was read by several experts. The results of this thorough process are evident in this wide‐ranging report; what is perhaps more surprising is the trenchant tone of the report. For example, one finding is that “Before taking up their present appointments, the three senior‐most members of Library‐wide administration (librarian, deputy librarian, and chief of staff) did not have particular expertise or experience in library administration or information technology”.

To summarise the report: LC is not thinking far enough ahead, it has been slow to collect and store digital materials, it has no clear strategy for such materials, it is some way behind many other libraries, it has failed to give a lead, it has been insular, it is not organised for the task of collecting and managing digital materials, it does not have enough of the necessary expertise, and its organisational structure is inadequate. There are many good things about what LC has been doing, and some recent initiatives (e.g. the National Digital Library Program) are praised, but overall the report is clearly intended to shock LC – and Congress – into action.

The diagnosis is accompanied by no fewer than 54 recommendations. LC must work together with other libraries and publishers more closely; it should establish an external technical advisory board, and each major unit “should create an advisory council comprising members from the library, user and service provider communities”; LC must cease to favour print as the form in which digital materials are deposited; “the idea of greater reliance on outsourcing and contract employees should be pursued”, more training opportunities should be provided, and a culture of innovation and learning should be encouraged; a new (extra) deputy librarian should be appointed “to supplement the strengths and capabilities of the three [top] members of the Library‐wide administration now in place”; and so on.

LC seems to have taken on board the criticisms directed at itself; it duly responded last January, inter alia creating a new high‐level post responsible for Strategic Initiatives. Congress has certainly done its bit, with a special allocation to the library of $100 million (in addition to its 2001 appropriation of nearly $550 million), “to develop a nationwide collecting strategy and repository for digital material”. It has to be seen how far LC is able to implement the recommendations; there is inevitably some doubt as to whether such a huge institution can develop the totally new mindset that the report states to be needed.

This report is of interest far beyond LC. It deals with issues of concern to all national libraries, some of which are handling them better than others; the British Library under its new chief executive is one that is making strenuous efforts to grasp them. But all libraries, large or small, can learn something from the report: the question “Will libraries survive at all?” is raised in the early pages and is implicit throughout the report.

There is an excellent bibliography 24 pages long, but, disappointingly, no index.