Ahead or Behind the Curve...
by Nikki Poling
Nikki Poling is the assistant editor of Information Outlook.
Where Do You Stand?
It can hardly be said that benchmarking is a 'dying topic' these days.
Not only does the benchmarking process help an organization understand where they stand with their competitors, it can also build valuable relationships amongst information professionals. Do you know where your organization stands? Are you making use of best practices? Nikki Poling posed questions to three special librarians to see where organizations stand in defining and implementing the benchmarking process today.
Roger Strouse of Outsell, Inc. 
Nikki Poling (NP): How would you define benchmarking?
Roger Strouse (RS): I think it is using a standard set of attributes to compare multiple organizations to each other. In the case of libraries, those attributes are types of services being offered, how the function is changing, how much the library might be spending per user, or how much staff they have per customer. I think it's a framework for comparing different operations.
NP: Do you think benchmarking is a dying topic?
RS: Outsell is a little bit different, in that we provide the service of benchmarking for our clients. Outsell constantly receives requests for benchmarking data, which is why I thought it was so interesting that you asked 'Is benchmarking a dying topic?' Quite to the contrary, we find that our clients ask for a lot of benchmark databoth operational benchmarks (stuff like budgets, staff ratios, budgets per user); and the more qualitative benchmarks (trends in the services offered, trends in the information center function itself). I see people using a lot of benchmarking, so I would not say it was dying. Particularly, the larger organizations are using it rather heavily.
NP: How would you say the members of SLA do or could use benchmarking?
RS: I see information centers benchmarking themselves in order to get ideas for operational best practices, also to rationalize their information spending and their staffingjust all their activities, in order to understand how the function is trending, to find out what new services and
products are being offered. Information managers want to understand how they stack-up to other organizations. They want to know, 'Is my information center ahead of the curve or behind it?'
I think information professionals also use benchmarking to find new ideas and unique services. Participating in a benchmark survey allows you to find out what others are doing that might be innovative. But probably the real 'meat and potatoes' of benchmarking is the staffing and budgeting information that helps managers rationalize their spending to executives.
Another major use of benchmarking can be applied when an organization has multiple libraries at different sites and they want to compare the consistency and quality between the different libraries. Or it can be helpful for planning purposes or for integrating multiple sites (like in a merger).
Also, when organizations are considering opening a brand new information center, they might use benchmark data to get a level set about what it will cost, how it will work or what type of services it should offer.
NP: Is there anything that has changed over the years as far as collecting benchmarking data?
RS: I think the principles are the same, but what has changed is the information gathered. The function of librarianship has changed so much that maybe a benchmarking study now may include things like 'how much do you participate in Web development for your organization?' The functions that are benchmarked now have changed. But benchmarking is still about objectively comparing yourself to other organizations.
NP: If an information professional really had no idea of where to start with a benchmarking study, where could they begin?
RS: You could rely on secondary informationfor instance, reading articles on other libraries, using SLA resources or doing some informal networking by calling other libraries/companies/organizations that are comparable. Then there are formal methods, such an engaging a research firm to put together a study with multiple participants, using surveys, phone interviews and the standard questionnaire. There is definitely a spectrum, from two librarians chatting, all the way through a full-blown study done by an outside research firm.
David Shumaker of the MITRE Corporation
Nikki Poling (NP): How would you define benchmarking?
David Shumaker (DS): I would define it as comparing your organization with other organizations and learning from the comparison. That can involve process benchmarking, which you can do with an entirely different type of organization from your own, to adopt a process in which their techniques can be applied to a process of your own. Another kind of benchmarking can be done with like organizations to compare service levels, budget, staffing, etc. I would divide it into those two areas.
NP: How often do you evaluate?
DS: We've actually done a couple of exercises within the past year. I think it is good to do it regularly, especially if you want to compare services and like organizations. Maybe there is a consortium of institutions that have something in common and they can share their information regularly.
NP: Would you say benchmarking is dying?
DS: No, I don't agree with that. Benchmarking is one (but not the only) source of good ideas and information for the kind of continuous improvement that I think we all have to be engaged in.
NP: What would you say are the benefits/downfalls of benchmarking?
DS: We've talked about the goal-directed process of benchmarking, and how it can be used to track like organizations in order to get an idea of where your own group stands overall. Besides the specific actions you might be able to take as a result of benchmarking, you are also building relationships. Those relationships can be called on for all kinds of unexpected things. Being connected to others with common professional interest is how we en
rich what we do. Benchmarking is a way of getting connected and staying connectedit has somewhat intangible and unpredictable benefits.
On the downside, from time to time I have heard the criticism that benchmarking may limit your own creativity, since you are adopting something somebody else already thought of. It's not the kind of groundbreaking innovation that you would have if you came up with something truly original. And while that is true, I don't think that is a reason not to benchmark. I think it's great to be innovative and break new ground, but you're not going to be able to do that all the time. And if that is all you are trying to do, you may end up reinventing the wheel.
Since every organization is different too, you can't always assume that everything is going to work the same in yours. You have to adapt good practices to your own circumstances.
NP: Do you think there is competition involved in benchmarking?
DS: I have been in situations where organizations don't want to share what they have with others, because they have the competitive advantage. You have to be sensitive to that and know where to draw the lines. The issue of competition is obviously different for nonprofits than it is for firms in the for-profit sector.
Annette Gohlke of Library Benchmarking International
Nikki Poling (NP): How would you define benchmarking?
Annette Gohlke (AG): To me, benchmarking is a process of looking at how you are getting work done and then deciding if you have a problem area. The problem area identified may be based on customer or executive feedback, or new edicts that come from upper management or for whomever you are working. The next step is to go out and find other libraries or entities that perform the same process, and compare their process and results to yours, especially if they are doing it differently and getting better results. You will probably need to compare with several others to decide who has the "best practice." You can decide whether to adopt what they are doing exactly, or to adapt it in your library.
NP: Would you say benchmarking is dying?
AG: I don't think benchmarking is dying, nor should it, especially in the corporate world. It's probably easier to launch benchmarking studies in the private sector, where there may be more purpose and reward. My feeling is that some public librariesas part of municipal governmentare looking at benchmarking to measure performance, prove value and cut down on costs. I believe Dr. James Matarazzo has reported in at least one of his studies that most of usafter we graduate from library schoolcontinue to do things the way we learned them (until it's 35 years later and we are still doing things the same way). Librarians, for whatever reason, in the public, academic and government sectors, don't have the pressure to move forward and streamline (or measure) how they perform or "do business."
Benchmarking is definitely still alive and well in Australia, England and in the corporate sector in many other countries. In the United States, I think there are 'pockets of progress' where librarians are benchmarking. This is especially true in medical libraries. The Medical Library Association has taken the lead in developing a database of critical information that can be used by medical librarians for benchmarking purposes. Quality processes, including benchmarking, is driven by the 1994 accreditation standards issued by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, which significantly affects the management of information, and in turn, medical libraries. I found in Southeast Asia, where I recently taught a series of benchmarking workshops last September, that there was a strong concern about the viability of benchmarking. It was repeatedly expressed that if there is not an immediate reward (increased funding, special recognition) or threat within the library work environment (the loss of funding or staffing), then it would be difficult to encourage or force a benchmarking effort. I strongly believe there is room in all types of librariesacademic, public, government and specialfor planned performance improvement efforts using the benchmarking process and I base that opinion on 40 years of working in, directing and evaluating library services. I think that quality expectations will grow in direct proportion to the value of information services provided by librarians.
NP: Are there any problem areas you can identify in benchmarking?
AG: I think there will always be both real and perceived problem areas associated with change and learning new processes, especially now. Librarians are absolutely overloaded with change and working under a time crunch. They are constantly challenged to increase their knowledge and experience bank. Where in the busy workday is a librarian supposed fit a benchmarking study - especially since it can take a considerable time commitment? Somewhere between new library services, more demanding customers, implementing new automation tools or coping with the burgeoning Internet? Yet it is the "crises mode" that demands new solutionsand many proactive librarians have been finding those solutions for years. They "borrowed" creative solutions from colleagues "on the fly" rather than using the more formal "benchmarking process." Besides time, benchmarking usually requires a commitment of money from within the library budget or in addition to it. Funds may be used for personnel to help with the study, communications with and travel to visit selected partners.
Tunnel vision (TV) is often the most tenacious obstacle to overcome. People with TV frequently believe that they don't need to "improve." They can also be identified by their frequent answer, "Because I've always done it this way," when asked why they do a task the way they do it. Supervisors of TV personnel will need some charm and charisma, lots of patience and persistence, boundless energy and encouragement if they are to achieve benchmarking success.
NP: If a librarian is just starting out the process of benchmarking, where would you tell them to start?
AG: Find out what benchmarking is all about and then determine what goes into quality or how quality is defined. Select a work process that you know needs improvingidentified from either your crystal ball, intuition or from lots of complaints. You want to select a work process that can be studied in a reasonable amount of time. Benchmarking is a process that should be completed in about four to six months. You have to know where your resources to benchmark are coming from and what you want to accomplishyour purpose. When you have all of that in focus, then you are ready to conduct and implement a successful benchmarking study.
NP: How often would you say benchmarking needs to be done?
AG: It is a continuous process, it's like total quality managementyou never finish improving. Let's say you finish your study in six months, then you need to implement the improvement in three to six more months. When you are finished, you may look for another process to improve, but you will still be looking at the one you just completed to make sure that is still a "best practice" and that you don't slip back into old habits. There's always room for improvement.
RSS
Feedback form
