Measures of excellence: the search for the gold standard.

Questions concerning some of the values we hold as librarians and the goals, standards, and other evaluation tools we derive from them are discussed in the context of the history of our profession and the present period of rapid change. The concepts of stable and changing paradigms and of "scientific communities" provide the foundation for consideration of how a changing conceptual framework can affect values and their application in the evaluation process. One of many possible scenarios for the future is briefly outlined to demonstrate how some traditional values may fare.     

Review of criteria used to measure library effectiveness

This article reports the results of a survey of literature on measures of library effectiveness. This survey led to the formulation of six criterion concepts (accessibility, cost, user satisfaction, response time, cost/benefit ratio, and use). The advantages and disadvantages of each method of measurement are discussed. Several points which became clear during the analysis are discussed. First, there is a relative lack of concern with the rationale behind the evaluation process, although the results invariably lead to a confused interpretation when there is no clear understanding of the purpose of an evaluation. Second, the total library system is rarely considered; instead, each evaluation criterion is taken in isolation rather than as part of the whole. Third, the library's preservation function has not been considered at all.     

The hospital library committee: its composition and tasks

Since a sizeable hospital must have a library, it must have a library committee. Like all hospital committees, this one is to help maintain standards of medical care and to mediate between staff and administration. Unlike others, it clusters around one elected member (the chairman) and one employee (the librarian). A dynamic librarian can, and should, influence and inspire the committee's deliberations; and must be able to depend upon the support of the physician members of the committee.     

Reply to the Comments

First, I am pleased to note the broad area of agreement amongthe four of us. We concur fully that polls are useful, powerful,and play an important role in contemporary politics. My threeresponders also acknowledge the significance of alternativeways in which citizens can express their opinions and, furthermore,that public opinion is more diverse and nuanced than any dichotomoussplit between the pros and cons on a particular issue recordedat a particular time might suggest. Sir Robert chides me explicitly, and Gary Langer by implication,for failing