Process Reengineering in Academic Libraries: Shifting to Client-centered Resource Provision

Copyright 1995 CAUSE. From _CAUSE/EFFECT_ magazine, Volume 18, 
Number 2, Summer 1995, pp. 40-46. Permssion to copy or disseminate 
all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies 
are not made or distributed for commercial advantage, the CAUSE 
copyright and its date appear, and notice is given that copying is 
by permission of CAUSE, the association for managing and using 
information technology in higher education. To disseminate 
otherwise, or to republish, requires written permission. For 
further information, contact Julia Rudy at CAUSE, 4840 Pearl East 
Circle, Suite 302E, Boulder, CO 80301 USA; 303-939-0308; e-mail: 
jrudy@CAUSE.colorado.edu


        PROCESS REENGINEERING IN ACADEMIC LIBRARIES: 
       SHIFTING TO CLIENT-CENTERED RESOURCE PROVISION 
              by Maxine Brodie and Neil McLean


ABSTRACT: The emergence of networked information services is 
challenging traditional forms of academic information delivery. 
This article examines the potential of business process 
reengineering to address this challenge through creation of a new 
client-centered paradigm for information resource provision that 
will strengthen the partnerships between all information 
professionals.



The rapid expansion of networked information services, together 
with the increased nemphasis on quality assurance processes, 
highlights some interesting problems for academic libraries. While 
strategic planning in academic libraries now reflects a more 
customer-focused approach, the principal assumption behind most of 
this planning is that academic libraries are still firmly in the 
right business and that continuous improvement of existing 
practices will lead to greater customer satisfaction. This 
viewpoint challenges that assumption: we believe that if we are to 
meet the needs of our clients, we need to develop a new paradigm 
for information resource provision.

To illustrate the potential application of business process 
reengineering principles to the redesign of academic library 
services, we examine only traditional document delivery services. 
However, it becomes clear that these principles can apply to all 
aspects of the information provision process, and that their 
implementation requires the collaboration of all information 
resources professionals, not just those who work in the library.


Making a Case for Action

Why is continuous improvement of existing document delivery 
practices not enough? We believe that the internal operating 
environments of many academic libraries are showing signs of 
organizational stress, the major symptoms being:

  *  a decline in resources;
  *  a decreasing ability to meet client needs and expectations in
     the old ways;
  *  addition of new ways of doing things without dispensing with
     the old;
  *  inability to shift resources quickly;
  *  chronic under-investment in new technologies;
  *  inability to reexamine the need for existing practices and/or
     the need to change them;
  *  a tendency to shift the blame onto others;
  * organizational structures and cultures that are unreceptive to
    innovation and unable to accommodate change easily;
  *  management information that is activity- and input-oriented
     rather than output-oriented--we can always answer "how many?"
     but not "at what cost?" and "how long did it take?"

Added to this, there are important factors affecting academic 
libraries in the external environment. These factors arise out of 
changes in relationships within the publishing and information 
industry and changes in information technology (IT).

Traditionally, academic libraries have followed the "local 
ownership" approach by acquiring substantial serial holdings to 
meet the needs of their clients. As a result they have always been 
the largest purchasers of serials and, as such, are tied to the 
future of the large serial publishers. The spiraling price of 
serials causes libraries to cancel more, which in turn causes 
publishers to raise the price to cover smaller production runs. At 
the same time, communications technology and photocopying make it 
easier to obtain copies of individual articles rather than rely on 
a serial subscription. This puts further pressure on the 
publishing industry and means that traditional sources of supply 
are no longer clear. The changing economics of providing access to 
the serial literature mean that libraries can no longer be self-
sufficient and are faced with increasing uncertainty in choices 
for document supply.

The advent of commercial document delivery services has added a 
new dimension to service delivery, and many academic libraries now 
make use of them. It is the emergence of these services that has 
led to the "just-in-time" versus "just-in-case" debate and to the 
development of so-called "access versus ownership" policies. There 
is, however, great uncertainty as to how the process of 
procurement should be managed--for example, whether the library or 
the client should pay for the service, and whether the library or 
the client should deal directly with the vendor. Such services 
present a challenge to traditional academic library philosophies, 
and there seems to be no consensus of opinion on how they should 
be integrated into library service strategies.

The result is that libraries are providing access to more and more 
material from more and more sources for their clients--an activity 
that is currently putting great strain on many areas of the 
library's budget, including inter-library loan. From the user 
viewpoint, the loss of local journal subscriptions and the forced 
reliance on remote searching through the current cumbersome 
interfaces are cause for unease, if not dissatisfaction. This 
points to the need for a new service paradigm that combines the 
traditional strengths of library service, the rapidly emerging 
networked information services, and the increased capacity of 
clients to access and manage information resources through 
workstations.


Creating a New Client-centered Paradigm

To design a new service paradigm we need a new way of thinking--a 
new framework that is truly client-centered. Such a framework can 
be found in the literature on reorganization and change in 
American corporations--that of reengineering. Why consider a 
concept like reengineering in relation to academic libraries?

    "Advanced technologies, the disappearance of boundaries 
     between national markets, and the altered expectations of 
     customers who now have more choices than ever before have 
     combined to make the goals, methods, and basic organizing 
     principles of the classical American corporation sadly 
     obsolete."[1]

If we substitute "academic library" for "American corporation," 
there is an obvious potential for application of the process 
reengineering approach to the library.

Process Reengineering

Hammer and Champy define reengineering as "the fundamental 
rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve 
dramatic improvements in critical, contemporary measures of 
performance, such as cost, quality, service and speed."[2]

The rethink is fundamental because it assumes nothing; it asks 
"why" and "what should be," not "what is." The redesign is radical 
because it is not "fiddling at the edges"--it is meant to get to 
the root of things, including written rules and unwritten 
assumptions. The improvement is dramatic because the aim is a 
quantum leap, not a safe 10 percent improvement. It is focused on 
processes--not on products, tasks, jobs, structures, or workers. 
Indeed, another writer on reengineering, Thomas Davenport, claims 
that just adopting a process view may be a major step forward for 
an organization, because there is value in "viewing the business 
cross-functionally through the eyes of the customer."[3]

Once the key processes are defined, order of magnitude 
improvements can be achieved by redesigning them from beginning to 
end, using innovative technologies and organizational resources. 
Using technology to innovate is not the same as automating 
existing procedures; it is not "paving cow paths"--that is, 
providing more efficient ways of doing the wrong things.[4]

Reengineering is ambitious, rule-breaking, enabled by the creative 
use of technology, and oriented towards processes. It has become 
necessary in business because of a new environment in which 
customersare in charge, competition has intensified, and change is 
constant.[5] Reengineering implies a new organization of work, 
using a process model rather than the old industrial model. In the 
industrial model, work is broken down into simple tasks on the 
assumption that people have few skills and little capacity for 
training. However, organizations then need complex processes and 
structures to link these simple tasks back together, leading to 
inefficiency. The process model says, on the other hand, that "to 
meet the contemporary demands of quality, service, flexibility, 
and low cost, processes must be kept simple. This need for 
simplicity has enormous consequences for how processes are 
designed and organizations are shaped."[6]

Information Resource Delivery: 
a Business Process

It is our contention that the corporate concept of "business 
process" has considerable potential in the library context. As 
Hammer and Champy say, "A business process is a set or collection 
of activities that take more than one kind of input and that, 
taken together, produce a result of value to the customer."[7] A 
process is not a function, a department, or a hierarchy--in fact, 
in many cases these "organizational artifacts" can obscure the 
true processes that should be the focus. The end result of a 
process is always an output--and one that is of value to the 
customer. If an organizational activity is only of value to the 
organization itself, it is likely that it is a candidate for 
obliteration, not improvement.

In applying this concept to academic libraries, a different view 
of information provision emerges, particularly in the area of 
document delivery and traditional interlibrary loan (see Figure 
1). In this model, resource delivery is one of the processes of 
information provision. The input to this process is a request for 
a specific information resource, the output is the resource itself 
in a form, of a quality, and at a time and cost acceptable to the 
client.


(FIGURE 1 NOT AVAILABLE IN ASCII TEXT VERSION)


The broader term "resource" is used, rather than "document," to 
reflect the changing nature of scholarly publishing. It is likely 
that the future "electronic journal" will not only provide an 
article as we know it now, but link correspondence and corrections 
with the original, provide hypertext links of citations in the 
bibliography to abstracts and to the text/image of those articles; 
and provide access to the underlying data files, formulas, 
diagrams, multimedia 3-D images, etc.[8] For monographs, it will 
also become possible to create a book "on demand" either in its 
entirety or eclectically, and have it printed or downloaded on 
request.

According to this definition of process, the broader concept of 
"resource delivery" also challenges other traditional library 
functions, for example, those involved in delivering information 
resources to undergraduates--acquisitions, cataloguing, reserve 
room, loans, reshelving.

For many types of library clients, it is likely that the old 
notion of document delivery mediated by the library through 
interlibrary loan will disappear, except for access to older 
printed works that have not been converted to electronic form. 
Instead, resource delivery will involve direct participation by 
the client, with direct delivery to the client. The process of 
resource delivery may be triggered by resource discovery (planned 
and unplanned through serendipity) in sources provided by the 
library or by others. The client will need to be able to collapse 
or expand the steps involved in resource discovery and delivery 
when required.

Several key points emerge from this process view of information 
provision:

  *  Effective service to the client involves a high degree of
     interdependence and collaboration between information
     publishers, system and tool developers, IT infrastructure
     providers, and libraries. 

  *  Information technology can link the client not only to the
     library, but also directly to publishers and suppliers, and
     to information and systems providers. For our clients, this
     means we do it their way, or sooner or later they will do it
     themselves. If we behave like a "troll on the bridge," our
     users will build a new bridge a mile upstream. Therefore, the
     library's viability will depend on its effectiveness in
     planning, managing, marketing, and educating, and in
     facilitating for its clients the processes of resource
     discovery, delivery, management, and use.

  *  Unlike a manufacturer, the library has no central
     "production" process--a library integrates the output of
     others. This may have a significant impact on our ability to
     reengineer our processes, unless we find effective ways to
     exercise our limited influence on others in the supply chain. 

  *  Library processes are not ends in themselves, but need to be
     integrated into the processes of our clients.

  *  Library processes are linked and not discrete, so change to
     one will affect another. 

  *  Library processes are not "one size fits all." Each library
     process may have multiple versions for a different client
     (for example, undergraduate, researcher), and in different
     disciplines.

Information Resource Delivery: 
the need for reengineering 

Hammer and Champy suggest that processes are suitable for 
reengineering if they satisfy these three criteria:

  *  Is it "broken"? Symptoms of a broken process are:
     -extensive information exchange, data redundancy, rekeying
     -high ratio of checking and control to value adding
     -high degree of rework and iteration
     -complexity, exceptions, and special cases 

  *  Is it important to your clients? There is no question that
     this process is of strategic importance both to clients and
     libraries. 

  *  Is it feasible to tackle it? Even if the prospect is
     daunting, what will be the consequences of not tackling the
     problem? [9]

Our current procedures for document delivery qualify for serious 
consideration on all three criteria.


Redesigning Information Resource Delivery

Key factors in redesigning resource delivery according to the 
process reengineering framework include developing a new vision, 
focusing on the client, understanding the existing process, and 
understanding a number of enablers and barriers.

**********************************************************

Key Steps in Redesigning Resource Delivery

          * Develop a New Vision
          * Focus on the Client
          * Understand the Existing Process
          * Understand Enablers and Barriers
               -Technological
               -Marketplace
               -Organizational

********************************************************

After establishing the case for action, a new vision is required 
before the redesign process can start. For example, such a vision 
for resource delivery could be that clients are able to obtain the 
right information resources, when and where they want to, at the 
least cost, and at the required quality.

The redesign process then starts with identification of client 
needs, facilitated by the library in consultation with information 
providers and those responsible for the IT support required. We 
should not assume we know clients' needs better than they do. On 
the other hand, we should not be limited by what they say they 
want, as our clients often find it difficult to conceptualize what 
they do not know. We should end up by understanding the needs of 
our clients better than they do themselves. This will require a 
close understanding of their work environment, an assessment of 
the differences between expectations and reality, and an 
understanding of what they do with the output of this process. 

To redesign a process effectively, we need to know how well (or 
badly) the current one performs and what the critical issues are 
that govern its performance. To develop this understanding, we 
need to first understand what the current process provides, and 
why, and then consider what else might be possible. This can be 
achieved in a number of ways, including participating in the 
process ourselves as users and by identifying best practices in 
our own and/or other service sectors. Then we need to assess the 
potential of technological, marketplace, and organizational 
developments to support or hinder the redesign process.

Understanding IT Enablers and Barriers

According to Hammer and Champy, technology should be used to help 
us "break the rules" in process redesign. "Companies need to make 
technology exploitation one of their core competencies if they are 
to succeed in a period of ongoing technological change."[10] 
Although libraries have been fairly quick to take up new 
technology as it appears, there has been less concerted attempt to 
influence future developments. As a result, information technology 
has been developed and adopted in a piecemeal fashion, becoming 
both an enabler and a barrier at the same time.
     There are many opportunities for collaborative work with IT 
professionals to improve client support at the individual 
workstation. Some of the most significant IT enablers required to 
be able to redesign the resource delivery process are listed in 
Table 1.


********************************************************

                TABLE 1: IT ENABLERS REQUIRED
         TO REDESIGN INFORMATION RESOURCE DELIVERY

     * Ubiquitous access to and use of communications
       infrastructure by clients

     * Academic data networks that are powerful and reliable
       enough to support electronic resource delivery

     * Mature client/server architecture providing, for example,
       automatic, seamless look-ups of resource locations, with
       delivery options linked to the resource discovery process

     * Resource discovery tools that are client-centered and not
       data-centered,[11] that is, which support all types of user
       requests from simple to complex in the language of the user
       rather than the language of the system and which provide
       Z39.50,[12] or similar, interoperability between systems

     * User-centered searching tools appropriate to very large,
       full-text databases

     * User-centered browsing tools appropriate to electronic
       resources

     * Means to resolve problems relating to the integrity of the
       scholarly record in an electronic age[13]

     * Cross-functional resource management systems with
       substantial integration at least at the user level,
       consisting of simple and robust data structures organized
       by key aspect of the library's business

     * Single rather than multiple financial and control systems.

*******************************************************

Understanding Marketplace Enablers and Barriers

The scholarly information industry is in a volatile state for a 
variety of reasons. It is important at the outset to realize that 
the scholarly publishing industry is a very small industry by 
world standards, which has not so far attracted the attention of 
the big multinational conglomerates. This means that the industry 
suffers from chronic under-investment. The investment in the 
development of the new technology often comes from increasing the 
profit on hard copy.

There are, however, some interesting trends emerging. One of the 
most exciting of these is the move towards user-centered 
publishing. Karen Hunter suggests that we will see increased 
personal choice in communication and entertainment modes reflected 
in increased flexibility and sophistication in scholars' 
professional communications.[14] As a result, academic libraries 
should expect and demand a more personalized set of offerings and 
more customized services from publishers, and should capitalize on 
the client-centered approach to tailor services to disciplines and 
individuals. Charles Schwartz proposes that the "loosely coupled" 
nature of scholarly communication, while preventing wholesale 
structural reform of the industry, may in fact reinforce such 
possibilities for local innovation.[15]

Some consolidation is taking place within the industry as 
publishers, database producers, and document delivery services 
enter into new alliances generally aimed at providing an 
integrated service to users. These new services do not, however, 
break new ground in terms of the delivery of electronic services, 
because they simply link present services in a more integrated 
way. The user can move from the search on a bibliographic 
database, to an agent who provides the document in a fairly 
conventional way, through fax or post from an existing hard copy 
held either in a document supply center or a library. One 
important missing link is the capacity for the user to be able to 
request the document in electronic form and to have it downloaded 
directly to a workstation. This capacity exists already between 
scholars on the Internet, but it is not yet embedded in the 
commercial scholarly information industry.

One of the main impediments to new forms of service delivery is 
the question of copyright and payment. The publishers have relied 
heavily on libraries to purchase hard copy serial subscriptions 
for their income, with "fair use" agreements covering photocopying 
for individual use. There is much debate as to the adequacy of 
existing copyright law for the electronic information environment. 
From the publishers' point of view, fair use is less important 
than royalty payments from users accessing services. There are a 
variety of licensing/royalty agreements already in use, but they 
are clumsy and difficult to administer. In the short term we are 
likely to be confronted with different copyright solutions for 
libraries and individual requesters and with different problems 
associated with "returnable" and "non-returnable" documents.

In spite of all these difficulties, new alliances are emerging 
with increasing frequency in an attempt to provide a more 
comprehensive resource delivery service. Various attempts by 
libraries to engineer solutions to the problem of integrating 
resource discovery and resource delivery have met with mixed 
success. There is now a growing realization that the marketplace 
should be left to sort out its own solutions. The aim of academic 
libraries as an intermediary for users is to retain flexibility in 
a highly competitive market and to avoid unduly restrictive long-
term commitments.

Academic libraries will need to think about their relationships 
with publishers and suppliers and move to create bargaining power 
with those who can add value through such services as:

  *  consolidating the output of other publishers/suppliers,

  *  packaging resources and services to suit our users'
     requirements,

  *  providing "just in time" delivery,

  *  providing a quality control service on resources and services
     supplied, and

  *  providing information to us on usage patterns, user
     preferences, etc.[16]

Understanding Organizational Enablers and Barriers 

Libraries have to make a strategic decision as to how far they can 
facilitate the resource delivery process on an individual basis 
and/or to what extent they should rely on cooperative or national 
initiatives to achieve their goal. They have to decide, also, to 
what extent the resource delivery process should be subsidized, 
either by national funds or library funds.

The array of initiatives now under way in different countries is 
very often dependent on the prevailing attitude of government to 
the notion of central subsidy/organization of services. Academic 
libraries have to decide, therefore, the ground rules for 
corporate or national action, who the stakeholders are to be in 
such a process, and the range of marketplace options to be 
included in such a program.

At the individual library level, there are a number of important 
strategic issues to be addressed. The heart of the matter is 
whether the library wishes to be truly client-centered in its 
approach to service. At the present time, publishers and other 
resource providers are not willing or able to deal with individual 
users in academic institutions. Therefore, there can be no new 
service paradigm in the short term unless the resource delivery 
process is facilitated by the library. In order to achieve this 
objective, the library has to change its role as an intermediary 
from being a deliverer of actual services and products to being an 
active facilitator in the resource delivery process. Of primary 
importance in achieving this change will be the effort devoted to 
marketing the new service paradigm and its related facilities and 
the training of users to make effective use of the process. If 
libraries do not rise to this challenge, they will be increasingly 
marginalized as service providers, and users will make their own 
arrangements as the need arises.

Libraries have devoted considerable amounts of time to traditional 
forms of user education, but this has been directed primarily at 
undergraduate students. Academic staff are understandably 
reluctant to change their traditional patterns of usage and 
reliance on libraries. Therefore, a lot of effort is required to 
make them aware of the new services and to persuade them that the 
new services will fulfill their needs. Success in the 
marketing/promotion initiative will fail if it is not followed up 
with a targeted training program. While some academic staff are 
highly proficient in the use of technology and electronic 
information, many are not. This, too, is a resource-hungry 
activity, and electronic training packages must be devised and 
applied wherever possible.

Effective organizational solutions demand levels of resource 
alignment beyond that currently envisaged in most academic library 
strategic plans. Not only are human resources required for 
marketing and training, but significant cash subsidies are 
necessary for resource delivery to the user from existing library 
funds. Libraries will be challenged to find these resources within 
their present budgets, so ways will have to be found to liberate 
resources tied up in the old functional approach to service 
delivery.

Adoption of the process framework and the redesign effort will 
also have a significant organizational impact (see Table 2). Our 
ability to achieve organizational changes of this kind will be a 
key to redesigning the resource delivery process. This scale of 
organizational change will require considerable collaboration 
between all information and information technology professionals 
within the institution in providing basic IT infrastructure, 
gateways to information resources, and training to clients.

*****************************************************

               TABLE 2: ORGANIZATIONAL IMPACT
             OF ADOPTING A PROCESS FRAMEWORK [17]
 
     * Steps in the process will be performed in natural order
       (simultaneous processing)

     * Work will be performed where it makes the most sense (even
       if this means the client participates!)

     * Work units will change-from functional departments to
       process teams

     * Jobs will change-from simple to multidimensional-when the
       result to the client is always cared about

     * Processes will have multiple versions for different clients
       (not standardization)

     * Staff roles will change-from controlled to empowered to
       make decisions

     * The focus of performance measures will shift-from
       activities to results

     * Values will change-from protective to productive

     * Managers will change-from supervisors to coaches

     * Organizational structures will change-from hierarchical to
       flat

     * Executives will change-from scorekeepers to leaders

     * A hybrid centralized/decentralized structure will be
       possible, based on shared information systems

     * A "one stop shopping" case manager, with easy access to all
       information systems, may be used to provide a single point
       of contact for users and to shield them from remaining
       complexities in the process

     * Checks and controls will be introduced

*********************************************************


Developing an Agenda for Action

Margot J. Montgomery postulated the future role of libraries as 
follows:

     "In the future, the information provision business will be 
     even more competitive than it is today. Successful libraries 
     will be good at catering to users. This will mean knowing 
     users' current and anticipated information needs and 
     negotiating efficient and effective access on behalf of users 
     with publishers, other libraries, and authors/creators.[18]

In light of the process model, we should expand this list of those 
with whom we need to negotiate to include all information and 
information technology professionals.

It is increasingly likely that we will have to conduct these 
negotiations with new alliances of old partners and with new 
players we have not yet encountered. Therefore, it is important 
that we concentrate our own efforts on developing and refining our 
role as intermediary and facilitator for our users. This role will 
survive and grow because the client-centered approach demands 
mechanisms that provide information on user requirements, the 
satisfaction of user expectations through locally tailored 
services, and an ongoing role in training and support.

Apart from demanding "imagination, inductive thinking, and a touch 
of craziness,"[19] reengineering the information resource delivery 
process will provide a substantial challenge to the skills of all 
information professionals in two key areas: (1) finding effective 
ways of influencing the development of the technological, 
organizational, and marketplace enablers required to achieve our 
objectives, including the development of new and stronger 
partnerships, and (2) developing the means to profile and record 
client requirements and client satisfaction measures as part of 
overall information management and decision support systems.

Librarians may be tempted to adopt a "wait and see" strategy when 
faced with the complexities outlined in this article. Such a 
stance would be at best folly and, at worst, the beginning of the 
road to extinction. In order to survive, we require a new service 
paradigm, which will demand new and bold ways of managing service 
provision in close collaboration with our partners. This is our 
challenge for the remainder of the decade.


====================================================

SIDEBAR:

               KEY OBJECTIVES FOR FACILITATING
          RESOURCE DELIVERY USING THE PROCESS MODEL

  *  Construct profiles of clients and their needs, so that the
     resource delivery process can be tailored to fit their
     characteristics.

  *  Integrate this client information with our other internal
     information systems.

  *  Achieve integration of resource discovery, delivery, and use,
     as and when required by the client.

  *  Achieve integration of resource delivery into the client's
     own processes, tools, and other outputs.

  *  Offer flexibility and choice in all aspects of the resource
     delivery process.

  *  Provide clients with an "expert system" for discrimination
     among choice of resource delivery option, cost, time, and
     format.

  *  Provide flexible payment options that are configurable by the
     client, which identify and authorize usage of tools and
     services without library staff intervention, and which
     automatically comply with copyright and licensing
     requirements.

  *  Specify and influence the development of modules common to
     all versions of the resource delivery process--for example,
     "establish client credentials," "bill the client," "pay
     royalties/license fees"--all of which should function without
     impeding the resource delivery process to the client.

  *  Develop measures of client satisfaction that include simple
     and automatic feedback on aspects of resource delivery, like
     accessibility, cost, legibility, and speed.


==================================================

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Michael J. Hammer and James Champy, _Reengineering the 
Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution_ (New York: 
HarperBusiness, 1993), p.11. 

[2] Ibid., p.32. 

[3] Thomas H. Davenport, _Process Innovation: Reengineering Work 
through Information Technology_ (Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business 
School Press, 1993), p. 306. 

[4] Hammer and Champy, p.48. 

[5] Ibid., p.24. 

[6] Ibid., p.51. 

[7] Ibid., p.3.
 
[8] Karen Hunter, "The Changing Business of Scholarly Publishing," 
_Journal of Library Administration_ 19 (3/4 1993): 28. 

[9] Hammer and Champy, Chapter 7. 

[10] Ibid., p. 100. 

[11] Carolyn Watters and Michael A. Shepherd, "Shifting the 
Information Paradigm from Data-Centered to User-Centered," 
_Information Processing & Management_ 30 (4 1994): 455. 

[12] Z39.50 is an ANSI (American National Standards Institute) 
standard which facilitates interoperability between systems. For 
example, it is now being implemented by a number of major library 
system vendors as a means of allowing clients to search the online 
public access catalogues of other libraries without having to 
learn a new set of commands. 

[13] Clifford A. Lynch, "Rethinking the Integrity of the Scholarly 
Record in the Networked Information Age," _Educom Review_, 
March/April 1994, pp. 38-40. 

[14] Hunter, p. 26. 

[15] Charles A. Schwartz, "Scholarly Communication as a Loosely 
Coupled System; Reassessing Prospects for Structural Reform," 
_College and Research Libraries_ 55 (March 1994): 101-117. 

[16] Davenport, p. 239. 

[17] Hammer and Champy, Chapter 4. 

[18] Margot J. Montgomery, "Document Supply in a Changing World," 
_Interlending & Document Supply_ 21 (4 1993): 28. 

[19] Hammer and Champy, p. 134.


************************************************************

Maxine Brodie is currently Assistant Librarian (Resources) at the 
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia, and a member of the 
University's Information Technology Advisory Committee. She has a 
special interest in broadening the range of library services 
through the use of IT and in exploring opportunities for resource 
sharing and collaboration.

Neil McLean is currently Acting University Librarian at Macquarie 
University, Sydney, Australia, where he chairs the Campuswide 
Information System Steering Group and has been a consistent 
advocate of library and IT professionals collaborating in new 
service modes in the interests of customer satisfaction.
Process Reengineering in Academic Libraries: Shifting to Client-centered Resource Provision



2ðýÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿýcem9528.txtTEXTMSWD
ÿÿÿÿTEXTMSWD
ÿÿÿÿ¬ƒUŠ
Bðÿÿ
Ý`oÿ
ÝÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿJeff Hansen

2
{ ¼5ž2STR 
¿ãÿÿ
{™ˆ