On 11/15/2013 12:43 AM, Julie Moore wrote:
Curious about how others have been reorganized …
When Technical Services Departments are dissolved and you have only “Cataloging” left, what has happened to Cataloging in your experience?
In our situation, they put Cataloging under IT. (I guess that since it is such a small operation now, they had to put it under something, and IT was the logical landing point, what with all of the ebook and ejournal packages that need to be loaded and manipulated.)
I have heard of other places that have put Cataloging under Special Collections. (I am guessing that the thinking is that the majority of the “real” book-by-book cataloging that is going on is falling under special collections — that is where there is the most need for original cataloging.)
This was interesting, so I searched Google for “library” “organization chart” “cataloging” and found quite a number of charts. Back in library school, I discovered that I enjoyed looking at organization charts and have done so throughout the years. This time, I looked at a very unscientific selection, selected and arranged for me by Google(!), and found that mostly, organization in libraries still seems pretty traditional. Although the title may not be “Technical Services”, it may be something like “Discovery services”, “Collection services” of
“Research resources”, they still seem to have cataloging and acquisitions together. Often, this may include IT or Digital Services and they all are under something like “Discovery services”. Sometimes Cataloging is under IT services but from what I saw, mostly they are organized under one head.
Of course, just looking at a chart tells you very little. For instance, the head of “Discovery services” in one library may be more of a technical person than in another library where the person is more of a traditional librarian. But yes, I saw a few examples of Cataloging under IT. But not under anything else, e.g. Public services.
A few comments:
ILL has always been unpredictable: it can be in technical services, public services, or access services. It still is today, but it can also be in “Digital services”. It is also hard to predict where circulation is, and it can still be found very often under Public services or Technical services.
To be honest, since the ILMS have been introduced, I have expected acquisitions and cataloging literally to be merged but I haven’t noticed that and they are still separate so far as I noticed.
One library had something called “Digital User Experience” which I found intriguing, but it was under “Collections and Technology” and not under “Public services” where I would have expected something like that.
Of course, after I did all this, I realized that adding “cataloging” to my search in Google may have skewed everything completely since the newest organization patterns may not use the word “cataloging” at all!