Impact of training and institutional context on book conservation practices
A web-based survey of book conservation treatment practices in research libraries was conducted in 2007. Survey results were summarized in a 2010 report that documented standard practice, moderate-use, and low-use book conservation treatments for special collections and general collections in research libraries in the United States. Similarities and differences between special and general collections practices were highlighted. In an effort to better understand the differences in practices observed in the first report, the authors revisit the data to identify whether, and how, the demographic characteristics of book conservation practitioners are correlated with particular treatment practices. Noting the trend suggested in the literature toward both hybrid facilities—those dedicated to both special and general collections—as well as hybrid practitioners, the authors were especially curious whether such facilities and practitioners might approach treatment differently. The data collected in 2007 were analyzed to identify whether key demographic variables—such as practitioner training, type of collections served by a practitioner, size of library, type of library, and type of conservation facility—were correlated with specific treatment practices. In this report, specific trends associated with the demographic variables are identified and explored. Areas of further research suggested by the results of the study are identified.
A Comparison of Standard Practice Treatments in Research Library Book Conservation, 2007 to 2017
In 2007, a web-based survey of book conservation practices was conducted to document standard-practice, moderate-use, and low-use book conservation treatments for general and special collections in research libraries in the United States. This paper reports on the findings of a ten-year follow-up survey conducted in 2017 to determine whether and how book conservation treatment practices have changed over the last ten years. Overall, the data indicate that while general collections treatment practices have remained consistent, special collections practices continue to evolve, with many treatments newly qualifying as standard practice in the special collections context since 2007. The data also suggest areas of further research, including how demographic factors may correlate with particular treatment practices.
Managing Cultural Assets from a Business Perspective
Without understanding the value of collections as assets to the home institution, it is difficult for libraries to determine how best to make those assets most productive. This report describes how the Library of Congre'ss developed and implemented a plan for greater accountability over its collections. The report presents a model for the management of library and archival collections, adaptable to any type of library that defines those collections as core assets and seeks to make them maximally productive while controlling risks to their integrity. The model focuses on business risk and proposes a framework of controls to minimize the risks that threaten the viability of those assets. The first section of the report defines business risk and discusses the origins of the risk-assessment model. The next section describes the risk-assessment process which includes creating an internal control framework identifying relevant controls, determining how to assess risk, conducting the risk assessment, addressing unacceptable risks, monitoring risk, and limitations on internal control. Finally, long-term benefits of risk assessment are outlined, with discussion on integrating technology and taking preventive action. The business risk model is fully described in the appendix. (AEF) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document.