7. STRUCTURES

7.1 Need for a single national library

In par. 3.4.9 above it was reported that the analysis in par. 3.4 had led to a two-fold conclusion:

• The functions of the present two national libraries cannot readily be taken over by other institutions.
• A single national library is preferable to two separate institutions.

In discussions between representatives of the existing two national libraries, a consensus was reached in favour of a single national library, to be known as the National Library of South Africa (NLSA). The following reasons were given for establishing a single national library:

• South Africa cannot afford unnecessary duplication of structures.
• The existence of two national libraries causes confusion about their role in DACST, among their clients, and in the South African library and information services community generally.
• Most countries have only one national library. The existence of two national libraries creates confusion in the international library world.
• The presence of two national libraries is an obstacle to the exercise of leadership. A single national library will have a less ambivalent status and will be in a stronger position to display leadership.
• Combining the existing two national libraries will effect economies of scale and make possible optimal utilisation of their limited resources. Some rationalisation of activities will be possible, which should permit the redeployment of resources to functions and tasks which cannot at present be carried out effectively.
• A single national library will make possible the redeployment of staff between the existing institutions, creating greater career mobility within the institution.
• Most significantly, the establishment of a single national library offers scope for the creation of a transformed, post-apartheid institution which can be repositioned within South Africa's library and information services sector and which can refocus its programmes on post-apartheid priorities.

7.2 Options for unification

If the existing two national libraries are to be unified, two questions immediately arise concerning the structure of the new organisation:

The first question concerns the structure of the new institution. To what extent should the existing institutions be combined or unified? Options range from a loose confederation to a fully unitary institution. This question has been thoroughly debated in the present national libraries, where the following consensus emerged: To enjoy the benefits of unification as outlined above, the new national library should be a unitary institution, with a single board and chief executive officer, rather than a federation or a loose association of autonomous libraries.

The second question concerns the location of the new institution. The following options were considered:

• Location on one site, namely on the premises of the South African Library in Cape Town.
• Location on one site, on the premises of the State Library in Pretoria.
• Location on one site, in a centre other than Cape Town or Pretoria.
• Location on two "campuses", namely on the premises of the existing national libraries in Cape Town and Pretoria.

>From discussion of this question in the existing national libraries consensus emerged that a two-campus national library is preferred. The reasons for this can be summarised as follows:

• Neither of the existing libraries has premises large enough to accommodate the collections, staff and clients of both institutions. The provision of expanded premises in either of the two cities would in all likelihood entail a significant delay and much uncertainty.
• The two national libraries have long histories and are significant components of the intellectual and cultural life of the cities and provinces in which they are located. The removal of either would be damaging to its home city and region.
• The removal of the collections of either of the two institutions to the premises of the other would be expensive, time-consuming and disruptive to clients and institutions dependent on their services.
• Removal to the campus of the staff of either of the institutions to the other city, with concomitant transfers and retrenchments, would be disruptive.
• In a time of rapid technological and societal change, the new national library should be fully operational as soon as possible. A long period of transition would be damaging to the new institution if it brought about an internal focus at a time when rapid repositioning and refocusing is essential. The last four considerations outlined above are relevant to the option of establishing a single new national library on a site other than Cape Town or Pretoria. This would cause even greater disruption than the removal of one of the existing libraries. Hence it is not considered as a serious option.

It is therefore recommended that the NLSA be established as a unitary institution on two campuses, in Cape Town and Pretoria. This does not rule out the possibility that one or more other institutions could also be included in the NLSA, such as:

• The South African Library for the Blind, Grahamstown (see par. 1)
• National English Literary Museum, Grahamstown
• Afrikaanse Taalmonument-museum, Paarl
• National Film Library, Pretoria

The two language museums are declared cultural institutions that do not fit neatly into the proposed new structures for the national museums. They are largely concerned with national documentary heritage and therefore have affinities with the national library. They could conceivably be accommodated in the NLSA structure as specialised documentation centres. However, this raises the question of similar documentation centres for the other official languages. The inclusion of the language museums in the NLSA has not been officially raised or discussed. The possible inclusion of the National Film Library was suggested in comments received on the Terms of Reference of the Working Group.

7.3 Division of responsibilities between the two campuses

If a dual-campus NLSA is proposed, attention has to be paid to rationalisation of the activities currently duplicated on two campuses. Decisions are needed on aspects such as the following:

• On what logical basis responsibilities for particular functions are to be allocated to the two campuses.
• Which functions are to be allocated to each campus as its primary or sole responsibility.
• Which programmes will consequently have to be terminated and scaled down on a given campus.
• Which programmes will consequently have to be initiated or expanded on a given campus.
• Which functions and programmes are to be retained more or less unchanged on both campuses (as dual responsibilities).
• The functions and size of a headquarters component (Office of the National Librarian).
• The location of the headquarters component.

In making these decisions, care must be taken to avoid unnecessary duplication and to effect cost savings leading to redeployment of resources.

Two structural models can be considered for a dual-campus NLSA: (a) A structure in which the two campuses constitute the major structural components or divisions of the NLSA. (b) A structure in which the major components are functionally rather than geographically determined.

7.3.1 Model A: Campuses as major structural components

In this model the two campuses constitute the major structural components or divisions of the NLSA, for example:

1. A modest headquarters component, to consist of the Office of the National Librarian (Chief director) together with central staff functions such as Information Systems and Technology, Human Resources, Corporate Communication and Financial Management) located in either of the two cities.
2. The Cape Town campus, headed by a campus director.
3. The Pretoria campus, headed by a campus director.

While the strategic management of resources such as human resources, finance and information technology would be centralised in the headquarters component, each campus would have its own administrative staff to take care of operational tasks such as human resource administration and control of expenditure. Table 4 sets out how the organisational units identified in Section 6 could be allocated to the campuses.

TABLE 4: STRUCTURAL MODEL A (GEOGRAPHICALLY BASED)

Organisational units            Allocation of
                                responsibility
                                 for projects
                                (as listed in
                                Section 6)

                                Cape Town      Headquarters    Pretoria

Heritage collections            Primary                        Secondary
                                011-014, 016                   011, 015

National collections            Secondary                      Primary
management                      022                            021-024


Internal bibliographic          Joint          Coordinating    Joint
organisation                    031                            031

National bibliographic          Joint 041-044  Coordinating    Joint 041-044
organisation                                                   Primary
                                                               045-048

National availability of        Secondary                      Primary
publications                    051                            051-053

Information access services     Primary                        Secondary
                                061-063                        061-062

Preservation                    Primary                        Secondary
                                071-074                        071, 074

Heritage & information          Primary                        Secondary
awareness                       081, 082                       082

National infrastructure         Secondary      Primary         Secondary
development                     091-097        091-097         091-097

Management Support              Secondary      Primary         Secondary
                                101-106        101-106         101-106

Information systems &           Secondary      Primary         Secondary
technology                      112, 114       111-113         112, 114

Table 4 is based on many assumptions which cannot be discussed here. Further in-depth discussion between the two existing national libraries is needed on the allocation of responsibilities between the two campuses.

This structure has been favoured in discussions between representatives of the existing national libraries. It will cause little disruption, but a concern has been expressed that it may constitute an obstacle to rationalisation and organisational change in that it might tend to preserve the status quo and shield the existing organisation cultures from change.

7.3.2 Model B: Functional divisions as major structural components

In this model the major components of the structure are functionally rather than geographically determined, for example:

1. A modest headquarters component as in the previous model.
2. A Division of Documentary Heritage, with its headquarters in Cape Town but with programmes and projects in both cities, headed by a director.
3. A Division of Infrastructure or Information Access, with its headquarters in Pretoria but with programmes and projects in both cities, headed by a director.

Table 5 illustrates this model.

TABLE 5: STRUCTURAL MODEL B (FUNCTIONALLY BASED)

Organisational units            Allocation of
                                responsibility
                                 for projects
                                (as listed in
                                Section 6)

                                Division of    Headquarters    Division of
                                Documentary    (Office of the  Infrastructure
                                Heritage       National        and
                                               Librarian)      Information
                                                               Access

Heritage collections            Primary                        Secondary
                                011- 016                       015

National collections                                           Primary
management                                                     021-024

Internal bibliographic          Primary  031                   Secondary  031
organisation

National bibliographic          Secondary                      Primary
organisation                    041-044                        041-048

National availability of                                       Primary
publications                                                   051-053

Information access services     Primary                        Secondary
                                061-063                        061-062

Preservation                    Primary
                                071-074

Heritage & information          Primary 081,
awareness                       082

National infrastructure         Secondary      Coordinating    Primary
development                     091-097        091-097         091-097

Management Support              Secondary      Primary         Secondary
                                101-106        101-106         101-106

Information systems &           Secondary      Primary         Secondary
technology                      112, 114       111-113         112

In this structure functional areas cut across campuses. Functional responsibilities are more clear-cut, but the directors of the two functional divisions will each be responsible for certain organisational units on both campuses. It has been suggested that such a structure will bring about greater exposure to change factors, but it may hold some potential for ambivalent reporting relationships. For example, operational administration will still have to be provided on each campus.

This structure has been proposed by the Working Group's Task Team on Programmes and Structure as being more likely to lead to significant transformation. However, it has not yet been discussed by the existing national libraries.

7.3.3 Discussion

Precedents for both of the above structural models can be found at the British Library, which has significant functional components in London as well as at Boston Spa (in West Yorkshire, several hundred kilometres north of London). Over a period of time the organisational structure of the British Library has shown elements of both models, which have evolved over time in response to internal and external factors. The lesson to be learnt from this is that the chosen structure should not be regarded as "cast in concrete" and it should certainly not be enshrined in legislation. Instead, the Board of the new institution should have the freedom to revise the organisation structure from time to time.