The point that most concerns me is the respondent who said
that input or participation from public libraries seems unwelcome.
This has been an issue for ALCTS as well as PCC.

We've acknowledged for years that it's a shame that only the
larger academic libraries, in general, feel they can afford
to fund staff to participate in the larger profession.
Maybe it's time to devote some more practical thought
to what can be done about that.

Special libraries, school libraries, and cultural institutions
beyond the library world are also not well represented in our conversations.

Christopher H. Walker
Serials Cataloging Librarian
Penn State's representative to the CONSER Operations Committee
126 Paterno Library
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802-1812
(814) 865-4212
[log in to unmask]

From: "Beacom, Matthew" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 6:49:24 AM
Subject: [PCCLIST] The recent PCC strategic planning survey

Hi all,


The survey responses are in! 183 persons responded. Thank you for your participation.


You can view the responses to the PCC survey with this link:


There are three views of the data available. The default is the summary view of each question. Bar graphs showing the responses.  For the bar graphs that have an “Other” category you will see a link that brings up individual response to that option. There are also views of ‘data trends’ and ‘individual responses.’ Those are interesting, but less readily understandable. The default view of the bar graphs is easy.


There were 13 questions.  Since, reviewing them and even reading the statements to the ‘other’ category doesn’t take long, I’ll refrain from offering my take as a summary of a summary. Please take a moment to read the survey responses and share your reaction to the list. PoCo will continue to review the survey responses and incorporate them into our preparation for the strategic planning session in November.


Thanks again, and all the best to you,