Chapter 4 : Data Analysis and Interpretation

Transcription

1 22 Chapter 4 : Data Analysis and Interpretation This research work is an endeavor to analyze the impact of outsourcing of library activities and services in S & T libraries of Northern India (viz. Haryana, Chandigarh and Delhi). This chapter is devoted to present analysed data through Tables and Graphs supported by interpretations. The analysis presented in the following sections is based on the response/feedback, provided by the librarians and library staff to the questionnaires designed and distributed for this purpose. To achieve more meaningful and realistic results, the sample data has been integrated and analyzed in different parts. First part provides the general information about the S & T institutions and their libraries. Second part gives the information about the financial and learning resources of the selected libraries. In the Third part, ICT infrastructure available in the libraries is given. Fourth part provides the information about the use of outsourcing in different library activities and services. 4. GENERAL INFORMATION TABLE 4.: AVAILABILITY OF WEBSITE OF THE INSTITUTION & LIBRARY STATE/UT WEBSITE LIBRARY & INSTITUTION INSTITUTION n (%) n (%) HARYANA 3 (33.3) 6 (66.7) 2.04 CHANDIGARH (00) df= 2 DELHI 5 (25) 5 (75) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY 2 (00) 0.0 DEEMED UNIVERSITY 4 (50) 4 (50) RESEARCH INSTITUTES 2 (2.5) 4 (87.5) INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE (00) FUNDING SOURCE χ² 3.6 df= 3 GOVERNMENT 7 (23.3) 23 (76.7) 0.0 NON- GOVERNMENT (25) 3 (75) df= TOTAL 8 (23.5) 26 (76.5)

2 23 The Table 4. shows that out of 34 S & T libraries, only 8 (23.5%) are having website of both institution as well as their library. 26 (76.5%) libraries are having only institution s website and there is a no website for library. a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: It is noted that under the State/UT wise analysis, Haryana is on the top of the tally with 33.3% libraries having the website for both institution and library, followed by 25% libraries of Delhi. However, in Chandigarh none of the libraries is having its own website. When the data was analyzed based on statistical testing the difference of response between State/UT and website creation for libraries, it was found insignificant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the State/UT does not play significant role in library website creation. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: Under the institute wise analysis of the same issue, University libraries got the top position with 00% for having website of both institution and library, followed by Deemed University and Research Institutes having 50% and 2.5% respectively. However, other S & T institutes are not having separate website for library. Statistical testing the difference of response between institutes and website creation for libraries was found significant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the institutes play significant role in library website creation. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Table further reveals that 25% non- government funded institutes and 23.3% government funded institutes are having websites for both institution and library. Statistical testing shows the difference of response between funding agency and website creation for libraries, it was found insignificant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the funding agency does not play significant role in library website creation. It is concluded from Table 4. that the major reason for not having the separate website for libraries is due to lack of trained and skilled IT professional available in libraries.

3 24 TABLE 4.2: POSITION OF THE LIBRARIAN HEADED BY THE LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL VS. NON-PROFESSIONAL STATE/UT POSITION HEADED BY LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL NON- LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL n (%) n (%) HARYANA 6 (66.7) 3 (33.3) CHANDIGARH 4 (80) (20) DELHI 7 (85) 3 (5) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY 2 (00) 0.0 DEEMED UNIVERSITY 6 (75) 2 (25) RESEARCH INSTITUTES (68.75) 5 (3.25) INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE 8 (00) 0 FUNDING SOURCE GOVERNMENT 23 (76.7) 7 (23.3) NON- GOVERNMENT 4 (00) 0.0 TOTAL 27 (79.4) 7 (20.6) A properly qualified and competent librarian is indispensible for a library to run in a smooth, efficient and scientific manner. In absence of a professional librarian in a library, there is every possibility of unwieldy and chaotic situation. Table 4.2 shows that out of 34, 27 (79.4%) libraries are headed by the professionally qualified librarians and only 7 (20.6%) libraries have no professionally qualified librarian as their heads. a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: The importance of the professional librarians is recognized by Delhi. The mostly libraries i.e. 85% in Delhi are headed by library professionals. However, in Haryana and Chandigarh heads 66.67% and 80% of libraries are headed by library professionals respectively. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: Under the institute wise analysis of the same issue, 00 % University and Institutes of National Repute libraries are headed by professional librarians, followed by 87.5% libraries of Deemed University, while 62.5% of Research Institute libraries are being under the competent headship of library professionals. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.2 also reveals that 00% non- funded libraries are being under the competent leadership of library professionals, followed by 76.67% government funded libraries. While 23.33%

4 25 of government funded libraries are run by non-library professionals, which indicates that casual approach of the government in the appointment of the qualified librarians. However, all non- government funded libraries are manned by the competent library professionals. TABLE 4.3: INSTITUTE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF LIBRARY STAFF INSTITUTES n % UNIVERSITY DEEMED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE INSTITUTE OF NATIONAL REPUTE TOTAL Table 4.3 shows that majority of the respondent library staff i.e.3.58% are from the Research Institutes, followed by 28.95% and 26.32% library staff from the Deemed Universities and Institutes of National Repute respectively. The least responses i.e. 3.6% library staff is from the Universities. TABLE 4.4: QUALIFICATION OF THE LIBRARIANS STATE/UT 0+2 & C. LIB. MLIS M.A./M.SC./ M.COM & MLIS MLIS & M. PHIL MLIS & Ph.D. n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) HARYANA (6.67) (6.67) 4 (66.67) CHANDIGARH 0.0 (25) 2 (50) (25) 0.0 DELHI (5.88) 8 (52.94) 3 (7.64) (5.88) 4 (23.52) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY (00) (25) (2.5) (2.5) 2 (25) DEEMED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTES INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE FUNDING SOURCE (6.25) 4 (25) 5 (3.25) 0.0 (6.25) (37.5) 0 2 (25) 3 (37.5) GOVERNMENT (4.34) 9 (39.3) 5 (2.7) (3.33) 7 (30.4) NON- GOVERNMENT (25) 2 (50) (25) TOTAL (3.7) 9 (33.4) 6 (22.2) 3 (.) 8 (29.6)

5 26 Table 4.4 reveals a heartening finding that 3.7% of librarians are under qualified. 33.4% librarians are having only MLIS Degree, followed by 29.6% librarians having Ph.D. Degree and 22.2% had obtained MLIS with Master s Degree. Rest.% of them had acquired M.Phil. Degree to enhance their skills. a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.4 shows that % librarians of Delhi are having only MLIS Degree; followed by 23.52% librarians had obtained MLIS with Master s Degree, followed by 7.64% librarians having the highest qualification of Ph.D. However, 5.88 % are under qualified % librarians in Haryana are having highest qualification of Ph.D. While MLIS with M.A/M.Sc./M.Com Degrees and MLIS and M.Phil. Degree holder librarians are 6.67 % each. In Chandigarh, none of the librarians was having Ph.D. 50% librarians in Chandigarh were also having M.A/M.Sc/ M.Com along with MLIS Degree, followed by the librarians having only MLIS Degree and MLIS & M.Phil. Degree are 25% each. It is clear from Table 4.4 that Haryana is having maximum number of highly qualified librarians i.e 66.67% and none of the librarian in Chandigarh is highly qualified. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: 00% University librarians are Ph.D. degree holders. 25% of Deemed University librarians hold Ph.D. degree and only MLIS degree each, followed by the librarians having MLIS Degree along with Masters Degree and MLIS & M.Phil. Degree are 2.5% each. 3.25% librarians of Research Institutes were hold MLIS Degree along with Masters Degree, followed by 25% of librarians are having only MLIS degree. 6.25% librarians of Research Institutes are Ph.D. degree holders. 37.5% librarians of Institutes of National Repute were hold Ph. D. degree and only MLIS degree each, followed by the 25% librarians having MLIS Degree & M.Phil. Degree. Table 4.4 concludes that 00% University librarians are highly qualified, followed by 37.5% of librarians of Research Institutes and 25% librarians of Deemed University. However, 6.25% librarians of the Research Institute are under qualified.

6 27 c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Most of the librarians govt. funded libraries i.e. 39.3% are having MLIS Degree only, followed by 30.4% and 2.73% having Ph.D. and M.A/M.Sc/ M.Com & MLIS Degree respectively. Whereas 50% librarians of Non-Government funded libraries are having MLIS & M.Phil. Degree and 25% librarians are having Ph.D. and MLIS Degree along with Masters Degree each. Above table, reveals that none of the Nongovt. funded libraries is having under qualified librarian. TABLE 4.5: PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF LIBRARY STAFF PROFESSIONAL DEGREE n % BLIS MLIS M.PHIL.IN LIS Ph.D. IN LIS 0 0 TOTAL Table 4.5 indicates that majority of the library staff i.e. 7.05% are having MLIS Degree. 2.05% Library staff are having BLIS Degree, followed by 7.89% are having M.Phil.in LIS. However, none of the library staff was having Ph.D. Degree in LIS. 4.2 FINANCIAL RESOURCES Finance plays a very significant role in the organization and management of the libraries, as it is one of the most important elements of management. As libraries are not profit making institutions, they have a recurring requirement of money to manage themselves. Libraries heavily depend on continuous supply of funds for organizing their activities, programmes and services smoothly. For continuous supply of funds, there should be some assured sources of income for every library. Different type of libraries receive funds from different sources, though some of them are common to all type of libraries, such as government grants. For the sake of clarity and interpretation, financial resources of these libraries are divided in two parts government and non-government sources.

7 28 TABLE 4.6: FUNDING SOURCE OF LIBRARIES SOURCES OF FINANCE LIBRARIES n % GOVERNMENT NON-GOVERNMENT 4.76 TOTAL Table 4.6 shows that 88.24% (30) libraries are receiving grants from government. Remaining.76% (4) libraries are non-government/self funded. 4.3 LEARNING RESOURCES The learning resources form the core of a library system, occupy the pivotal position in the overall status of the library concerned. Only, the numerical strength of learning material is not the decisive factor to judge the standard of any library, the efficiency and effectiveness of a library depend largely both on quality and quantity of its collection. It is an accepted fact that a library cannot serve its clientele effectively unless it has a strong, balanced and need based learning resources. For the sake of clarity and convenience in interpretation, the learning resources of these libraries have been classified under two broad groups: Print Sources and Non- Print Sources. 4.3 PRINT SOURCES In order to ascertain the state of print sources and their relative share in the collection of the sample libraries, the respondents were asked to furnish the state of available print sources under six broad groups of non-print sources namely Books, Journals, Book Volumes of Journals, Thesis & Dissertations, Reports & Reprints, Patents and Standards and Maps & Atlases. Tables from 4.7 to 4.2 represent the state of Print Sources of studied Science & Technology Libraries.

8 29 TABLE 4.7: BOOKS COLLECTION OF LIBRARIES RANGE LIBRARIES n % UP TO 25, ,00-50, ,00-75, ,00-,00, ,00,00 & ABOVE TOTAL Up to 25,000 25,00-50,000 50,00-75,000 75,00-,00,000,00,00 & Above Libraries FIGURE 4.: BOOKS COLLECTION OF LIBRARIES Table 4.7 and Figure 4. reveals strength of books in various libraries. This table depicts that 5 (44.2%) libraries have up to 25,000 books, followed by 8 (23.53%) libraries possessing book collection ranging 25,00-50,000, followed by, 20.59% libraries have the collection of,00,00 and above books. The table further reveals that 3 (8.82%) libraries have a collection ranging between 50,00-75,000. Only (2.94%) libraries have collection more than 75,000 books but not more than,00,000 books. This situation may be due to the fact that S & T libraries give more stress on quality of books than on quantity or due to more dependence on journals due to more stress on research activities.

9 30 TABLE 4.8: CURRENT PRINT JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTION RANGE LIBRARIES TOTAL GOVT. FUNDED NON-GOVT. FUNDED n (%) n % n % UP TO (20.6) (29.4) (4.7) (2.9) (2.9) (5.9) (2.9) 40 & ABOVE (20.6) TOTAL (00) As per the Table 4.8 maximum libraries, i.e. 29.4% subscribed current titles within a range of 5 to 00, followed by 20.6% libraries subscribing up to 50 titles and 40 & above titles each. 5 (4.7%) libraries subscribed current journals ranging 0-50, while 2 (5.9%) libraries subscribed journal titles. There is considerable variation regarding the subscription of current journals. Further Table reveals that govt. funded libraries subscribed more current journals may be due to the availability of funds for this purpose, than the non-govt. funded libraries, which do not seem subscribing to current journals either due to paucity of funds or due to their reluctance to spend on them. Considering the enormous importance of current journals in updating and enriching knowledge, the non- govt. funded institutes should also enhance the subscription of current journals in a big way to make their libraries richly equipped.

10 3 TABLE 4.9: BACK VOLUME OF JOURNALS RANGE LIBRARIES n % UP TO 0, ,00-20, ,00-30, ,00-40, ,00-50, ,00-60, ,00-80, ,00 & ABOVE TOTAL Table 4.9 clearly demonstrates that majority of the libraries 52.47% are having up to 0,000 back volumes of journals and only 5.88 % libraries have 80,00 & above back volumes of journals. TABLE 4.0: THESES AND DISSERTATIONS COLLECTION RANGE LIBRARIES n % UP TO 2, ,50-5, ,00-7, ,50-0, ,00 & ABOVE 2.94 NOT RESPONDED TOTAL Table 4.0 shows that out of total 34 S & T libraries 9 (55.88%) libraries have theses and dissertations in their collection. The study reveals that 2 (35.29%) libraries have up to 2,500 theses and dissertations, 4 (.76%) having 2,50-5,000 and only (2.94%) libraries have theses and dissertations in the range of 0,00 & above.

11 32 TABLE 4.: REPORTS AND REPRINTS COLLECTION RANGE LIBRARIES n % Up to 2, ,50-5, ,00-2, ,00-,00, NOT RESPONDED TOTAL Table 4. depicts that there are (5.2%) libraries having up to 2,500 reports and reprints, followed by 2.94% libraries have reports and reprints ranging between 2,50-5,000 and only (2.94%) library have 75,000-,00,000 ranging of reports and reprints. While, 20 libraries did not respond to this question, suggesting their record of reports could still be more dismal. Table 4.9 represents the range of patents and standards available in the sample S & T libraries. Out of 34 libraries, only 0 libraries reported to have patents and standards in their collection. TABLE 4.2: PATENTS AND STANDARDS COLLECTION RANGE LIBRARIES n % UP TO, ,00-3, ,00-4, ,00 & ABOVE NOT RESPONDED TOTAL The Table 4.2 shows that there are 4 (.76%) libraries having up to,000 patents and standards, while 5.88% libraries are having patents and standards ranging between 3,00 to 4,000. Only 8.82% libraries are patents and standards having ranging between of 5,00 & above.

12 NON-PRINT SOURCES In order to ascertain the status of non-print sources and their relative share in the collection of the selected libraries, the respondents were asked to furnish the state of their non-print sources under six broad groups of non-print sources namely- E-books, E-Journals, E- Thesis & Dissertations, E-Databases, E- Patents and Standards, E-Maps etc. Tables from 4.3 to 4.9 represent the state of Non-Print Sources of studied Science & Technology Libraries. TABLE 4.3: E-BOOKS COLLECTION RANGE LIBRARIES n % Up to ,00-2, ,00-5, ,000 & ABOVE NOT RESPONDED TOTAL The E-books are gradually making space in all the library collection. Table 4.3 shows the availability of the e-books in libraries under study, 29.4% libraries have up to 500 E-books in their collection followed by, 8.82% having within a range of,00-2,000 and 5.88% libraries having within the range of 4,00-5,000 and above 20,000 respectively. Rest 50% libraries did not respond to this query. TABLE 4.4: E-JOURNALS COLLECTION RANGE LIBRARIES n % UP TO , ,00-2, ,00-3, ,00 & ABOVE 2.94 NOT RESPONDED TOTAL 34 00

13 34 Table 4.4 reveals that 5 (44.2%) libraries subscribe up to 500 E- journals, followed by 5 (4.7%) libraries subscribing 50-,000 E-journals,.76% libraries subscribe within a range of,00-2,000 and 2,00-3,00 journals each. There is only a single library which subscribes 5,00 and above E-journals. TABLE 4.5: E-THESES AND DISSERTATIONS COLLECTION RANGE LIBRARIES n % UP TO ,00-2, NOT RESPONDED TOTAL Table 4.5 shows that only (2.94%) libraries have up to 500 E-theses and dissertations. Only one library has within a range of,00-2,000 E-theses and dissertations. Remaining 94.2% libraries are not having any E-theses and dissertations collection. TABLE 4.6: DATABASES (ONLINE/OFFLINE) RANGE LIBRARIES n % UP TO & ABOVE 2.94 NOT RESPONDED TOTAL Table 4.6 depicts the availability of full text (online/offline) and bibliographic (online/offline) databases subscribed by the selected S & T libraries. Out of 34 libraries, only 24 libraries responded to this query. Further the Table reveals that 2 (6.76%) libraries are subscribing up to 5 databases, followed by 2.94% libraries subscribing within the range of 6-0 and 6-20

14 35 each. There is only a single library that subscribes 2 & above databases. Remaining 29.4% libraries are not subscribing any databases. This indicates that most of the libraries are still either not aware or do not realize the paramount importance of these resources. The scarcity of funds could also be one of the reasons of their not subscribing the databases. TABLE 4.7: PARTICIPATION IN CONSORTIUM STATE/ UT LIBRARIES YES NO χ² n (%) n (%) HARYANA 8 (88.89) (.) 0.2 CHANDIGARH 4(80) (20) df= 2 DELHI 7 (85) 3(5) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY 2 (00) 0 DEEMED UNIVERSITY 6 (75) 2 (25) RESEARCH INSTITUTES 6 (00) 0 INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE 5 (62.5) 3 (37.5) FUNDING SOURCE 7.09 df= 3 GOVERNMENT 28 (93.33) 2(6.67) 3.4 NON- GOVERNMENT (25) 3(75) df= TOTAL 29 (84.29) 5 (4.7) Table 4.7 reveals that 29 (84.29%) libraries are participating in consortia. Remaining 5 (4.7%) libraries are not subscribing any consortia. a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: in Table 4.7 shows that Haryana is on the top in respects of libraries taking advantage of consortium with 88.89%, followed by Delhi and Chandigarh with 85% and 80% respectively. When the data analyzed based on statistical testing the difference of response between state/ut and participation in consortium, it was found insignificant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the state/ut does not play significant role in participation of consortium. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: University and Research Institute libraries participation in consortium is 00% each, Deemed University and Institutes of National Repute libraries are participating in consortium with 75% and 62.5% respectively. When the data analyzed based on statistical testing the difference

15 36 of response between institute wise and participation in consortium, it was found insignificant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the institute does not play significant role in participation of consortium. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.7 reveals that govt. funded libraries and the non- govt. funded libraries are participating in the e-resources consortium with % and 25% respectively. When the data analyzed based on statistical testing the difference of response between funding agency and participation in consortium, it was found significant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the funding agency plays significant role in participation of consortium. Considering the shrinking funds of libraries and rising cost of research journals, consortium can be instrumental in mitigating their financial constraints and to raise the quality of services, the libraries should extensively participate in the consortium. TABLE 4.8: PARTICIPATION OF LIBRARIES IN VARIOUS CONSORTIUMS STATE/ UT CSIR ERMED AICTE- INDEST CONSORTIUM CERA DRDO AICTE- INDEST & UGC- INFONET n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) 3 5 HARYANA (37.5) (62.5) 2 2 CHANDIGARH (50) (50) DELHI 0 (.8) (47.05) (7.7) (.8) (5.88) (5.88) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY DEEMED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTES INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE FUNDING SOURCE GOVERNMENT NON- GOVERNMENT TOTAL (2.5) 0 2 (7.4) 8 (50) 2 (40) 0 (35.7) (6.89) 0 (34.48) 4 (66.67) (6.25) 3 (60) 7 (25) (00) 8 (27.58) (50) (6.67) 3 (8.75) 0 (50) (2.5) ISI 0 (6.67) (7.85) 2 (7.4) (3.57) (3.57) (7.24) 2 (6.89) (3.44) (3.44)

16 37 Table 4.8 shows that ERMED and AICTE-INDEST are the maximum subscribed consortia by 34.48% and 27.58% libraries respectively, followed by 7.24% libraries participating in CERA. The libraries participating in CSIR and DRDO consortium are having same percentage i.e. 6.89%. There is only one (3.44%) library subscribing two consortia (AICTE-INDEST & UGC- INFONET) together. a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: shows that 47.05% and 7.7% libraries of Delhi are participating in ERMED and AICTE-INDEST consortia respectively, followed by CSIR and DRDO consortium by same percentage of libraries i.e..8%. In Haryana 62.5% and 37.5% libraries are participating in CERA and AICTE-INDEST respectively. In Chandigarh ERMED and AICTE-INDEST consortium participation is equal i.e. 50% each. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: Under the institute wise analysis 00% University and Research Institute libraries are found taking advantage of consortium. The 50% of Research Institute are participating in ERMED, followed by 8.75% in CERA % of Deemed University are participating in AICTE-INDEST consortium. Institutes of National Repute participating in AICTE-INDEST and ERMED consortium are 60% and 40% respectively. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Table reveals that govt. funded libraries participation in various e-resources consortium is higher than the nongovt. funded libraries. ERMED and AICTE-INDEST, CERA consortiums are popular in S & T libraries. Traditionally, a portal denotes a gate, a door, or entrance. In the context of the World Wide Web, it is the next logical step in the evolution to a digital culture. The idea of a portal is to collect information from different sources and create a single point of access to information - a library of categorized and personalized content.

17 38 TABLE 4.9: PREPARED URL OF PORTAL FOR OPEN ACCESS SOURCES STATE/UT LIBRARIES YES NO χ² n (%) n (%) HARYANA 3 (33.3) 6 (66.7) 2.04 CHANDIGARH (00) df= 2 DELHI 5 (25) 5 (75) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY 2 (00) 0.0 DEEMED UNIVERSITY 4 (50) 4 (50) RESEARCH INSTITUTES 2 (2.5) 4 (87.5) INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE (00) FUNDING SOURCE 3.6 df= 3 GOVERNMENT 7 (23.3) 23 (76.7) 0.0 NON- GOVERNMENT (25) 3 (75) df= TOTAL 8 (23.5) 26 (76.5) Table 4.9 reveals that only 23.5% libraries have prepared portals for the users convenience and 76.5 % libraries have not prepared portal for open access sources. a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: shows that 33.3% libraries in Haryana and 25% in Delhi have prepared portals. However, in Chandigarh none of the libraries has prepared portal for the open access sources. Statistical analyzed data shows the difference of response between state/ut and portal preparation for open access resources, insignificant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the state/ut does not play significant role in preparation of portal for open access resources. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: Under the institute wise analysis 00% and 50% University and Deemed University libraries respectively have prepared portals of open access sources for the users convenience, followed by 2.5% of Research Institutes. Institutes of National Repute did not prepare any portal. When the data analyzed based on statistical testing the difference of response between institutes and portal preparation for open access resources, it was found significant at 5% level of significance. It means the type of institute plays a significant role in preparation of portal of open access resources.

18 39 c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: As funding agency analysis, groups of institutes prepared open source portals almost equally i.e. by 25% Non-govt. funded libraries and 23.3% govt. funded libraries. Statistical testing of data showed the difference of response of portal preparation for open access resources in govt. and non-govt. funded institutions, it was found insignificant at 5% level of significance. It means the differences of the funding agency does not play significant role in preparation of open access resources portal. More awareness about portal creation for open access resources needs to be generated among the libraries. Only 23.5% libraries are providing this very fruitful and innovative service. Only the libraries having a separate library website are providing this facility to their users. The major reason behind this may be lack of trained and skilled IT professionals in the libraries. 4.4 ICT INFRASTRUCTURE ICT infrastructure is very important ingredient of every library in modern times. In order to provide the effective and quality services to the users library needs appropriate ICT infrastructure. To ascertain the state of ICT infrastructure and their relative share in the collection of the sample libraries, the respondents were asked to furnish the state of their ICT infrastructure under two broad groups namely, Computer and Networking & In-house databases creation. Tables from 4.20 to 4.29 represent the state of ICT infrastructure of studied S & T libraries.

19 40 TABLE 4.20: COMPUTER HARDWARE- NO. OF COMPUTERS STATE/ UT AND RANGE DELHI HARYANA CHANDIGARH INSTITUTE NO. OF COMPUTERS UP TO & 0 ABOVE n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) 9 (45) 5 (55.6) 2 (40) 4 (20) (.) 3 (60) 3 (5) (.) (.) (5) (5) (.) 2 (0) UNIVERSITY DEEMED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH OTHERS FUNDING SOURCE GOVT. NON- GOVT. TOTAL 3 (37.5) 8 (50) 5 (62.5) 4 (46.67) 2 (50) 6 (47.05) 2 (25) 3 (8.75) 3 (37.5) 6 (20) 2 (50) 8 (23.53) 0 3 (8.75) (2.5) (2.5) (6.25) (2.5) (50) (50) 0 0 (6.25) (0) (3.33) (3.33) (3.33) (3.33) (3.33) 2 (6.67) (8.82) (2.94) (2.94) (2.94) (2.94) (2.94) 2 (5.88) Table 4.20 represents the number of computers available in the 34 S & T libraries. It is derived from the Table 4.20 that 6 (47.05%) libraries are having up to 0 computers, followed by 23.53% having computer between ranging - 20 and 8.82% are having ranging between There are only 5 libraries which are having more than 50 computers. a) STATE WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.20 reveals that out of 34 sample libraries, 6 libraries are having computers up to 0. In Delhi 4 (20%) libraries are having more than 50 computes, followed by.% libraries of Haryana. 2 (22.25%) libraries in Haryana are having computers ranging between However, no library in Chandigarh possess more than 20 computers. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: It is clear that 00% University libraries are having more than 70 computers, followed by 6.25% Research Institutes. While 2.5 % Deemed University libraries are having more than 50 computers,

20 4 followed by the 6.25% of the Research Institutes. However, none of the Institutes of National Repute possess more than 20 computers. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Above Table depicts that none of the non-govt. funded institutes libraries are having more than 20 computers. TABLE 4.2: AVAILABILITY OF COMPUTER HARDWARE STATE/ UT AND RANGE HARYANA CHANDIGARH DELHI INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY DEEMED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTES INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE FUNDING SOURCE GOVERNMENT NON- GOVERNMENT TOTAL SERVERS/CPU PRINTERS SCANNERS UP TO UP TO UP TO n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) (88.89) (.) (77.7 ) (22.3) (00) (00) (00) (00) (95) (5) (80) (0) (0) (95) (5) (50) 8 (00) 5 (93.75) 8 (00) 28 (93.33) 4 (00) 32 (94.) (50) 0 (6.25) 0 2 (6.67) 0 2 (5.89) 0 7 (87.5) 3 (8.25) 8 (00) 24 (80) 4 (00) 28 (82.35) (50) (2.5) 2 (2.5) (50) 0 (6.25) (3.33) 2 (6.67) (.76) 2 (5.88) 2 (00) 8 (00) 5 (93.75) 8 (00) 29 (96. 67) 4 (00) 33 (97.05) 0 0 (6.25) 0 (3.33) 0 (2.95) Table 4.2 reveals the status of Computer Hardware viz. Servers, Printers and Scanners etc. in S & T libraries. This Table depicts that 94.% libraries are having up to 5 servers. However, only 5.89% libraries possess servers ranging from % libraries are having up to 5 printers, followed by.76% libraries having printers ranging from 6-0 and only 5.88% libraries are having printers between ranging -5. This Table further reveals that 97.05% libraries are having up to 5 scanners. There is only (2.95%) library having scanners between ranging 6-0.

21 42 a) STATE WISE ANALYSIS: It is clear from the above Table that.% and 5% libraries are having the servers ranging between 6-0 in Haryana and Delhi respectively. In Delhi 0% of the libraries possess the printers ranging between -5, followed by 0% and 22.3% libraries having printers ranging between 6-0 in Delhi and Haryana respectively. There are only 5% libraries of Delhi having scanners ranging between 6-0. However, in Chandigarh 00% libraries are having up to 5 servers, printers and scanners. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: 50% of the university libraries are having up to 5, followed by 50% and 6.25% libraries of University and Research Institutes possessing ranging between 6-0 respectively and 00% Deemed University libraries are having up to 5 servers. 50% University libraries are having printers ranging between 6-0, followed by 50% and 6.25% libraries of University and Research Institutes possessing printers ranging between -5 respectively. 2.5% of the Deemed University and Research Institute libraries are having ranging between 6-0 printers each. 87.5% and 8.25% libraries of Deemed University and Research Institute are possessing up to 5 printers respectively. There is only () 6.25% library which is having scanners ranging between 6-0. Rest libraries are having up to 5 scanners. However, 00% libraries of Institute of National Repute are having up to 5 servers, printer and scanners. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.2 shows that govt. funded institutes are having more number of servers, printers and scanners as compared to non-govt. funded libraries. The conclusion emerges from Table 4.20 and 4.2 that Delhi is raked top in hardware status followed by Haryana. Universities and Research Institutes possess more hardware as compared to Deemed Universities and Institutes of National Repute. Govt. funded institute libraries are more affluent in hardware. Libraries of non-govt. funded institutes are not able to acquire sufficient ICT infrastructure may be due to the paucity of the funds or indifferent attitude of management or library staff.

22 43 TABLE 4.22: OPERATING SYSTEM OPERATING SYSTEM LIBRARIES n % WINDOWS XP WINDOWS XP AND WINDOWS WINDOWS XP AND WINDOWS WINDOWS XP AND LINUX WINDOWS XP, WINDOWS 7 AND WINDOWS NT WINDOWS XP, WINDOWS 7, WINDOWS NT, WINDOWS 2.94 VISTA AND LINUX WINDOWS XP, WINDOWS 7, WINDOWS NT, WINDOWS VISTA, LINUX AND UNIX TOTAL The study shows that various versions of Windows are most popular operating system used in libraries, Windows XP is available and used in 00% libraries. Table 4.22 shows that 64.7% (22) libraries are using only one operating system i.e. Windows XP. Rest 35.3% (2) libraries are using multiple operating systems. 7 (20.58%) libraries used two operating system viz. Windows XP and Windows 2003, Windows XP and Windows 7 and Windows XP and Linux, followed by 2 (5.88%) using three and 3 (8.82%) libraries using up to 5 & above operating systems. TABLE 4.23: GENERAL PURPOSE APPLICATION SOFTWARE GENERAL PURPOSE APPLICATION SOFTWARE LIBRARIES n % MS-OFFICE MS-OFFICE MS-OFFICE-2003 AND OPEN OFFICE 2.94 MS-OFFICE-2007, OPEN OFFICE AND PAGE MAKER TOTAL Table 4.23 shows that 00% libraries are using MS-Office. Maximum libraries are using only one General Purpose Application Software. Only 3 libraries are using two & more General Purpose Application Software i.e MS- Office, Open Office and Page Maker % libraries are using MS-Office version 2003.

23 44 The conclusion emerges from Table 4.22 and 4.23 that the practice of using old versions of operating system and general application software could be attributed either to the paucity of funds or due to the reluctance to change or unawareness of the development in this field. TABLE 4.24: IN-HOUSE BUILT VS. READYMADE LIBRARY APPLICATION SOFTWARE LIBRARY APPLICATION SOFTWARE LIBRARIES n % READYMADE IN-HOUSE BUILT NOT HAVING 2.94 TOTAL Table 4.24 clearly shows that readymade software is certainly more popular than in-house built software % libraries are using readymade library application software and only 5.88% are using in-house built software. There is only one (2.94%) library, which is not using any library application software neither in-house built nor readymade for automation. The reasons for more popularity of the readymade software could be its more efficient functioning, features like updation, maintenance facility and technical support etc. TABLE 4.25: USE OF LIBRARY APPLICATION SOFTWARE LIBRARY APPLICATION SOFTWARE LIBRARIES n % LIBSYS ALICE FOR WINDOWS TROODON 3.03 ANY OTHER (DELMS) ANY OTHER ( LIBERTY) 3.03 TOTAL Sample libraries were asked to furnish information regarding the library application software being used by them and the response obtained is depicted in Table It is found from the said response that 78.78% (26) libraries are using LIBSYS, followed by 9.09% libraries using ALICE for Windows, 3.03%

24 45 libraries using TROODON and LIBERTY each. There are only two (6.06%) libraries using in-house built library application software i.e DELMS (Defence Library Management System by DESIDOC). The study reveals that LIBSYS enjoys the greatest popularity, while the popularity of other software is not mentionable. TABLE 4.26: ESTABLISHMENT OF LAN LAN ESTABLISHED IN INSTITUTES n % LIBRARY DEPARTMENTS RESIDENTS 0 0 HOSTELS ALL THESE TOTAL The above Table shows that out of 34 institutes, LAN connectivity is available in 32 (94.%) libraries. Remaining 2 (5.89%) are not having LAN connectivity. Out of these 32, 9 (59.37%) libraries are having LAN connectivity in their Library only. LAN is available up to departments in 9 (28.2%) institutes, followed by those 6.25% institutes in which LAN is available up to Hostels. There are only 2 institutes in which LAN is available in all these areas. Table 4.26 reveals that LAN is established and maintained by outside (outsourced) agency in 62.5% and 50% libraries respectively. LAN is established and maintained within organization by 37.5% and 40.6% libraries respectively. It is clear from the above table that none of the LAN is establishment by library staff. However, library staff in 9.4% libraries maintains it.

25 46 TABLE 4.27: LAN ESTABLISHED AND MAINTAINED BY STATE/UT LAN ESTABLISHED BY LAN MAINTAINED BY DELHI HARYANA CHANDIGARH INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY DEEMED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH OTHERS FUNDING SOURCE GOVT NON-GOVT. TOTAL WITHIN ORGANIZATION LIBRARY STAFF OUTSIDE AGENCY WITHIN ORGANIZATION LIBRARY STAFF OUTSIDE AGENCY n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) (36.9) (63.) (42.) (0.52) (47.4) (44.4) (55.6) (55.6) (.) (33.3) (25) (75) (00) (50) 3 (37.5) 6 (40) 2 (29.8) 0 (34.5) 2 (66.7) 2 (37.5) (50) 5 (62.5) 9 (60) 5 (7.42) 9 (65.5) (33.3) 20 (62.5) (50) 4 (50) 7 (46.7) (4.8) 2 (4.3) (33.3) 3 (40.6) 0 2 (25) 0 (4.8) 2 (6.8) (33.3) 3 (9.4) (50) 2 (25) 8 (53.3) 5 (7.4) 5 (5.7) (33.3) 6 (50) Established by Maintained by LAN Establishment and Maintenace Within Organization Library Staff Outside Agency FIGURE 4.2: LAN ESTABLISHMENT AND a) STATE WISE ANALYSIS: In 75% institutes of Chandigarh, LAN was established by outside agencies, followed by 63.% institutes in Delhi and 55.6% institutes in Haryana % institutes of Haryana LAN were established within organization, followed by 36.9% institutes of Delhi and 25% institutes of Chandigarh. All institutes of Chandigarh LAN is maintained by outside agency, followed by 47.4 % institutes in Delhi and 33.3 % institutes in

26 47 Haryana. 55.6% institutes in Haryana LAN is maintained within the organization, followed by 42.% institutes of Delhi. Library staff maintaines LAN in.% institutes of Haryana and 0.52% institutes of Delhi. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: Under the institute wise analysis, LAN is established by outside agency in 7.42% Institutes of National Repute, followed by 62.5% Deemed University, 60% Research Institutes and 50% University. 50% University established LAN within the organization, followed by 40% Research Institutes, 37.5% Deemed University libraries and 29.8% Institutes of National Repute. LAN is maintained by outside agency in 7.4% Institutes of National Repute, followed by 53.3% Research Institutes, 50% University and 25% Deemed University. 50% University and Deemed University maintain LAN within organization, followed by 46.7% Research Institutes, and 4.8% other institutes. LAN is maintained by library staff within 25% and 4.8% institutes of Deemed University and Institutes of National Repute respectively. c) FINDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: LAN is established by outside agency in 65.5% (9) govt. funded institutes, and in 33.3% () non-govt. funded institutes. 2 (66.7%) govt. funded institutes established LAN within the organization, followed by 0 (34.5%) non-govt. funded institutes. LAN is maintained by outside agency in 5.7% (5) govt. funded institutes. LAN is maintained within organization in 4.3% govt. funded institutes and 33.3% in non-govt. funded institutes. LAN is maintained by Library staff in 33.3% nongovt. funded institutes and in 6.8% govt. funded institutes. The conclusion emerges from the Table 4.27 and Figure 4.2 that Chandigarh is ranked top in LAN establishment and maintenance by outsource agency either it is due to lack of sufficient funds, IT professional staff and ICT infrastructure etc. However, govt. funded institutes get enough funds for the purpose their LAN establishment and maintenance is generally done by the outsourced agency.

27 48 TABLE 4.28: AVAILABILITY OF LIBRARY NETWORK MEMBERSHIP AVAILABILITY OF LIBRARY NETWORK MEMBERSHIP LIBRARIES N % YES NO TOTAL Table 4.28 reveals that 64.7% libraries are having the membership of the various library networks. While, 35.3% libraries are not having the library network membership. TABLE 4.29: MEMBERSHIP OF LIBRARY NETWORK NETWORK LIBRARIES n % DELNET ERNET 4.54 DELNET, ERNET & INFLIBNET 4.54 INFLIBNET & DELNET 4.54 TOTAL Table 4.29 further shows the participation of libraries in specific library networks. As per the table as high as 86.7% libraries have DELNET membership, 4.54% subscribe ERNET. There are only two libraries, which are having the membership of two and more networks % libraries are having the DELNET, ERNET and INFLIBNET membership and 4.54% are having membership of INFLIBNET & DELNET. It shows the picture of popularity of DELNET over the other networks in S & T libraries, since other networks are specialized one and DELNET, being a general library network, so it is subscribed by all type of libraries. 4.5 HUMAN RESOURCES Human resources are acknowledged as the most valuable and important asset in libraries. The main aim of any library is to get the maximum quality output from the available human resources by their performance. The only difference between one library and another is the performance of their human resources. For the sake of clarity and convenience in interpretation, the

28 Percentage 49 available human resources of these libraries have been classified under three broad categories of professionals: Library, IT and Non-library Professionals. TABLE 4.30: NATURE OF PROFESSIONAL STAFF AVAILABLE IN LIBRARIES STATE/UT IN-HOUSE ON CONTRACT/ OUTSOURCED FULLY PARTIALLY n (%) n (%) n (%) HARYANA 7 (78) 0 2 (22) CHANDIGARH 4 (80) 0 (20) DELHI 7 (35) 2 (0) (55) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY 2 (00) 0 0 DEEMED UNIVERSITY 2 (25) (2) 5 (63) RESEARCH INSTITUTES (69) (6) 4 (25) INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE 3 (37) 0 5 (63) FUNDING SOURCE GOVERNMENT 5 (50) (3) 4 (47) NON- GOVERNMENT 3 (75) (25) 0 TOTAL 8 (53) 2 (6) 4 (4) Haryana 20 0 In-House Fully Outsourced Partially Outsourced Chandigarh Delhi Nature of the Available Library Professional Staff FIGURE 4.3: STATE WISE AVAILABLE LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL STAFF Table 4.30 reveals that 53% (8) libraries are having permanent inhouse library professional staff and 6% (2) libraries are fully managed by the outsourced library professionals. However, 4% (4) libraries are having partially outsourced library professional staff.

29 Percentage 50 a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.30 and Figure 4.3 show that Chandigarh is the front runner in having maximum permanent professionals, followed by Haryana with 78%. Delhi libraries outsource 65% of its professional staff with 0% fully managed by the outsourced library professional staff and 55% partially outsourcing. However in Haryana and Chandigarh none of library is fully managed by outsourced library professional staff. Haryana and Chandigarh libraries are 22% and 20% partially outsourced library professional staff respectively In-House Fully Outsourced Partially Outsourced 0 Universities Deemed Universities Research Institutes Institutes Institutes of National Repute FIGURE 4.4: INSTITUTE WISE AVAILABLE LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL STAFF b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: in Table 4.30 and Figure 4.4 shows that none of the University library is having outsourced library professional. 2% libraries of Deemed University and 6% libraries of Research Institutes are having fully outsourced library professional staff. 63% of the Deemed University and Institutes of National Repute are having partially outsourced library professional staff, followed by 25% of the Research institutes. More than 60% libraries of the Deemed University and Institutes of National Repute are having lack of the permanent in-house library professional staff. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.30 shows that 50% Govt. funded and 75% non-govt. funded libraries are having permanent in-house library professional staff. 3% of the govt.-funded libraries and 25% of the nongovt. funded libraries are having fully outsourced library professional staff.

30 5 The conclusion emerges from the Table and Figures is that the state wise libraries situated in Delhi, Institute wise Deemed University libraries and funding source wise Govt. funded libraries are ahead in having outsourced professional. It shows that the government is least interested in appointing the permanent library professional staff. TABLE 4.3: NATURE OF IT PROFESSIONAL STAFF AVAILABLE IN LIBRARIES STATE/UT IN- HOUSE ON CONTRACT/ OUTSOURCED FULLY PARTIALLY NOT AVAILABLE n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) HARYANA () () () 6 (67) CHANDIGARH (00) DELHI 2 (0) 4 (20) 0 4 (70) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY 0 (50) (50) 0 0 (3) 0 7 (87) DEEMED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTES INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE (6) (6) 0 4 (88) 2 (25) 2 (25) 0 4 (50) FUNDING SOURCE GOVERNMENT 2 (7) 5 (7) (3) 22 (73) NON- GOVERNMENT (25) (75) TOTAL 3 (9) 5 (5) (3) 25 (73) It is found from Table 4.3 that only 9% libraries are having the permanent in-house IT professional staff, followed by 5% libraries having fully outsourced and 3% are having partially outsourced IT professional staff. However, 73% of the libraries are having neither in-house nor outsourced IT professional staff.

31 Perenatage Percentage In-House Fully Outsourced Partially Outsourced Not Available Nature of the Available IT Professional Staff Haryana Chandigarh Delhi FIGURE 4.5: STATE WISE AVAILABLE IT PROFESSIONAL STAFF IN LIBRARIES a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.3 and Figure 4.5 show that only % libraries of Haryana are having in-house IT professionals, followed by 0% libraries of Delhi. % libraries of Haryana and 20% libraries of Delhi are having fully outsourced IT professional staff. However none of the libraries in Chandigarh is having in-house or outsourced IT professional staff In-house Universities Deemed Universities Research Institutes Institutes Institutes of National Repute Fully Outsourced PartIally Outsoucred Not Available FIGURE 4.6: INSTITUTE WISE AVAILABLE IT PROFESSIONAL STAFF IN LIBRARIES b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: Table 4.3 and Figure 4.6 reveal that 6% libraries of Research Institutes and 25% libraries of Institutes of National Repute are having in-house as well as fully outsourced IT professional staff respectively. 50% libraries of University and 3% libraries of Deemed University are having fully outsourced IT professional staff. However, 87%

32 53 libraries of Deemed University, 88% libraries of Research Institutes and 50% libraries of Institutes of National Repute are not having any type of IT professional staff. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: only 7% of the government funded libraries and 25% of the non-government funded libraries are having in-house IT professional staff. 73% libraries of government funded and 75% libraries of non-government funded institutes are not having any IT professional staff. The conclusion emerges from the Table and Figures is that the state wise libraries situated in Delhi, Institute wise University libraries and only 7% Govt. funded institutes have fully outsourced IT professional staff. It also shows that 73% S & T libraries are not having required IT professional staff. TABLE 4.32: NATURE OF NON- PROFESSIONAL STAFF AVAILABLE IN LIBRARIES STATE/UT IN-HOUSE ON CONTRACT/ OUTSOURCED FULLY PARTIALLY n (%) n (%) n (%) HARYANA 3 (34) 3 (33) 3 (33) CHANDIGARH 2 (40) 2 (40) (20) DELHI 4 (20) 3 (65) 3 (5) INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY (50) 0 (50) DEEMED UNIVERSITY (2) 5 (63) 2 (25) RESEARCH INSTITUTES 5 (3) 7 (44) 4 (25) INSTITUTES OF NATIONAL REPUTE 2 (25) 6 (75) 0 FUNDING SOURCE GOVERNMENT 8 (27) 6 (53) 6 (20) NON- GOVERNMENT (25) 2 (50) (25) TOTAL 9 (26) 8 (53) 7 (2) It is found from Table 4.32 that 26% libraries are having in-house Non- Professional staff, followed by 53% libraries having fully outsourced and 2% libraries having partially outsourced Non-Professional staff. a) STATE/ UT WISE ANALYSIS: 40% libraries in Chandigarh are having the in-house non-professional staff, followed by 34% libraries in Haryana and 30% libraries in Delhi. Delhi is on the top with having 65% fully outsourced nonprofessional staff, followed by 40% libraries in Chandigarh and 33% libraries

33 54 in Haryana. Haryana is on the top in having partially outsourced nonprofessional staff category with 33% libraries, followed by 20% libraries of Chandigarh and 5% libraries of Delhi. b) INSTITUTE WISE ANALYSIS: University libraries got the top rank in having in-house non- professional staff category with 50% libraries, followed by 3% Research Institute and 2% Institutes of National Repute. 2% Deemed University are libraries have in-house non- professional staff. 75% Institutes of National Repute libraries having fully outsourced nonprofessional staff and got the top rank in this category, followed by 63% Deemed University and 44% Research Institutes libraries. In partially outsourced non-professional staff category University libraries got the top rank with 50% libraries, followed by Deemed University and Research Institutes libraries with 25% each. c) FUNDING SOURCE WISE ANALYSIS: under this funding source wise analysis of the same issue it is revealed from Table 4.32 that 27% libraries of the govt. funded institutes and 25% libraries of non-govt. funded are having inhouse non- professional staff. 53% of the libraries of the govt. funded and 50% libraries of non-govt. funded institutes are having fully outsourced nonprofessional staff. The conclusion emerges from the Table is that the state wise libraries situated in Delhi, Institute wise, Institutes of National Repute libraries and funding source wise Govt. funded libraries are ahead in having fully outsourced Non- professional category staff. It also shows that majority of the S & T libraries have hired the non- professional staff. 4.6 OUTSOURCING IN LIBRARIES The intention here is to find out how outsourcing is affecting and would affect the activities and services in different areas and evaluate its overall impact on S & T libraries. This survey tried to cover all aspects of library activities and services that has potential to be outsourced: Library Automation, Software Development, Website Creation and Designing, Website Updation,

34 55 Digitization, RFID Tagging and Maintenance, Cataloguing, Classification, Translation, Photocopying, Binding etc. For the sake of clarity and convenience in interpretation, library activities and services have been divided in three parts: Professional-Automated, Professional-Manual and Non- Professional library activities and services. Each question also provided the opportunity for librarians to indicate their future plans. The remarks provided by the respondents made it clear that at times there was a balance between inhouse and outsourced operations. TABLE 4.33: LIBRARIANS OPINION ABOUT USEFULNESS OF OUTSOURCING FOR LIBRARY ACTIVITIES & SERVICES RESPONSE MANUAL ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES PROFESSIONAL AUTOMATED NON- PROFESSIONAL n % n % n % YES NO TOTAL Table 4.33 reveals that 55.9% (9) respondents agreed that outsourcing is useful for the Professional-Manual library activities and services. However, 44.% (5) librarians do not agree with this. Further, this table shows that major i.e. 94.% (32) librarians agree that outsourcing is useful for Professional-Automated library activities and services, while 2 (5.9%) do not agreed with this. The Table further proves that 97.5% professionals agree that outsourcing is useful for Non-Professional library activities and services. Only (2.95%) librarians do not agree with this. It can be concluded from Table 4.33 that Non-Professional library activities and services are ranked at top preferred activity for outsourcing, followed by Professional-Automated library activities and services. However, outsourcing is least useful for Professional-Manual library activities and services.

35 56 TABLE 4.34: LIBRARY STAFF S OPINION ABOUT USEFULNESS OF OUTSOURCING LIBRARY ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES USEFUL MANUAL ACTIVITIES AND SERVICES PROFESSIONAL NON- PROFESSIONAL AUTOMATED n % n % n % YES NO TOTAL Table 4.34 shows that 93.42% library staff also agree that outsourcing is useful for Non-Professional library activities and services and 84.2% library staff agree that outsourcing is useful for Professional-Automated activities and services. However, 3.58% agreed that outsourcing is also useful in Professional-Manual library activities and services. When comparing the views librarians with library staff regarding the usefulness of the outsourcing for library activities are services. It is found that both preferred the use of outsourcing mostly for Non-Professional activities and services, followed by Professional-Automated and Professional-Manual. However, preferences ratio is bit vary for Professional activities and services. The respondents were further asked to furnish the information regarding the type of outsourcing implemented in their libraries TABLE 4.35: TYPE OF OUTSOURCING IMPLEMENTED IN LIBRARIES TYPE OF OUTSOURCING LIBRARIES n % SELECTIVE 3 9 PROPOSED 3 MUTI-SOURCING 0 0 FULLY 0 0 NOT MENTIONED 2 6 TOTAL 34 00

36 57 3% 6% Selective Proposed Not Mentioned 9% FIGURE 4.7: TYPE OF OUTSOURCING IMPLEMENTED IN LIBRARIES Table 4.35 along with Figure 4.7 shows that majority of the libraries i.e. 9% have implemented only selective outsourcing. Only 6% libraries have not mentioned the type of outsourcing implemented. It is important to observe that none of the libraries has used full outsourcing. TABLE 4.36: TIME SINCE OUTSOURCING IMPLEMENTED IN LIBRARIES YEARS LIBRARIES n % LESS THAN YEAR 2 6-2YEAR YEAR YEAR 3 MORE THAN 5 YEAR NOT MENTIONED 2 6 TOTAL % 6% 6% 6% 2% 3% Less than year -2 Year 2-3 Year 3-4 Year More than 5 Year Not Mentioned FIGURE 4.8: TIME SINCE OUTSOURCING IMPLEMENTED IN LIBRARIES

37 58 Table 4.36 and Figure 4.8 show that 67% libraries are using outsourcing since more than 5 years, followed by 2% libraries using since 2-3 years and 6% since the last -2 years and less than one year each. 6% libraries have not mentioned the period since using outsourcing. The responses have made it clear that most of the libraries have been using outsourcing since many years. Therefore, it is not a new phenomenon for Indian libraries too. TABLE 4.37: EVALUATING THE NEED OF OUTSOURCING BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSE LIBRARIES n % YES NO 3 9 NOT MENTIONED 2 6 TOTAL % 6% Yes No Not Mentioned 85% FIGURE 4.9: EVALUATING THE NEED OF OUTSOURCING BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION Table 4.37 and Figure 4.9 show that 85% libraries have carefully evaluated the need of the outsourcing before its implementation and 9% libraries did not evaluate the need of the outsourcing before its implementation. It means that these libraries are not taking any precautions before the implementation of outsourcing. So, the success of outsourcing project may not be sure in these cases. However, this table reveals the awareness and seriousness of the library professional in using and implementing outsourcing in libraries.