A lot of what I have been reading in library blogs lately is matching up with many of the things that our library has been doing and our CEO has been considering.

First off has come the move towards rearranging non-fiction collections into genres, rather than strict dewey order. Quite a few public libraries in Melbourne have done this - and we have just opened a new branch with this feature applied to the adult non-fiction collection. Several of our other branches have done it already and the others will follow in due course. So far, the anecdotal evidence has been positive with regards to the move, hopefully the statistical evidence will follow. It has been hard to judge thus far, as we have also made other changes which have impacted loans.

One of those changes was loan periods. We previously had 4 week loan periods for all books, magazines and audio books and 1 week loans for all AV. This was with the option of one renewal - if the item was not overdue or reserved. About this time last year, we extended the AV loan period to 2 weeks, and reduced the magazines loan period to that same 2 week period. A grace period of several months was set on magazines to help our borrowers to adjust and now a year later, I can say that anecdotally, it has been well received and utilised by our borrowers. Our renewal period has not changed.

An interesting viewpoint on Dewey and spine labels can be found in “Spine labels and De-Dewefication” by Michael Casey at Library Crunch. He asks why we need Dewey at all on non-fiction books - why not just subject labels, especially in libraries which have already genrified their non-fiction collections. Going with that is why we even need author labels on fiction, as the author’s names are in a large font on the side of the books already. His entry is thought provoking, as are the many comments which accompany it, both agreeing and disagreeing with his stance.

Where do I stand? I was not keen at first on the whole idea of genrification, but I can see that for the borrower, in most instances it will be easier for them to find what they are looking for. It might be harder for staff (at least until the become familiar with how and where the genres are located in their branch), but once past that, they will go to the shelves in the same way they go for a book in normal dewey order. It will be confusing for borrowers seeking a particular book, but I don’t think it will be any more that straight Dewey is now and at least when they get to the area, they will be able to find other titles which may interest them.

Our library service has genrified by gathering Dewey numbers together in one area and linking them with a colour coded genre label. We have nine genre categories, with the rest of the stock still filed in straight Dewey order. On the point of having just those genre labels, there is something to be said for using just author order within that area. However, we are not at the point where that can happen. Firstly, we have several libraries with large collections - one with approximately 40,000 non-fiction items. I believe this is too large a collection to organise this way. We also have smaller branches, but our users tend to be mobile and we don’t want to further confuse them by having different systems at different libraries. Secondly, not all our non-fiction is in genres. Do we again add to the confusion by having these books in dewey order, but others in genres. We are trying to make it easier for our borrowers and by having the genres we are taking the steps we can take to do this. As for the fiction - if all fiction books had easy to read author names, then I think we could justify dropping the author spine labels. But considering how long it takes me to find books in bookstores without labels, I think I am happier to stick with the system we have.

What is good in all this, is that all these things are being considered and reconsidered in light of our changing society and users. We can’t just stick to the way things are because that’s the way we have always done it. It is good to take the time and realistically consider and then maybe take a risk and try something different.