The Australian Library Journal

E-government: issues and implicationsfor public libraries

Jennifer Berryman

Manuscript received July 2004

This is a refereed article

This article is based on a report prepared for the NSW Public Library Network Research Committee in February 2004. The report was the first stage of a larger research project to in develop a greater understanding of the impact of NSW Government electronic service delivery initiatives on NSW public libraries. The term 'e-government' is preferred throughout this report and may be taken to include the broad range of definitions which include electronic government service delivery, government online (GOL) e-administration and e-democracy.

Introduction

Governments around the world have recognised the opportunities provided by the internet and the worldwide web and are exploring new ways of delivering services to and interacting with citizens. Although e-government strategies are so far showing consistency across countries and jurisdictions, e-government is still in the early stages of development (Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, 2003; Moon, 2002; Stedman, 2001) with 'little agreement on terms, tools, or techniques' (Holden, 2001, p75). This article identifies issues for Australian public libraries which arise from e-government implementations. It is neither a comprehensive review of the literature nor an exhaustive analysis of government policy in this area. Rather it seeks to stimulate discussion of future roles for public libraries in this evolving area.

What is e-government?

Not surprisingly, given its early stages of development, definitions abound for 'e-government' and associated terms such as 'government online', e-service, e-administration (Muir and Oppenheim, 2001). Those from the late 1990s, such as that of the NSW Government, emphasised delivering existing government services electronically (NSW Government, 1998?), whereas more recently the Australian Government sees e-government as moving beyond delivering existing services electronically to a 'transformative change' in government services provision (NOIE, 2002).

Other recent definitions broaden our understanding of the concept. For example, the Gartner definition of e-government encompasses the multi-dimensional nature of the concept, referring to 'information and communication technologies to optimise government service delivery, constituency participation and internal government processes' (Di Maio, et al, 2002, p7). The European Commission (undated) extends this definition to include the organisational change which must accompany the implementation of e-government.

As well as grappling with definitions, a range of analytical frameworks is being developed, against which to consider and evaluate the development of e-government. Many of these frameworks break e-government into stages of development to maturity (NSW Audit Office, 2001, p108). However, there are different ways to view e-government developments. For example, Usher (2001, cited in Found and Mackenzie) classifies e-government by the types of interactions with citizens and the Bertelsmann Foundation (2002) differentiates between e-administration and e-democracy.

Although comments appear about the potential transformational nature of e-government, as yet the shape of this 'transformed government' is only roughly sketched and not all writers share this enthusiasm for transformation. Concerns are being voiced, for example, that the nature of the public sector culture may inhibit e-government roll-out (Allen, et al, 2001; Barratt, 2002) or that implementation in the United Kingdom may be simply 'reproducing Whitehall online' (Stedman, 2001). As recently as 2002, Kost (2002) noted that many governments still apparently felt that e-government implementation was just making services available via the web.

ICT environment for e-government

The evolving information and communications technology context and developments in web services are major influences on how e-government is taking shape. In March 2003, fifty-four per cent of Australian households had access to the internet (NOIE, 2003c). Of those individuals with access to the internet, sixty per cent accessed the internet from home, thirty-two per cent from work and twenty-five per cent from other sites such as the local library or internet cafes (ibid.). July 2003 World Bank figures, cited in a recent report from OCLC (2004) and presumably based on the 2001 Census statistics, place Australia in the top ten countries for internet usage, although at thirty-seven per cent usage, Australia sits some way below the leading country, Norway, where sixty per cent of the population reports use of the internet.

Australia is one of the most developed countries in terms of e-government, with several analyses (NOIE, 2002; Stedman, 2001; Canadian Library Association, 2003; Muir and Oppenheim, 2001) rating Australia's achievements highly. Across the world however, many implementations are still in the early stages of maturity. Only the most straightforward transactions are targeted for web service in these jurisdictions (Kost and Kolsky, 2003; NOIE, 2003b). This stage of development necessarily leaves more complex transactions to be handled by staff, either face-to-face or over the phone.

There is a strong focus by both the Australian and New South Wales governments on electronic service delivery rather than e-democracy (Stedman, 2001). Both governments signal the potential for development beyond improved services and both acknowledge that e-government initiatives are complementing rather than replacing traditional government service delivery (NOIE, 2000; NSW Audit Office, 2001).

At the local government level, the rollout of e-government is less extensive (Singh, et al, 2001). In Australia, not unexpectedly, the situation varies from state to state. In NSW, for example, the emphasis has been on getting technical infrastructure into place and local councils online, especially in remote regional areas. Contrast this with the situation in Victoria or the United Kingdom, both of which situate local e-government in an overall e-government context, providing access to key policy and strategy documents, examples of best practice and a range of links. All local jurisdictions however have to cope with a range of complexities which include a 'lack of a shared, reliable computing and network infrastructure; goals that are too ambitious for the resources available; human and organizational resistance to change; organizational, programmatic, technological, and legal complexity and overlapping or conflicting missions among participating agencies' (La Vigne, 1997, p3).

E-government and public libraries

Public libraries are places and institutions of significant value to their communities, serving educational, economic and social needs. (Briggs, et al, 1996; Cox, 2000). Public libraries in Australia also play an important role in the information industry (NOIE, 1999), providing access to electronic information in several ways: through public access to the internet, via access to their own databases, through reference services which draw on electronic as well as paper resources, and through their 'enabling' role in providing training in both ICT skills and information seeking skills.

Research carried out for the Canadian Library Association (2003, p28) in 2002 found 'no in-depth treatment of public libraries as a source of GOL'. However, the literature reveals two distinct though related ways to view the issues surrounding public libraries and e-government.

Public libraries and e-government - more of the same?

Firstly, as government-funded services, public libraries clearly deliver e-services in their own right, providing electronic access to information and resources, including government information. In a sense, this is an extension of what libraries have always done and their performance is recognised. The European Commission, assessing e-government implementation, identified twenty 'basic public services' to benchmark (Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, 2003, p3), with public libraries nominated as one of twelve 'services to citizens'. Of the twenty services, public libraries are the most heavily used, with fifty per cent of users being online (Top of the Web, 2003).

Examples of best practice identified by consulting firms, SAP and Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, highlight the performance of 'traditional' library services, such as getting access points in place; providing links to local government web pages and providing training in ICT skills (Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, 2003; SAP, 2002). Professional bodies also see a continuing role for public libraries in these areas (American Library Association, 2001; Canadian Library Association, 2003).

So public libraries as e-government service providers are clearly significant players in e-government.

Public libraries and e-government - something quite different?

There is however a second way to view the relationship between public libraries and e-government. As the physical barriers between service providers break down through web service implementation, as jurisdictions and government agencies are 'joined up', some public libraries are beginning to provide government services other than information provision. In this respect, they can be seen to be moving beyond the traditional role of libraries as providers of information.

The American Library Association submission cited above foreshadows an evolving role for libraries, moving from information provision and managing library transactions electronically to handling government business transactions as well. This view of a possible evolutionary path is shared by others such as the United Kingdom Government (Re:Source, 2003; Garrod, 2003). Public library practitioners in Europe also advocate an expanded role for libraries in e-government developments, for example: as 'access points for e-government, and electronic voting through internet provision and guidance, providing access to local and national government information, schemes and plans; providing space and support for e-government related activities', among other activities (PULMAN, 2003).

Froud and MacKenzie (2001) argue that public libraries exist to further the agenda of their parent body. These writers clearly believe that the evolution of e-government is an environmental change which provides significant opportunity for public libraries to stake out a stronger position for themselves and demonstrate their value to their local community.

Issues and implications for public libraries

Still in its infancy, e-government is not without its critics, whose evaluations and studies reveal a number of concerns relating to its deployment. Nonetheless, e-government, in some form or another, is clearly here to stay.

The digital divide

Even in countries with relatively advanced e-government implementation, many citizens do not have internet access at home. For instance, forty-six per cent of people in Australia are in this situation and increasing home or work access to the internet will not in the short-term close the digital divide (Di Maio, et al, 2002; Pew Institute, 2004).

Moreover, recognition is growing that the concept of a 'digital divide' encapsulates more than PC ownership or internet access (McLaren and Zappalà, 2002). Surveys into e-government take-up consistently identified barriers to use. These barriers include physical accessibility (the number and location of access points; slow and unreliable connections); accessibility issues relating to lack of necessary ICT-related skills and some groups in the community being 'left out' of the information economy (Jaegar, 2003; NOIE, 2003b; Moon, 2002; Jaegar and Thompson, 2003; Canadian Library Association, 2003).

As one example, particular concerns reported by respondents (NOIE, 2003b) to a survey into demand for e-government highlighted problems with searching websites, for instance, poor search capabilities, and difficulty finding the service. These problems may be related to poor web design and usability or they may be traceable to a lack of skills in using ICTs or in seeking information. A further specific inhibitor for regional users is 'slow or unreliable connection, the cost of computers, libraries only being able to provide limited access' (ibid).

Of particular concern are those groups in the community designated as 'key disadvantaged groups' (Lloyd and Bill, 2004, p31) by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. These groups are most likely to be targeted by government intervention programs but are least likely to have home or work internet access (ibid).

Although a single portal or electronic one-stop shop for services and transactions is the stated goal of many governments, the figures and analyses cited above suggest that for some years to come, many members of the community will continue to access the internet and e-government through an intermediary of some kind.

Intermediaries

Intermediaries may be defined as organisations that link citizens and government in a way that adds value (rather than another barrier) to the process (Office of the e-Envoy, undated).

Intermediation 'will increase rather than diminish in importance' (Di Maio, 2002, p1) with traditional intermediaries such as post offices or banks being joined by new ones, like utilities and media and telecommunications companies. Indeed, in the United Kingdom, intermediaries are acknowledged as key players in e-government roll-out. With the goal of 'joined-up government', a challenge which cannot be met by government alone, the United Kingdom government sees a 'mixed economy' as a desirable model for the delivery of e-government services.

One plausible reason put forward for citizen preference for intermediaries relates to ease of use. Citizens may be in contact with these intermediaries more often than with government. For this reason, they are likely to find it more convenient to do other government business there rather than make a separate visit to the local one-stop government shop (Di Maio, 2001; Singh, et al, 2001).

The United Kingdom experience (KPMG Consulting, 2002) suggests however, that intermediaries are not frequently used to access public services. Preference was 'roughly even' (p6) between face-to-face service, internet access and telephone service through call centres. Of the face-to-face options, the most preferred channel was the one-stop shop, presumably managed by government or council. Other preferred access points for face-to-face transactions were post offices, preferred by eleven per cent of respondents, and public libraries, preferred by three per cent of respondents.

An issue not yet widely canvassed in the literature is the effectiveness of intermediaries in delivering government services. It would seem however, that intermediaries who are not working regularly with government services are likely to be less knowledgeable about those services than dedicated staff.

Related to the use of intermediaries, and the training necessary to be effective in that role, is the ongoing need for human intervention in the provision of government services. KPMG Consulting (2002), analysing the United Kingdom Government's progress in e-government implementation, sees a clear indication that a multiplicity of channels best meets the need of different groups in the community, with human contact still preferred by thirty-one per cent.

Clearly, some government services are not appropriately handled over the web at all, and even those services most appropriate to web service delivery will sometimes need human intervention (Kost, 2002; Pew Institute, 2004). However, it appears that governments have done little planning to ensure that timely and effective intervention takes place.

Resourcing e-government

As the possibilities of e-government are broadening, so the 'complex realities' (Pardo, 2000, p1) of fully and effectively implementing e-government are being recognised (ibid; Moon, 2002). Singh et al (2001) observe, for example, that 'unrealistic assessments were initially made of short-term savings that now appear to be unachievable' (ibid, p9).

These unrealistic assessments possibly arise from incomplete costings of self-service via the web (Kost and Kolsky, 2003). For example, a web service is an additional channel for government service delivery. Governments acknowledge the need for 'multi-channel' service provision and although costs in existing channels can be minimised, these channels cannot be closed down altogether (ibid).

In most countries, the initial approach has been to resource e-government pilot projects from start-up project funds. For example, in the United Kingdom, over three years, £500 million is being made available to local councils to encourage e-government initiatives. At this stage, it is not clear what will happen to services when the start-up funds cut out.

The Australian experience with online access centres (Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, 2003), provides clues to the fate of government initiatives funded in this way. Without an ongoing revenue stream, online access centres are often not sustainable - unless the new service deliverer is willing to pick up the ongoing cost so the community is not disadvantaged. 'Cost shifting' of this nature has already been marked as an issue in Australia, for example, through unfunded 'changing responsibilities and cost increases' (Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 2003a, p12).

Conclusion

Given the early stages of e-government development, the future is necessarily still unclear. Although concerns are expressed about what the future of e-government might hold, e-government will continue to develop 'into a sophisticated service with high user expectations' (Canadian Library Association, 2003, p19). Now the easy steps have been taken, governments must grapple with more challenging questions, such as the implications for privacy legislation of 'joined-up' government, with the associated necessity of sharing of information.

The existence of the digital divide suggests that for some years to come, a significant segment in the community will rely on intermediaries, including public libraries, for access to the internet and, therefore, to e-government. A range of surveys report that citizens continue to experience difficulty with obtaining information and conducting business via government websites. Together with an ongoing need for human intervention in government service transactions, it appears that intermediaries can expect an increase rather than a decrease in demands for assistance.

No overall strategic response or framework has yet emerged to provide practical guidance for public library involvement in e-government. Australia, like the United Kingdom, has invested heavily in getting the building blocks of internet access in place in public libraries and other community centres such as Rural Transaction Centres. Both Australia and the United Kingdom are seen by other countries as models in this respect.

But e-government is not just about providing infrastructure. E-government offers opportunities to provide government services more efficiently and effectively. For public libraries, providing access to government information online can be seen as an extension of a traditional role. However, with increasing amounts of information available on government websites, demand is likely to increase for this information service.

And public libraries face an additional challenge from an expanding role. Acting as an intermediary in the provision of e-government services and transactions, public libraries can expect further demands to be placed upon them. How will they respond?

References

Allen, BA; Juillet, L; Paquet, G and Roy, J (2001) 'E-governance & government online in Canada: partnerships, people & prospects', Government Information Quarterly vol. 18, pp93-104.

American Library Association (2001) The role of libraries in e-government. Briefing paper submitted to the Congressional Internet Caucus Advisory Committee Briefing Book on E-government. Available at http://www.netcaucus.org/books/egov2001/pdf/ALABrief.pdf. Accessed on 13 January 2004.

Barratt, P (2002) E-government and joined up government, presentation [... to the] Global Working Group Meeting, Wellington, New Zealand, 14-15 February 2002. Available at http://www.anao.gov.au/WebSite.nsf/Publications/4A256AE90015F69B4A256B680015CC94. Accessed on 24 February 2004.

Bertelsmann Foundation in co-operation with Booz Allen Hamilton (2002) E-Government - Connecting efficient administration and responsive democracy. Gutersloh, Bertelsmann Foundation.

Briggs, S, Guldberg H & Sivacivan, S (1996) Lane Cove Library - a part of life: the social role and economic benefit of a public library. Sydney, Library Council of New South Wales in association with Lane Cove Council.

Canadian Library Association (2003) Access of [sic] GOL in public libraries, prepared for Industry Canada by the Canadian Library Association with the assistance of Maureen Cubberly and Stan Skrzeszewski, ASM Advanced Strategic Management Consultants. Available at http://ln-rb.ic.gc.ca/e/connect/LibraryNetGoLAccessReport.pdf. Accessed 25 November 2003.

Cap Gemini Ernst & Young (2003) Online availability of public services: how does Europe progress? Web-based survey on electronic public services, prepared by Cap Gemini Ernst & Young for the European Commission and DG Information Society. Available at: http://www.capgemini.dk/nyheder/2003/files/overall_report_2003.pdf. Accessed 15 January 2004.

Commonwealth of Australia. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, Finance and Public Administration (2003) Rates and taxes: a fair share for responsible local government. Canberra, the Commonwealth.

Cox, E (2000) A safe place to go: libraries and social capital. Sydney: University of Technology, Sydney and State Library of New South Wales.

Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (2003) Maintaining the viability of online access centres in regional, rural and remote Australia: discussion paper. Available at http://www.dcita.gov.au/download/0,2118,4_117075,00.doc. Accessed 12 February 2004

Di Maio, A (2001) E-government: what are citizens really looking for? Research note 24 May 2001. Stamford, Ct, Gartner.

Di Maio, A (2002) Government portals: whose life view? Research note 24 October 2002. Stamford, Ct, Gartner.

Di Maio, A, Baum, C and Keller, B (2002) Five truths and five myths to cross the digital divide: Research Note 1 February 2002. Stamford, Ct, Gartner.

Di Maio, A; Baum, C; Keller, B; Kreizman, G; Pretali, M & Seabrook, D (2002) Framework for Egovernment strategy assessment: strategic analysis report 8 March 2002. Stamford, Ct, Gartner.

European Commission (no date) E-government research and development. Available at: http://www.europa.eu.int/information_society/programmes/egov_rd/index_en.htm. Accessed 28 January 2004.

Froud, R and Mackenzie, C (2001) E-government & public libraries: furthering local and national agendas. Gutersloh, Bertelsmann Foundation.

Garrod, P (2003) 'A tour round local e-government interoperability and the role of the public library' Managing Information vol 10 (1, January/February 2003) pp40-42.

Holden, F and Fletcher, P (2001) 'Introduction [to] symposium issue' Government Information Quarterly vol 18, pp75-77.

Jaegar, PT (2003) 'The endless wire: E-government as global phenomenon' Government Information Quarterly vol 20, nº 4 pp323-331.

Jaegar, PT and Thompson, KM (2003) 'E-government around the world: lessons, challenges, and future directions', Government Information Quarterly vol 20, nº 4, pp289-294.

Kost, J & Kolsky, E (2003) Understanding true costs of self-service in government: Research Note 12 April 2003. Stamford, Ct, Gartner.

Kost, J (2002) Human intervention in E-government: Research note 6 September 2002. Stamford, Ct, Gartner.

KPMG Consulting (2001) Egovernment for all: the KPMG Consulting e-government survey 2001. London, KPMG. Available at: http://www.kpmgconsulting.co.uk/research/reports/ps_egov0401.html. Accessed 11 December 2003

KPMG Consulting (2002) Is Britain on course for 2005? The third KPMG Consulting e-government survey. London, KPMG Consulting. Available at: http://www.kpmgconsulting.co.uk. Accessed 11 December 2003.

La Vigne, M (1997) E-Government bridges the state-local divide. Center for Technology in Government/University at Albany, SUNY. Available at http://www.netcaucus.org/books/egov2001/pdf/egovtbri.pdf. Accessed 18 December 2003.

Lloyd, R and Bill, A (2004) Australia online: how Australians are using computers and the internet: Australian Census Analytic Program, 2001. Canberra, ABS.

McLaren, J and Zappalà, G (2002) 'The 'Digital Divide' among financially disadvantaged families in Australia' First Monday vol 7, nº 11 November 2002, Available at: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_11/mclaren/index.html. Accessed 23 February 2004.

Moon, M J (2002) 'The evolution of e-government among municipalities: rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review vol 62, nº 4, pp424-432.

Muir, A & Oppenheim, C (2001) Report on developments world-wide on national information policy, prepared for Re:Source and The Library Association by Adrienne Muir and Charles Oppenheim with the assistance of Naomi Hammond and Jane Platts. Department of Information Science, Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicester. Available at http://www.la-hq.org.uk/directory/prof_issues/nip/index.html. Accessed 9 February 2004.

NOIE (1999) A strategic framework for the information economy: [full report]: Identifying priorities for action, NOIE, Canberra. Available at: http://www.noie.gov.au/projects/framework/reports/dec98_strategy.htm. Accessed 2 February 2004.

NOIE (2000) Government online: The Commonwealth Government's strategy. NOIE, Canberra. Available at http://www.noie.gov.au/projects/egovernment/Archive/GovOnlineStrategy.htm. Accessed 23 December 2003.

NOIE (2002) Better services, better government: The Federal Government's e-Government strategy. Available at http://www.noie.gov.au/publications/NOIE/better_services-better_gov/exec_sum.htm. Accessed 23 December 2003.

NOIE (2003a) E-government benefits study: appendix 1 - Demand for e-government (Phase 1). Available at: http://www.noie.gov.au/publications/NOIE/egovt_benefits/appendix1.htm. Accessed 11 December 2003.

NOIE (2003b) E-government benefits study: demand for E-government, NOIE, Canberra. Available at: http://www.noie.gov.au/publications/NOIE/egovt_benefits/demand_egov.htm. Accessed on 11 December 2003.

NOIE (2003c) Pocket stats: Australia online. Canberra: NOIE. Available at: http://www.noie.gov.au/publications/NOIE/statistics/pocket_stats.htm. Accessed 28 January 2004.

NSW Audit Office (2001) E-government: use of the internet and related technologies to improve public sector performance: performance audit report, Audit Office, Sydney. Available at http://www.audit.nsw.gov.au/perfaud-rep/e-govt-sept01/E-government-Sept2001.pdf. Accessed 2 February 2004.

NSW Government (1998?) Egovernment. Available at http://www.nsw.gov.au/egovernment.asp. Accessed 8 December 2003.

OCLC (2004) 2003 Environmental scan: pattern recognition. Available at http://www.oclc.org/membership/escan/introduction/default.htm. Accessed 24 February 2004.

Office of the e-Envoy (no date) Responsibilities. Available at http://www.e-envoy.gov.uk/Responsibilities/Responsibilities/fs/en. Accessed 26 February 2004.

Pardo, T (2000) Realising the promise of digital government: it's more than building a website. Albany: Centre for Technology in Government, University of Albany, SUNY. Available at: http://www.netcaucus.org/books/egov2001/pdf/realizin.pdf. Accessed 14 January 2004.

Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, Finance and Public Administration (2003a) At the crossroads - a discussion paper: inquiry into local government and cost shifting. Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.

Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, Finance and Public Administration (2003b) Rates and taxes: a fair share for responsible local government. Canberra: the Commonwealth. Available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/efpa/localgovt/report/fullreport.pdf. Accessed 14 January 2004.

Pew Research Centre (2004) How Americans get in touch with government. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=127. Accessed 25 May 2004.

PULMAN (2003) The PULMAN Guidelines: Section 1: Social Policy Guidelines: E-Government and Citizenship. 2nd ed. February, 2003. Available at http://www.pulmanweb.org/DGMs/egovfull. Accessed 8 December 2003.

Re:Source: Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries (2003) Framework for the future: libraries, learning and information in the new decade, Department for Culture, Media and Sport, London. Available at http://www.resource.gov.uk/documents/fff_ap2003.doc. Accessed 13 January 2004.

Singh, S; Ryan, A; Kelso, R; Laidler, T; Burke, J and Tegart, A (2001) The user perspective on government electronic service delivery (ESD): Research Report nº 29. Melbourne, RMIT, Centre for International Research on Communication and Information Technologies. Available at http://www.circit.rmit.edu.au/publics/rr29.pdf. Accessed 27 January 2004.

Stedman, D. (2001) Transformation not automation: the e-government challenge. Demos, London. Available at www.demos.co.uk/catalogue/transformation_page103.aspx. Accessed 13 January 2004.

SAP (2002) Local e-government now: a worldwide view. Improvement and Development Agency, London. Cited in Canadian Library Association, 2003, Access of GOL in Public Libraries, prepared for Industry Canada by the Canadian Library Association with the assistance of Maureen Cubberly and Stan Skrzeszewski, ASM Advanced Strategic Management Consultants, p9. Available at http://ln-rb.ic.gc.ca/e/connect/LibraryNetGoLAccessReport.pdf. Accessed 25 November 2003.

Top of the web: survey on quality and usage of public E-services (2003) commissioned by DG Information Society; study conducted by PLS RAMBOLL Management A/S & EWORX S.A. Available at http://www.topoftheweb.net. Accessed 13 January 2004.

Usher, M (2001) Championing E-transformation in local government first No 8, August 2001, cited in Froud, R and MacKenzie, C, 2001. E-government and public libraries: furthering local and national agendas. Gutersloh, Bertelsmann Foundation.

Biographical information

Jennifer Berryman works in planning and policy development at the State Library of New South Wales and is undertaking doctoral research at the University of Technology, Sydney. She also teaches there in information management and has conducted research projects at the State Library and external consultancies in quality management. Jennifer Berryman, policy officer, State Library of New South Wales, Macquarie Street, Sydney 2000, ph 02 9273 1416 fx 02 9273 1262, berryman@sl.nsw.gov.au.