Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

The Identity of the Contemporary Public Library

 | 
Margarita Pérez Pulido
, 
Maurizio Vivarelli

4. Work in Progress

Public Libraries in the Social Accountability of Local Administrations

Ilaria Giglio et Maria Maiorano
Traduction de Jennifer Cooke

Texte intégral

The work has been jointly planned and organised as well as the final conclusions; Maria Maiorano wrote paragraphs 1, 3, 4; Ilaria Giglio paragraphs 2, 5, 6

1. An overview

1The situation of Italian public libraries is actually rather disparate: some examples are close to the best European experiences, but the best part of them fail to meet international standards. Computerisation and disintermediation characterise our society, they tend to reduce the value of librarian institutions and undermine their social role with the local administration they belong to. For these reasons, public libraries need to find a way to validate their position in the eyes of their stakeholders. A possible solution could be to implement self-assessment and communication, using social accountability and namely drafting a social report.

  • 1Italia. Dipartimento della funzione pubblica, Direttiva del Ministro della Funzione sulla rendico (...)

2According to a 2006 Direttiva issued by the Ministero della Funzione pubblica1, social accountability is the tool public administrations can use to satisfy the informative need of their stakeholders, giving them the chance to judge the effects of the administration: therefore, it is the principal means to relate to stakeholders and especially to local communities. The tools through which the public administration carries out its accountability report are final statements, whose purpose is to inform the community on its work in a specific time lapse. The main documents are:

  • balance of mandate: covering the finished period of administrative mandate;
  • social report: it is the tool communities use to get information about the administration policies, choices and results achieved in the local area, described in an accurate and thorough manner.

3Public administrations can get some advantages from an effective social accountability that can be extended to all the institutions involved in drafting the social report (hence also to libraries). These advantages are relative to the integration and revitalisation of the accounting dimension through a more transparent report on economic-financial resources; optimisation of communication flows with stakeholders; empowerment of institutions responsibility by focusing on administrative transparency and on citizens’ assessment; better working of administrations and responsible consciousness of public expenditure; bodies structural reorganisation, taking into account planning processes and users’ needs; promotion and development of expertise and professionalism; increasing employees’ motivation and satisfaction. Public bodies can be accountable for their actions and can give users the chance to evaluate them following some indicators, as they are suggested by the same Direttiva: goals pursued (quantifiable and measurable changes that can be expected, compared to the initial situation); actions undertaken (plans, projects, services and regulatory measures), describing process indicators (activities, times, progress ranking); used resources; final outcomes (their quantity and quality); efficiency (used resources / final outcomes); effectiveness (success in obtaining a desired result); effect (social effect of achieved purposes); beneficiaries’ judgements; future commitments.

  • 2  For an in-depth analysis on accountability and social report, refer to the following: Luca Andriol (...)

4Therefore, social reports are the main tool public administrations can use for social accountability, and they could be applied also to inner management and communication. The report is the final step of the accountability process and its “social” characterisation may refer to the impact and the immaterial consequences the local authority has had on its community, but also to a shared report, created with the support of citizens or other stakeholders. Public administrations should resort to social reports as the only means for evaluation, self-evaluation, communication of their social effect. Unfortunately, social reports are currently not mandatory in Italy2.

2. Methodology

  • 3  Refer to: Pieraldo Lietti, Stefano Parise, Il bilancio sociale della biblioteca, «Bollettino AIB», (...)
  • 4  Refer to the social reports edited by the Biblioteca San Giorgio di Pistoia, by the Fondazione per (...)

5Public Italian libraries should look to public administrations and use social reports to account for their actions and be more worthy in the eyes of their stakeholders. The Italian professional literature has so far failed to make its point about the importance of libraries social accountability3and there has not been a standardisation of the necessary practices, even if there are some cases which can be used as reference4.

  • 5  Cf. Giovanni Solimine, Nuovi appunti sulla interpretazione della biblioteca pubblica, «AIB studi», (...)

6However, before suggesting a specific model of application of the social report libraries could use to express their identity, it would be interesting to verify what is the actual Italian perception of the role libraries play. If one analyses the national recent professional literature, it seems that contemporary libraries are always too complex and lacking in flexibility to be able to adapt to the contexts they have to relate to. The result is a cultural facility, seen not “only” as a place to access and store information, but as a makerspace, where users can feel an active and creative part. Therefore, there is the chance for public libraries to start to compete not only with similar cultural facilities, but also with the educational and training world, thus positing themselves as an educational workshop, where the creative experience could involve both librarians and users alike5.

  • 6  ISO 16439:2014 (E), Methods and Procedures for Assessing the Impact of libraries, p. 14.

7To this aspect one may add libraries social vocations, as they are described in the recent ISO 16439:2014 (E)6:

    • Impact on social life, influencing social inclusion and unity.
    • Access to information and education, giving free access to information and the Internet; education and life-long learning; local culture and identity.
    • Cultural diversity, giving different groups the chance to preserve their cultural heritage while promoting community identity.
    • Community development, they are a focus point for many activities and programmes supporting the community or society at large.
    • Individual well-being, libraries are not only a quiet place where people can read and study, but also a meeting place where they can take part in events.
    • Preservation of the cultural heritage, the potential value of libraries for next generations, preserving the documentary heritage.

8These are the profiles the professional world actually acknowledges for libraries, but it could be interesting to understand how they are really recognised by their stakeholders and, above all, by their local public administrations.

3. Accountability in Italy: analysis, answers and examples

9In order to get a realistic overview of the Italian situation, a specific analysis of the accountability tools used by the municipalities of province capitals was carried out. The study was divided into three phases: the first one consisted in a preliminary search focused on the accountability tools public administrations can use; in the second phase, the documentary tools they utilise were singled out and analytically verified; in the third, the data from the social reports completed are thoroughly analysed. Out of the total of 110 municipalities examined, only 31,18 % filled out the social report, while 61,82 % did not (Fig. 1).

10Out of this 38,18 % , 67,28 % did not include references to public libraries in their social report, while 32,72 % also provided quite specific information on librarian institutions, their activities and on the potential community attendance (Fig. 2).

11It is also interesting to observe what is the geographic distribution percentage within that 38,18 % of municipalities with social reports. In Italy the reported cases of social accountability are: 71,42 % in the North, 16,66 % in central Italy, 4,77 % in the South and 7,15 % on the islands (Fig. 3).

4. Italian best practices

  • 7La San Giorgio risorsa per la città. Bilancio sociale della biblioteca anno 2011, final report 22 (...)

12In light of the data resulting from the analysis, we decided to consider some examples of social reports complete with many of the parameters previously indicated, and the cases selected are the documents of the Biblioteca San Giorgio in Pistoia, the Fondazione per Leggere and the social report of Pordenone municipality. The Biblioteca San Giorgio in Pistoia completed its social report7 in 2011, focusing on efficiency and effectiveness, with the intent and purpose to offer the community a public library with collections and services; a day care centre and a place of sharing, with free access to new technologies; a centre to promote reading, culture and information, and a forum of local identification. In completing the document some parameters on the facility and how it operates, the services it provides, and also on users’ satisfaction and their relation with the library, were considered. These data referred to:

  • Facility: total area; area accessible to users; total seats for reading/ reference/ audio-video;
  • Employees;
  • Resources: types of documents; purchases and donations; periodicals; pictures; multimedia material; desiderata; latest publications; rejected and restored documents.
  • Services: number of people registered; newspapers and periodicals reading; loans; interlibrary loans; collection use; suggestions and complaints; events; web portal and social media.
  • Activities: reading promotion; educational projects; bibliographic exhibitions; publications; cinema exhibitions and projections; library promotion; conventions and seminars; guided tours.
  • Costs: employees; paper and stationery; subscriptions; purchases; furniture; advertising; restorations; communication and signage; employees training; maintenance and cleaning; electricity, heating, water, telephone and garbage; insurance; taxes and refunds. They also include the revenue generated by the San Giorgio for the local community and its administration.
  • Appreciation: expressed by users, employees, friends and fellows of the library.
  • The mission of this document is to underline the social, cultural and economic role that the San Giorgio plays in the city of Pistoia.

13Unlike Pistoia accountability model, the social report completed in 2013 by the Fondazione per Leggere – south-west libraries of Milan – is more focused on the economic aspects, based on the activities of the libraries involved (<http://www.fondazioneperleggere.it/​docs/​istituzionali/​Bilancio_2013.pdf>. Indeed, the document features references to the accounting period, to the relating incomes and savings resulting from the foundation projects. Moreover, the report highlights such commercial aspects as sponsorships, courses, workshops, merchandising, etc., in view of an economic-financial result. More detailed information regarding the libraries can be found only in small part, and it mainly concerns the regular expenses for services and management of the facility, and the activities daily performed therein. A further example of report, very different from the two previously analysed, is the social and environmental budget promoted by the Municipality of Pordenone in 2011 covering the five-year period 2006-2010, where libraries are included in economic-financial contexts defined with the prospect of gain/revenue justifying their existence. The document analyses all the areas affected by the action of the municipal administration and it is organised in three sections. The first has an introductory character, or rather it describes the reference templates and the structure of the document; the second section outlines the mission of the institution and the social and environmental policies carried out during 2006-2010; in the third section, the actions undertaken by the Municipality in the different areas of family, knowledge, common goods, economic activities, networks, communication, resources, organisation are introduced. The sub-section “knowledge” analyses the museums, libraries, historical archives, the University, the Verdi Theatre and cultural events. The partition concerning libraries presents the goals the administration reached during the reference period, which make the library a place open to the city and its territory, capable of accommodating the demand for culture and information, give answers and, finally, propose new stimuli and interests. The priority decisions made by the Administration included the establishment of new headquarters for the central library (opened in June 2010), and the creation of a cutting-edge librarian institute, both from the point of view multimedia, with access to SBN and RFID technologies, and from the point of view of the services provided, taking into consideration all the types of users. An improvement of the quality of library service in the territory prompted the online connection of some of the holdings of 5 district libraries, and other cultural organisations present in the territory.

14Pordernone librarian institution has promoted numerous cultural initiatives having also a social relevance. Special sections were created, such as that for children and young people, young adults, music and comics archives. In addition to the cultural activities dealing with books and the promotion of reading, there are also numerous initiatives targeting immigrants and prison inmates. The budget is accompanied by tables reporting the data on the increments in the course of the years of attendance; active cards; loans; average of loans per user; opening days; attendance per opening day; circulating volumes; guided tours; students participating in guided tours; cultural events; participants in the cultural events. The investigations also concern the libraries in the districts of Torre, Mary della Schiava, Jolanda Turchet, North and South constituencies and their users; opening hours; animated readings; participants in animated readings and multimedia library with their opening days; accesses; books supplied in consultation; requests made.

5. New proposals

15Every library willing to grapple with social accountability must take into consideration some mandatory steps. The elements that characterise social accountability are:

  • voluntariness;
  • statement of commitments, results and social effects produced;
  • identify and build up a dialogue with stakeholders.

16The social accountability report, after an introduction to the document and a methodological note on the reporting process, contains information related to:

  • reference values, vision and programme administration;
  • policies and services rendered;
  • used and available resources.

17The process of implementation of the balance presupposes a prior definition of the areas examined and it is divided into:

  • definition of the accounting system, through informative elements and indicators;
  • collection of information;
  • drafting and approval of the document;
  • communication of the social report.

18Each social accountability report must: express the sense of the action of the administration, by describing the decision-making and operational processes which characterise it and their impact on the community; be made on a regular basis, allowing a periodical comparison between the goals set and the results achieved, by favouring the definition of new goals and commitments of the administration; be integrated with the planning and control system and with the entire accounting information system; focus on the different types of speeches delivered by the administration in the exercise of its duties and within the extent of its authority; give an account of the activities of public and private bodies that contribute to the implementation of the administration goals; address the administration interlocutors. When carrying out each of the phases in the process, it is necessary to ensure:

  • the involvement of the facility;
  • the connection with the planning and control system8.
  • 9   Ivi, p. 14-15.

19The final draft of document must in essence convey the communicative nature of social accountability, making the information therein contained relevant to its recipients. The editorial layout, the choice of language, the description and representation of informational content of the social accountability report should be designed according to each specific recipient. In general terms, one should use a simple, flowing and non-redundant language; avoid using concepts, terms, and references typical of the administrative, technical, sector-based language; the meaning of any foreign words and acronyms should be explained; whenever possible, mainly use quantitative data, set forth with the help of tables and graphs accompanied by explanations that would make interpretation clearer. Before dissemination, the social accountability report must be approved or acknowledged by the governing body of the administration9.

20After these general considerations, one may establish a set of parameters that could guide public libraries when drafting their respective social accountability reports. The comparison of information provided by the rules ISO 2789:2013, International Library Statistics and ISO 11620:2014, Library Performance Indicators has allowed us to devise a prototype evaluation scheme, suitable for public libraries to justify their existence and communicate their impact on the local community.

ISO 2789

ISO 11620

Code

Required statistical data

Code

Name of the indicator

6.3.2

Books and serials (printed material)

B.1.1.1

Required Titles Availability

6.3.3

Manuscripts

6.3.4

Microforms

6.3.5

Cartographic documents

6.3.6

Printed music documents

6.3.7

Audiovisual documents

6.3.8

Graphic documents

6.3.9

Patents

6.3.10

Other library documents and items

6.3.11

eBooks

6.3.12

Other digital documents

6.3.13

Database

6.3.13

Catalogue records

6.4.7

eBooks readers

6.2.12.2.1

Number of rejected accesses

B.1.1.3

Percentage of Rejected Accesses

6.2.4.1.1

Interlibrary loan requests received from other libraries

B.1.2.4

Percentage of Successful Interlibrary Loans

6.2.4.1.2

Interlibrary loan requests made to other libraries

6.4.8.1

Net usable area for library functions

B.1.3.1

User Area per Capita

6.4.8.2

Net usable area by function

6.4.8.3

Gross floor area of library buildings

6.4.8.4

Shelf counts

6.4.3

User places

B.1.3.2

User Places per Capita

6.4.4

Public access workstation

6.4.1

Opening hours

B.1.3.3

Hours Open Compared to Demand

6.4.2

Days open

6.7.2

Total staff

B.1.4.1

Staff per Capita

6.7.2.1

Professional staff

6.7.2.2

Qualified staff

6.7.2.3

Other staff

6.7.3

Volunteers

6.7.6

Staff allocation to service areas/working areas

6.7.7

Staff allocation to special services

6.2.12.1

Number of searches

B.2.1.4

Number of Content Units Downloaded per Capita

6.2.12.2

Number of accesses

6.2.12.4

Number of Internet accesses

6.2.12.3

Numbers of downloads

B.2.1.5

Number of Downloads per Document Digitized

6.2.12.5

Use of the digitized collection

6.2.2

Users

B.2.2.2

Percentage of External Users

A.2.1.1

Types of users

B.2.4.1

Percentage of the Target Population Reached

B.2.4.2

User Satisfaction

  • 10   With regard to performance indicators and quality measurement please refer, among others, to: Ros (...)

21The indicators listed in the table were shortlisted from a set of statistical data and performance indicators suggested in the two standards. The choice was made based on the information regarding the value and social impact of library services, derived from cross-referencing data. In particular, the table provides the correlation between performance10 indicators (ISO 2789) and corresponding quantitative data (ISO 11620). The aim is to obtain data that can implement the set of information on the social impact of the library. To this quality and quantity set, we may add the analysis methodologies resulting from impact assessment.

6. Methodologies for social impact evaluation

22The balances evaluated are characterised by a generally widespread use of “classic” indicators, notably quantitative ones, whereas that of the methodologies necessary to express the value of public libraries and communicate their impact on local communities is very limited. Among the documents in question, there are few which deal with the issue of impact evaluation, including the social accountability report of the Biblioteca San Giorgio in Pistoia, which describes the general criteria followed:

  • 11   Cf. La San Giorgio risorsa per la città, p. 26.

There are plentiful methodologies to measure the social and economical impact of cultural services on local communities […] they are all Anglo-Saxon and seldom known in our country. Because of the lack of Italian models applied to public libraries, we chose to utilise two kinds of tools […] able to clearly emphasise the most significant facts in the relation between San Giorgio and the town: how much citizens save with the services it provides and the level of satisfaction – one may even say of affection – of its goers. To obtain the first datum the method used was ROI (Return On Investment), […] to measure the appreciation level and the critical import, with the necessary set of indications and suggestions, users, stakeholders and employees were interviewed11.

23To highlight the social impact of its work, the Biblioteca San Giorgio has resorted to some interviews to all of the subjects who have in some way interacted with the facility. From the Balance, it is possible to note that three different questionnaires were submitted, dealing with respectively: staff, partner associations and users. Insofar as the users, the questions were: reasons for using the library; frequency of use; an assessment of the services provided; level of satisfaction with respect to the various disciplinary areas covered; activities of the library the interviewee knew of and his/her level of satisfaction.

  • 12   Ivi, p. 12-21.

24Regarding the staff: survey on the sense of pride and belonging; assessment of the relationship with the management and with the other members and users; identification with the library mission; evaluation of the library user-friendliness; an assessment of transparency and of the effectiveness and efficiency of the services provided; influence of the working experience on the interviewee’s own baggage of professional skills; adequacy of his/her past formative experiences. Regarding friends and allies: effectiveness of their work with regard to the library goals; quality of the relationship with the staff, with the other members of the group, with users; identification with the goals of the library community; evaluation of the library user-friendliness; an assessment of transparency, and of the effectiveness and efficiency of the services provided. In addition to the interviews, also first-hand testimonies of relevant stakeholders from the different groups were given, with respect to the value of the library and its actions on the territory12.

25The model presented by the balance of the Biblioteca San Giorgio is a good starting point to propose some additional considerations on social impact assessment, as suggested by ISO 16439:2014. A public library willing to evaluate its own impact on the community, should first choose an adequate population sample. Therefore it is necessary to choose between real and potential users, individuals or people belonging to certain groups, demographically determined or selected through criteria specific for the situation. Then one has to identify which qualitative techniques to prefer, i.e. individual interviews, focus groups, or even self-assessment of the user. In case one opts for individual interviews, the standard traces the path to follow through some guidelines. Since the social value of the impact of the library will have to be emphasised, the questions asked will focus on: free time, school and learning, information on health, job search, information for business and commerce. It is important to ask the time saved using library services, and solicit feedbacks on how to expedite and make them more efficient. Also part of the questions will focus on the role of the library as a physical space for reading, studying, but also as a place to socialise.

26Some of the questions proposed in ISO standard concern: obtaining useful information for school or study; receiving relevant information on health and welfare; improving work efficiency thanks to the library; time saved; approval of the visit; experience of the library as a quiet place to read and study. If the questionnaire does not address the whole population but a specific group, questions should be tailored on the needs and interests of that group. The results of the questions, as soon as they are submitted, could then be validated by asking respondents their opinion on a replacement for the library (or for some of its services). The ISO standard contains an example question, with the satisfying alternatives between which the user should choose:

  • “If this library did not exist, would you be able obtain the same information and help elsewhere?”
  • From another library.
  • By purchasing relevant material.
  • On the Internet.
  • From teachers, colleagues, friends.
  • Through the medias.
  • Perhaps, but it would require more time and commitment.
  • No, I don’t think I would have the same information.
  • 13   ISO 16439:2014(E), p. 36-37.

27Questions of this kind should not give the impression that the library is about to close, since their purpose is to demonstrate the relevance and perhaps the indispensability of a specified library to an individual user13.

28On the other hand, with respect to the use of focus groups, the norm suggests different topics on which to set the debate, through an exemplifying sample of questions, which should bring out the view of the participants on the general value of libraries (1) and the benefits users receive from using the services provided (2).

Example (1):

  • How do you see the educational role libraries play?
  • Do you think that libraries can influence the economy of their local communities?
  • Do you know how libraries could support social inclusion?

Example (2):

  • Why do you usually visit the library?
  • What are the advantages (or disadvantages) you encountered when using the library?
  • Are there other points that you would like us to highlight in relation to the influence of the library on your work or study or leisure14?
  • 15   Ivi, p. 42-44.

29Also interesting is the point of view of the rule with respect to the use of assessment questionnaires that could, for example, show the results of training courses for users or even of the reference service and that, in order to be effective, should be carried out by the user before and after using a service. In the model of the questionnaire proposed by the standard, respondents are asked to indicate their level of familiarity with the different types of services offered, by identifying a value on a scale from 1 to 5. From the comparative analysis of each questionnaire one may highlight the general levels of skills achieved by the identified target15.

30Finally, for those libraries which are able to provide digital and online services so as to have a constant reference target, the rule proposes to use also Log Analysis as a possible tool to replace first-hand observation, with regard to the use of electronic resources and services. It serves to highlight the interaction between the user and the system and the information that it is possible to obtain is about:

  • domain name users;
  • date and time of the transaction;
  • time spent researching or visiting;
  • pages linked and accessed;
  • words in search queries;
  • number of searches;
  • number of downloads16.

7. Conclusions

31This work represents a preliminary reflection on some key-points such as:

  • the importance of social reporting, and in particular the use of social accountability for Italian public libraries, in order to more effectively communicate their values to the general public; since the effectiveness of the balance for the purposes of reporting is generally recognised, there does not seem to be any reason why libraries should not take advantage of such a tool;
  • a higher visibility of public libraries, perceived not only by the professionals in the field, but also by public administrations, in order to make libraries more significant key-players within their local administrations, as agents of change in the community and hence a necessary service;
  • analysis of today’s best practices, in order to highlight the methodologies and the main features of some excellent Italian examples;
  • proposal of a research methodology, through which the information necessary for the preparation of a social accountability report can be retrieved, based on standards such as ISO 2789, 11620, 16489.

32The topic is very wide and complex, and our contribution is intended as an input for the professional research with respect to a certainly interesting field of investigation that could allow Italian public libraries to gain a more significant role, in their communities, and within the public bodies they belong to.

Notes

1Italia. Dipartimento della funzione pubblica, Direttiva del Ministro della Funzione sulla rendicontazione sociale nelle amministrazioni pubbliche, 2006, <http://www.funzionepubblica.gov.it/sites/funzionepubblica.gov.it/files/16887.pdf>.

2  For an in-depth analysis on accountability and social report, refer to the following: Luca Andrioli - Cristiana Serafini, Il bilancio sociale: obiettivi, principi e principali esperienze in atto, Roma, Enea, 2002; Luca Bartocci, Il bilancio sociale negli enti locali: fondamenti teorici e aspetti metodologici, Torino, Giappichelli, 2003; Luciano Hinna, Il bilancio sociale nelle amministrazioni pubbliche, Milano, Franco Angeli, 2004; Ileana Steccolini, Accountability e sistemi informativi negli enti locali: dal rendiconto al bilancio sociale, Torino, Giappichelli, 2004; Angelo Tanese, Rendere conto ai cittadini: il bilancio sociale nelle amministrazioni pubbliche, Napoli, ESI, 2004; GBS. Gruppo di studio per il bilancio sociale, La rendicontazione nel settore pubblico, in Il bilancio sociale: standard di base e documenti di ricerca, Milano, Giuffrè, 2005; La nuova comunicazione dell’ente locale: organizzare l’ascolto, l’informazione e la partecipazione degli stakeholder, [Texts by] Alfredo Alessandrini [et al.], Milano, F. Angeli, 2006; GBS. Gruppo di studio per il bilancio sociale, Gli indicatori di performance nella rendicontazione sociale, Milano, Giuffrè, 2007; GBS. Gruppo di studio per il bilancio sociale, Il bilancio sociale. Standard: la rendicontazione sociale nel settore pubblico, Milano, Giuffrè, 2007; Italia. Ministero dell’Interno. Osservatorio per la finanza e la contabilità degli enti locali, Linee guida per la rendicontazione sociale negli enti locali, 2007; Alberto Romolini, Accountability e bilancio sociale negli enti locali, Milano, F. Angeli, 2007; Paola Orlandini, Rendicontazione e responsabilità sociale, Torino, Giappichelli, 2008; GBS. Gruppo di Studio per il Bilancio Sociale, Il bilancio sociale. Standard : principi di redazione del bilancio sociale, Milano, Giuffrè, 2013.

3  Refer to: Pieraldo Lietti, Stefano Parise, Il bilancio sociale della biblioteca, «Bollettino AIB», 46,2006, 1/2, p. 9-21, <http://bollettino.aib.it/article/view/5131/4898> ; Stefano Parise, Il bilancio sociale come strumento di progettazione e valutazione in biblioteca, in: Vitamina biblioteca: quanto cresce la città: impatto sociale delle biblioteche, valutazione costi/benefici degli interventi culturali, domanda di cultura, atti della giornata di studio (Scandicci, 3 aprile 2009), [edited by Serena Borgi and Stefano De Martin], Firenze, Centro stampa Giunta Regionale Toscana, 2009, p. 26-31; Giovanni Di Domenico, La responsabilità sociale nella gestione delle biblioteche, «Bibliotime» 14, 2011, 1, <http://www.aib.it/aib/sezioni/emr/bibtime/num-xiv-1/didomenico.htm>.

4  Refer to the social reports edited by the Biblioteca San Giorgio di Pistoia, by the Fondazione per Leggere and by the municipality of Pordenone.

5  Cf. Giovanni Solimine, Nuovi appunti sulla interpretazione della biblioteca pubblica, «AIB studi», 53, 2013, 3, p. 269, DOI: 10.2426/aibstudi-9132.

6  ISO 16439:2014 (E), Methods and Procedures for Assessing the Impact of libraries, p. 14.

7La San Giorgio risorsa per la città. Bilancio sociale della biblioteca anno 2011, final report 22/01/2013, p. 2-18,

<http://www.sangiorgio.comune.pistoia.it/assets/files/download/files-vari/bilanciosociale2011.pdf >.

8   Cf. Direttiva del Ministro della Funzione Pubblica sulla rendicontazione sociale nelle Amministrazioni Pubbliche, p. 4-5.

9   Ivi, p. 14-15.

10   With regard to performance indicators and quality measurement please refer, among others, to: Roswitha Poll - Peter te Boekhorst, Measuring Quality: Performance Measurement in Libraries, München, K. G. Saur, 2007.

11   Cf. La San Giorgio risorsa per la città, p. 26.

12   Ivi, p. 12-21.

13   ISO 16439:2014(E), p. 36-37.

14   Ivi, p. 41.

15   Ivi, p. 42-44.

16   Ivi, p. 48.

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1
URL http://books.openedition.org/ledizioni/docannexe/image/3646/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 86k
Titre Fig. 2
URL http://books.openedition.org/ledizioni/docannexe/image/3646/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 91k
Titre Fig. 3
URL http://books.openedition.org/ledizioni/docannexe/image/3646/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 89k

Auteurs

Ilaria Giglio, Università di Salerno, e-mail: i.giglio89[at]gmail.com

Maria Maiorano, Università di Salerno, e-mail: maiorano.mal[at]gmail.com