Search results

Consumer knowledge is a very important asset for an organisation. Two types of consumer knowledge have been identified, “knowledge about customers” including customer segments, individual customer preferences, potential customers, and “knowledge possessed by customers” including knowledge about product ranges, companies, and the marketplace. e‐Commerce offers an ideal medium for the creation and exchange of both types of knowledge. This paper presents the results of an initial phase in a research cycle that looks at e‐Commerce through the lens of knowledge management. It examines e‐Commerce provision made by organisations for customers across seven facets ranging from transactional to relational facilities. The results of a self‐evaluation of companies' e‐commerce propositions are contrasted with customer expectations to determine divergence and alignment. Implications are discussed and conclusions proposed.

THE earliest catalogue of Cambridge University documents was compiled by Mr. William Rysley, in 1420. Most of the documents enumerated in this list are still extant. An interesting List of the Documents in the University Registry, from the year 1266 to the year 1544, was communicated to the Cambridge Antiquarian Society by the Rev. H. R. Luard, B.D., then University Registrar, on March 6th, 1876. From this, it appears that “The earliest document which the University possesses is so late as the year 1266. The earliest in the Record office is dated 16th July, 13 Hen. III., i.e. 1229. This is a permission to scholars of the University of Paris to come to England, and remain for purposes of study.”

HIS holidays over, before the individual and strenuous winter work of his library begins, the wise librarian concentrates for a few weeks on the Annual Meeting of the Library Association. This year the event is of unusual character and of great interest. Fifty years of public service on the part of devoted workers are to be commemorated, and there could be no more fitting place for the commemoration than Edinburgh. It is a special meeting, too, in that for the first time for many years the Library Association gathering will take a really international complexion. If some too exacting critics are forward to say that we have invited a very large number of foreign guests to come to hear themselves talk, we may reply that we want to hear them. There is a higher significance in the occasion than may appear on the surface—for an effort is to be made in the direction of international co‐operation. In spite of the excellent work of the various international schools, we are still insular. Now that the seas are open and a trip to America costs little more than one to (say) Italy, we hope that the way grows clearer to an almost universal co‐working amongst libraries. It is overdue. May our overseas guests find a real atmosphere of welcome, hospitality and friendship amongst us this memorable September!

A TRACE of acrimony has tinctured some recent letters published in these pages. The head and front of the offence seemed to be that the author of the first serious British book on work study failed to recognise the existence of the Institute of Industrial Technicians. Let us preserve a sense of proportion. At the worst it was probably no more than an oversight understandable enough in an author writing a technical work while immersed in the daily duties of his calling. Per se, the fact does not affect the Institute in the slightest degree.

A RECENT visit to Norway gave me the opportunity to see a cross‐section of libraries including those of the Royal University, the Storting and the Nobel Institute, the Deichman Library and its branches in and around Oslo, an industrial research library at Blindern, and provincial public libraries at Fredrikstad, Sarpsborg and Tønsberg. In addition, I visited the Statens Bibliotektilsyn (State Library Office), the Norwegian Library School, and the A/L Biblioteksentralen (the Central Buying Agency for Libraries). I had interesting discussions with Harald L. Tveterås, director of the Royal University Library and State adviser on scientific and research libraries, and also with Anders Andreassen, State director for public and school libraries, whose help throughout was invaluable.

AT the Conference at Folkestone of the London and Home Counties Branch of the Library Association, Mr. Jast gave one more example of his old fire and vigour in a paper which he entitled Publishers and Librarians. No doubt in other pages than ours the text will be given in full. Here, in summary, we may say that he dealt with some of the needs of librarians and readers for well‐produced editions of good books which for some reason were obtainable only in double‐columned small type or otherwise almost unreadable or at any rate unattractive form. He instanced Disraeli's Curiosities of Literature. He urged that if a sufficient number of public and other librarians represented this want to publishers, promising that the libraries would support such an edition, it was unlikely that the request would be ignored. A further suggestion arose from the established fact that in the welter of editions of certain books many were ill‐produced and unworthy to be placed in the hands of unsuspecting bookbuyers. Robinson Crusoe was a case in point, and as many parents desired their sons to read this they were often persuaded to buy editions which were unsuitable. Here he made a suggestion which is entirely practicable: that the Library Association should examine all of the common classics for form and for textual accuracy—a feature in which he alleged that some were deficient—and fix on suitable editions, allowing the publisher to add to their title‐pages “approved by the Library Association.” We seize upon this point first because there is nothing Utopian about it. It is a work that ought to be done.

OF old the public library was wont to take its reputation from the character of the newsroom. That room, as everyone knows, attracts every element in the community and it may be it attracts especially the poorer elements;—even at times undesirable ones. These people in some towns, but perhaps not so often now‐a‐days, have been unwashen and often not very attractive in appearance. It was natural, things being as they are, that the room should give a certain tone to the institution, and indeed on occasion cause it to be avoided by those who thought themselves to be superior. The whole level of living has altered, and we think has been raised, since the War. There is poverty and depression in parts of the country, it is true; but there are relief measures now which did not exist before the War. Only those who remember the grinding poverty of the unemployed in the days, especially the winter days, before the War can realise what poverty really means at its worst. This democratic levelling up applies, of course, to the public library as much as to any institution. At present it may be said that the part of the library which is most apparent to the public and by which it is usually judged, is the lending or home‐reading department. It therefore needs no apology if from time to time we give special attention to this department. Even in the great cities, which have always concentrated their chief attention upon their reference library, to‐day there is an attempt to supply a lending library service of adequate character. We recall, for example, that the Leeds Public Library of old was first and foremost a reference library, with a lending library attached; to‐day the lending library is one of the busiest in the kingdom. A similar judgment can be passed upon Sheffield, where quite deliberately the city librarian would restrict the reference library to works that are of real reference character, and would develop more fully the lending library. In Manchester, too, the new “Reference Library”—properly the new Central Library—has a lending library which issues about 1,500 volumes daily. There must be all over the country many libraries issuing up to a thousand volumes each a day from their central lending departments. This being the case the department comes in for very careful scrutiny.

AFTER some unsuccessful negotiations during the period when the first full‐time schools of librarianship were being established, the Birmingham School was founded in the autumn of 1950. Circumstances were not entirely favourable—the immediate post‐war generation of enthusiastic ex‐service students had already passed through other schools; the accommodation available was indifferent; the administrative support was bad; resources were weak, both in books and in equipment. There was, more importantly, a strong local tradition of part‐time classes in librarianship and little or no conviction that full‐time study was necessary or desirable.

This register of current research in social economics has been compiled by the International Institute of Social Economics. The register does not claim to be comprehensive but is merely an aid for research workers and institutions interested in social economics. The register will be updated and made more comprehensive in the future but this is largely dependent on the inflow of information from researchers in social economics. In order to facilitate this process a standardised form is to be found on the last page of this register. Completed forms, with attached sheets as necessary, should be returned to the compiler: Dr Barrie O. Pettman, Director, International Institute of Social Economics, Enholmes Hall, Patrington, Hull, N. Humberside, England, HU12 OPR. Any other comments on the register will also be welcome.

The purpose of this paper is to review the historic development of the requirements for sub-floor (also known as “basementless space” or “crawl space”) moisture management in the USA, UK and New Zealand (NZ) from 1600s to 1969.

The review of 171 documents, including legislation, research papers, books and magazines, identified three time periods where the focus differed: 1849, removal of impure air; 1850–1929, the use of ground cover and thorough ventilation; and 1930–1969, the development of standards.

Published moisture management guidance has been found from 1683, but until the 1920s, it was based on the provision of “adequate” ventilation and, in the UK, the use of impermeable ground cover. Specific ventilation area calculations have been available from 1898 in the UK, 1922 in the USA and 1924 in NZ. These are based on the area of ventilation per unit floor area, area of ventilation per unit length of perimeter wall, or a combination of both. However, it was not until 1937 in the USA, 1944 in NZ and after the period covered by this paper in the UK, that numerical values were enforced in codes. Vents requirements started at 1 in. of vent per square foot of floor area (0.7 per cent but first published in the USA with a misplaced decimal point as 7 per cent). The average vent area was 0.69 per cent in USA for 19 cases, 0.54 per cent in NZ for 7 cases and 0.13 per cent in UK for 3 cases. The lower UK vent area requirements were probably due to the use of ground covers such as asphalt or concrete in 1854, compared with in 1908 in NZ and in 1947 in USA. The use of roll ground cover (e.g. plastic film) was first promoted in 1949 in USA and 1960 in NZ.

Common themes found in the evolution of sub-floor moisture management include a lack of documented research until the 1940s, a lack of climate or site-based requirements and different paths to code requirements in the three countries. Unlike many building code requirements, a lack of sub-floor moisture management seldom leads to catastrophic failure and consequent political pressure for immediate change. From the first published use of performance-based “adequate” ventilation to the first numerical or “deemed to satisfy” solutions, it took 240 years. The lessons from this process may provide guidance on improving modern building codes.

This is the first time such an evaluation has been undertaken for the three countries.