Expanding the Standard to Include Multiple Products

As former chair of the LBI Standards Committee (during the last revision process), co-editor of the 1986 LBI Standard, and co-author of the Guide to the LBI Standard, I would like to offer my thoughts on how the next edition of the LBI Standard might be improved. The purpose of this article is to kick off the Open Forum column of the New Library Scene with a thought provoking topic that is not generally agreed upon by the members of the LBI. I encourage all readers to submit their own views on this and any other subject of interest.

Industry standard's must be reviewed on a regular basis, usually every five years. That review must include the companies that comprise the industry, the vendors that provide materials or services to the industry, the customers of the industry, and other interested parties. The 1986 edition of the LBI Standard complied with all of those requirements. A true national standard is referred to as a NISO Standard. "NISO, National Information Standards Organization, is a 52-year-old non-profit organization accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to develop voluntary technical standards used in libraries, information services, and publishing. Fifty NISO standards are now in print and ten standards are scheduled for publication in 1991-92."

The LBI Standard is currently on track to begin a review by a NISO committee that will ultimately lead to the publication of a joint LBI/NISO Standard--the ninth edition or perhaps it will be referred to as the first edition. This process should be viewed as healthy for the industry and positive for all concerned.

One of the primary benefits of a joint LBI/NISO Standard for Library Binding is that it will be free of any possible hint of serving the self-interest of a particular group of businesses. By definition, a NISO Standard must include input, participation, and approval from key parties who might be affected by the document. This does not mean to imply that the 1986 LBI Standard does not meet that test. It means that an LBI/NISO Standard would be beyond reproach. Furthermore, it would formalize the very healthy process of keeping the LBI Standard in tune with the needs of the marketplace.

The LBI Standard is a key document to most library binders, most vendors of bookbinding materials and supplies, and most consumers of library binding. The Standard sets the rules by which we all must live. It specifies what materials and processes must be included in products that are referred to as Library Binding. In theory it prevents binders from cheating on the baseline quality that customers have come to expect. Workmanship, service, and price may vary from company to company but consumers should be able to compare apples with apples in terms of the basic product so long as Certified Standard Library Binding has been specified.

A customer need not believe the promises of a self-motivated sales representative. The experience of many years, many knowledgeable professionals, and many millions of time-tested quality bindings take the risk out of purchasing library binding--if you choose Certified Standard Library Binding. While other binding products may be of high quality and may meet a particular library's needs, there is no measure of comparison against which the average librarian can judge the merits of these "other products".

The assurance that Certified Standard Library Binding is quality library binding, explains why bindery and library professionals pay so much attention to the Library Binding Institute Standard for Library Binding. Volumes that have been bound according to the specifications in the LBI Standard will meet the short-term and long-term preservation needs of actively used collections that deserve the best.

One of the weaknesses of the current LBI Standard is that it does not differentiate between the three major categories of binding. Periodical binding--the binding of loose issues of serial publications whose spine stamping patterns must match. Book binding--the binding or rebinding of hard cover books and reference volumes. Paperback binding--the binding of paper cover books into hard cover library bindings.

Each of these three categories of binding require a different blend of the options available in the current LBI Standard. Because periodicals are often comprised of two or more issues, someone must check to see that issues are in the correct sequence and that none are missing. This is not necessary for books or paperbacks. Paperbacks, however, are usually not bound with Group F buckram as the covering material because this heavy fabric would make the binding too inflexible. C grade book cloth is often used as the covering material for paperback bindings. Binders have developed distinct products that match the needs of the types of volumes they are asked to bind with the options that are available in the LBI Standard.

Most library binders also offer non-standard (economy) products for one or more of these three categories. These binding styles sometimes do not meet the specifications of the LBI Standard and they do not have generic names that are uniformly applied. Most library binders explain the differences between their LBI Standard products and their non-standard bindings to their customers, and most consumers of library binding accept this situation.

The 1986 Library Binding Institute Standard for Library Binding is rich with options for the sophisticated binding consumer to tailor a binding program to their particular needs. Volumes can be custom collated or be bound as received (standard collation). Leaves can be attached by any of five different methods of leaf attachment. Text blocks can be trimmed or left untrimmed. Spines can be rounded and backed or left flat backed. These choices and the many others that are incorporated in the LBI Standard allow better library bindings that meet the individual needs of particular volumes.

Most librarians do not purchase the traditional LBI Standard binding for all of their volumes. (I define traditional LBI Standard binding as a collated, sewn or adhesive bound, trimmed, rounded and backed, cloth lined, group F buckram covered binding with options for special procedures such as pockets and no strict limitations on size.) Furthermore, most librarians do not specify all of the binding options that they require on a volume by volume basis. Library binder's multiple products simplify binding decisions because they incorporate a sensible array of binding techniques appropriate for certain kinds of volumes (e.g., paperbacks that have no cloth spine lining and group-C book cloth for the cover material). This simplifies bindery preparation for the library.

Unfortunately the specifications for these products are not well defined, are not generally agreed upon, do not have generic names, and are not included in the Library Binding Institute Standard for Library Binding. In my opinion, this is a major weakness of the LBI Standard. While the Guide to the Library Binding Institute Standard for Library Binding does describe non-standard products, it does not clear up the confusion regarding what is and is not LBI Standard binding.

The time has come for the library binding industry to write specifications for the array of products that library binders are routinely providing. This is not to say that anyone should abandon Certified Standard Library Binding. On the contrary, it is still the best product available and the most cost effective way to protect significant investments in circulating library volumes. It simply is appropriate that the LBI Standard be expanded to include the variety of products that have achieved widespread acceptance in the marketplace. Some of these meet the current LBI specifications and some do not. In order for the LBI Standard to be a useful tool for librarians and binders, it must include specifications for the majority of the library binding products that are available.

Nature and business alike abhor a vacuum. If only one broadly defined product specification exists, entrepreneurs will refine specialized versions to meet market needs. Purists say that you should not contaminate the parent by recognizing the children. In a dynamic industry, change is unavoidable. Changing market forces pressure binders to seek different solutions to new challenges. The LBI must keep pace. The last edition of the LBI Standard formally recognized that page by page collation would no longer be routine, but would become an option (i.e., Custom Collation). It also recognized that one primary method of leaf attachment--oversewing--was not meeting the preservation and use needs of modern collections. In keeping with that progression of logical evolution, the time has come to recognize that no one formula (specification) for binding can be a universal solution to varied binding needs.

By recognizing the variety that exists in the product array of library binders and attempting to standardize it, the LBI can provide an enormous service to all of its members as well as their customers. An expanded LBI Standard will provide baseline specifications that will enable fair cost/quality comparisons between different products. Apples to apples comparisons will again have meaning. It will eliminate confusion in the marketplace as to what Certified Library Binding is and is not. Is it everything that a certified library binder manufactures or just those products that meet the specifications of the LBI Standard?

The final seal of approval for all library binding specifications must and should come from the composite group of varied interests that are designated as parties to the LBI/NISO Standard writing process. Library binding is not such a rapidly evolving technology that a five year cycle of review is intolerable. Library administrators are not caretakers of materials that can be dealt with lightly. Our market and our industry look to the LBI for leadership in these matters. It is our obligation to respond.

The danger in this line of reasoning is that quality will be destroyed or watered down by too many options. Customers may become confused. Costs may actually increase if binders are forced to manufacture smaller, less efficient batches of many different products. Recognizing and thereby legitimizing non-standard binding products may be akin to opening Pandora's Box. After working so hard to establish stringent quality specifications, why should the LBI endorse lesser products? Doing so may be our Waterloo.

The fact is that these products exist because the marketplace demands them. Our best customers are sophisticated buyers that understand binding technology and know what they need. Binders have already adapted their products and production lines to this changing reality. The LBI and the LBI Standard must do the same.

The primary strength of the 1986 LBI Standard for Library Binding is that it codified the leading edge of library binding technology (at that time) to address the library community's binding needs. It went beyond most expectations. It was bold and broke new ground for the LBI but not for the marketplace. The 1986 LBI Standard merely formalized the status quo that the marketplace demanded. In order for the LBI Standard to remain relevant in today's marketplace it must continue to push forward onto new territory that has proven to be solid. Change without reason is dangerous, but market driven change is a necessity. In these times of rapidly evolving information technology, library binders cannot assume that the definition of quality products is static. If library binders do not force our industry Standard to evolve in tandem with the needs of our market and our products, then we can only blame ourselves for the chaos that will result.

The LBI Standard must be viewed as a moving target or more aptly--an ever higher plateau to which we must aspire. If the LBI Standard becomes a more complete document with multiple products defined and specified, our customers will be the beneficiaries. Addressing this challenge together through the LBI will be in everyone's best interest--enabling binders to provide an array of quality products that will meet specific needs but remain protected by the seal of Certified Library Binding.

Paul Parisi, President
Acme Bookbinding

This article first appreared in:
The New Library Scent
Vol. 11, No. 1, Feb. 1992