Waging a successful library funding campaign: a case study

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to identify common arguments and points of resistance to library development projects, and to outline effective political and communication strategies, which can be used by library administrators and supporters when pursuing funding campaigns.

Design/methodology/approach

This study analyzed media messages from local newspaper and radio stations, including open comments posted in online discussion threads, over a one-year period. Interviews were also conducted with the library's director and foundation development officer.

Findings

Analysis of media coverage drew out primary points of resistance, while the interviews provided strategies utilized to counteract anti-library rhetoric.

Research limitations/implications

Further comparison with other library funding campaigns is needed. Particular areas to be studied include the relationship between the tone of online discussion forum posts and actual voting results; also, the impact of strongly opinionated posters on other participants.

Practical implications

Library administrators seeking public support should strongly consider the following points which contributed to the success of the campaign analyzed in this article: The need to understand common public responses and points of resistance to proposed library projects. The importance of a supportive city council. The need to reduce uncertainty about potential physical locations. Understanding the distinction between political vs marketing campaigns. Identifying potential supporters, regardless of whether they were library users.

Originality/value

This study is important because in seeking public support for major projects, administrators must be prepared to counter common anti-library messages. Strategies undertaken in this campaign may be generalized to libraries of other types.

Citation

S. Roberts, B. and L. Hoover, C. (2014), "Waging a successful library funding campaign: a case study", Library Management, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 164-174. https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-02-2013-0016