College and Research Libraries JOHN M. CHRIST Functional Analysis and Library Science Functional analysis is a tool with significant positive implications for library research because of: (1) its facility for investigating the social system of which the librar.y is an integral part; and (2) its direction towards heuristic considerations and metaphysical theory long neg- lected in library science. The sociological approach rather than the mechanistic or mathematical approach to functionalism should be adopted by library researchers because of its ability to develop func- tional relationships rather than deterministic, causal relationships. FuNCTIONAL ANALYSIS is a research methodology that has received consid- erable attention from the disciplines in the social sciences. Because the library is an important element in the social system and is initially concerned with human educational behavior, it is logi- cally consistent that librarians consider adopting a research method that has been highly effective in other socially scientific areas. For the librarian, the functional ap- proach to analysis has particula;r ad- vantages. These advantages stem from the nature of phenomena in library sci- ence and from the nature of the func- tional method. What is significant about the func- tional method is that it is an analytic process which attempts to establish de- pendencies between phenomena which are considered to be essential and in- terrelated parts of an integral whole. Consequently, the functional approach to investigation is highly adaptable to elements in the social system. Social scientist Claude Levy-Strauss, for exam- ple, stresses that "all aspects of social life, all institutions, whether social, po- litico-legal, economic, technological, re- Mr. Christ is Director of the Library at Rockhurst College in Kansas City. 242/ ligious, or aesthetic, form a related whole."1 The library is contained within that related whole to which Levy-Strauss refers. And, because of the widespread nature of the library's educational, eco- nomic, social, and political activities, understanding the complexity of these relationships requires an analytic sys- tem which will maximize the interrelat- edness of these varied social relation- ships. The premise of the functionalist po- sition is that no human custom, social institution, or set of behaviors exist in a vacuum, that there must always be an interplay between the component ele- ments which comprise the social system, and that a continuing interdependence between them is created on many dif- ferent levels. 2 Functionalism is not a particularly elaborate or complex conceptual frame- work within which to work. Philosopher- economist I. C. Jarvie defines function- alism as an analytic tool very succinctly. ~~As a rough first approximation," he said, "we can say it is a method of ex- 1 Claude Levy-Strauss, Structural Anthropology, tr. by C. Jacobson and B. C. Schoepf (New York: Basic Books, 1963), p. 277. 2 Robert F. Spencer, "The Nature and Value of Functionalism in Anthropology," in The American Academy of Political and Social Science, Functionalism in the Social Sciences (Philadelphia: AAPS, 1965), p. 13. Functional Analysis and Library Science I 243 plaining social events and institutions by specifying the functions they perform."3 The overall development of the func- tional approach to investigation in sci- ence has taken two approaches. Jarvie explained, At this stage we can split functionalism in two: the theory that every action or in- stitution has a function or functions, and the theory that societies are well inte- grated, well adjusted, and seamless. The first assumption depends upon the second; it is because societies are seamless that all actions and institutions have a function. The first theory asserts the existence of functions: (i.e.) "There exists a function for all events and institutions." The second theory makes a factual assertion about the character of existent societies: "Present so- cieties contain no nonfunctional elements." The first is useful but unfalsifiable; the second is restrictive and false. Insofar as functionalism assumes a well-integrated, efficiently adjusted, and seamless society, it is taking on the character of a meta- physical theory, that is, a theory that can- not be shown to be false. 4 Jarvie's statement pertains to the phi- losophy of the functional approach to scientific investigation. It follows from a validity standpoint that funqtionalism and the functional approach are limited in that they cannot be verified; that is, the results of functional analysis cannot be tested at any mathematical degree of confidence, but only in the general terms of logical consistency. Such a lim- itation is particularly relevant, however, only if the results of the investigation require, or are thought to require statis- tical verification. Such verification, how- ever, is generally associated with quan- titative measurement. The functional ap- proach to the library as a social institu- tion within a social system is highly qualitative or attributive. Thus, while a functional analysis of the library does take on the character of a metaphysical a Ibid., I. C. Jarvie, "Limits to Functionalism and Alternatives to It in Anthropology," p. 19. • Ibid., p. 27. theory this is not particularly debili- tating. The verification of the results of such an investigation will pertain more to the logical consistency of the results than to their being verified at a statis- tical level of confidence. The functional approach to investiga- tion is also relevant for the library from another point of view. This pertains to the trends which the application of func- tionalism have taken. Used in a mathe- matical or mechanistic sense, functional analysis has taken a rigid, deterministic bent. Mathematical functionalism ex- presses the relationships between two elements, two phenomena, or two or more variables stating a condition or conditions of the relation or relation- ships. For example, the mathematical approach to functional analysis might state that for every value of one phe- nomenon there are one or more deter- minate values of the other phenomenon. This type of functionalism, therefore, in- cludes the notion of a causal relation- ship between independent and depend- ent variables. That is, the second phe- nomenon, the dependent variable, is said to be a function of the first phe- nomenon or independent variable. If society were considered as the inde- pendent variable, the library, educa- tion, government, hospitals, all social phenomena could be treated as depend- ent variables. If the library were con- sidered as the independent variable in analysis, then social institutions as well as the patron, book materials, etc., could be considered as dependent variables of the library as a social entity. The use of the mathematical or mech- anistic approach to functionalism, how- ever, has less applicability in library science than the second or sociological approach to functional analysis. The na- ture of the phenomena in library science seems to be less mutually exclusive than that of mathematics or the physical sci- ences. Therefore, phenomena pertaining -------~ - - - ------ -----, 244 I College & Research Libraries • May 1969 to the library are also dynamic rather than highly static, or rigid. Sherman Roy Krupp discussed the applicability of the mechanistic approach to func- tional analysis in economics. He said: Functional theory focuses on the unity and directedness of a total system, w4ile mechanistic theory tends to concentrate on the precise determination of the relation- ship between parts of a system. . . . In mechanical theories the parts are assumed to be independent entities which are com- bined to special rules to yield aggregates. These aggregates obey the same general laws that apply to the parts. 5 To discuss relationships between the library and other elements in the social sphere in terms of general mechanical laws is not valid. Such an approach re- quires statistical validation because of the implication of certitude that is in- volved. Thus, such an approach is not applicable to library science and, there- fore, not an effective manner to under- take scientific investigation. An approach more suited to library analysis is what is commonly called the sociological functional theory. Krupp re- ferred to this method of functional anal- ysis as a "theory (which) assumes a sys- tem to have a basic organizing principle of goals and self-regulating mecha- nisms."'6 The sociological approach to function- al analysis has a greater degree of rele- vance for library research than the mechanistic approach because the meth- od is more closely related to the type of phenomena and social system which comprises the library as an institution. The mechanistic approach, because of its assumed rigidity of ;the phenomena and relationships involved naturally leads to a cause-effect, deductive-indu·c- tive approach to research and scientific analysis. This research method, often as- sociated or equated with the historical 5 Ibid., Sh~nnan Roy Krupp, "Equilibrium Theory in Economics and in Functional Analysis as Types of Explanation," p. 65, p. 70. e Ibid. or comparative methods, has typified most library research in the past. An- thropologist Robert F. Spencer points to the limitations of the deductive-induc- tive method for evaluating social phe- nomena and to the advantages of the functional approach when dealing with social reality. Spencer stated: In general terms, however, a problem of causality is at base a problem in history, one founded in a diachronic rather than a synchronic method. The methodology of functionalism sees sociocultural systems as ends, thereby ruling. out the cross-cultural comparisons which have been so essential to historical formulations .... Comparison of an institution between several societies, as in the case of the couvade above, is clearly different from analyzing it in re- lation to its place in a single social entity. In the latter case the issue is one of mode rather than of cause. 7 The close correlation between previ- ous library research which has been largely historically oriented and the functional method mentioned by Spen- cer was referred to by Carl M. White. He said: Writings on library history tend to describe individual libraries or the libraries of a country or period. These accounts can be expected to cover such topics as: the growth of collections, acquisition, classifi- cation and cataloging, housing, finance, regulations and personnel. All of this in- formation is good as far as it goes, but too often it leaves the reader to search in vain among sorted facts for some internal order -some mosaic-which will give the several fragments range of meaning. It is of course plain to all that libraries are among the things that are products of human effort, so if some larger configuration of meaning is to be found in their history, it is better to relate them to the whole stream of social evolution than to separate them as it were from human strivings. 8 Author White's concern is clearly for a functional analysis of the library. While past library research has pro- 7 Ibid., Spencer, p. 8. 8 Carl M. White ( ed.) Bases of Modern Librarian- ship (New York: Macmillan, 1964), p. 1. Functional Analysis and Library Science I 245 duced a deposit of factual data, it has not developed the kinds of relationships or understanding needed to produce theory for the profession. Many produc- tive authors such as Shera, Butler, and Foskett have consistently pleaded with the profession to develop philosophical concepts and principles in order that theories of relationships and procedures of implementation might be developed. The underlying assumptions of such a point of view are that before a philoso- phy can be defined working theories must be uncovered and examined for their applicability to the phenomena of the discipline and the type of system which constitutes the library. Barbara G. Petro£ made a plea similar to those mentioned above. "Librarians," she stated, ''have come to recognize the val- ue of research to the profession and much collecting of data is being accom- plished .... There has been little at- tempt thus far to develop an adequate theoretical framework into which prac- tical research can be hung. Such an ex- amination of the theoretical bases of li- brarianship will probably have to be made by library educators rather than by practitioners."9 While this statement is accurate in that there is a drastic need for theory development in library science, the assumption that this will probably occur with library educators may be erroneous. Such development is not taking place in the library schools at this time. The specific applicability of the so- ciological approach of functional analy- sis for library science concerns the treat- ment of both the phenomena and the system in that approach. Rather than mechanically rigid, this approach allows for interplay and overlap between re- lationships which define function. This is particularly beneficial in a system which does not possess rigid, determin- 9 Barbara G. Petro£, " Theory: the X Factor in Li- brarianship," College & Research Libraries, XXVI (July 1965 ) , 316. istic functions, such as the library, or where relationships are known to be definite and constant. The specific difficulty which library science realizes in maximizing its utiliza- tion of the functional method of analy- sis pertains to the purpose or end of the library. Such a question is basically a philosophical consideration. Library sci- ence, however, has not developed a clear, well-defined philosophical base. As a result explanations of the library tend to be forced into a causal orbit where cause-effect relationships exhaust the scope of the research. This deduc- tive-inductive approach, paramount in the history of the discipline, is only one way of deriving explanations. The cause-effect approach to explanation is unilinear where the functional ap- proach is multi-linear. The functional approach, because of its horizontal and vertical . thrusts, is a much more advan- tageous perspective for library theorists because it is involved with the totality of human society rather than just spe- cific, well-defined, rigid aspects of so- cial life. The library, for example, has the potential to be constantly concerned with the life of the individual and with his varied activities. Because the scope of the library's activities covers the whole social spectrum, the potentiality for relationships is enormous. This is not true of other social institutions. The schools, the hospital, the business world, the military, etc., are all concerned with the social person directly only at spe- cific periods or for specific durations of time. From the standpoint of the social- ization process the only possible time that the library does not have the po- tentiality for influence through direct contact with the individual is from birth to about one year of age. Once the so- cialization process has gained momen- tum so that the child begins to interact rather than only react to social stimuli, the library may take a continuous part in the child's life. The structure of other 246 I College & Research Libraries • May 1969 social institutions, however, prevents in- fluence until specific periods or points in the person's life. It is these relation- ships to the human person and the end or purpose of the library which need philosophical development and which, being presently underdeveloped, limit functional and operational developments of the library. Since the library is concerned not on- ly with the records of human activity but with the human person as well, its basic framework is as a social institution. And, since the library exists in social ex- perience with other social institutions, it is necessary, for a proper understand- ing of the purpose of the library, to con- sider its relation to society as a whole and to the diverse elements within so- ciety which comprise the social frame- work. The functional approach, being multi-linear, offers more of a chance to achieve such analysis than does the his- torical, or comparative, approach. These linear approaches to investigation do of- fer advantages in subanalysis in that they offer the researcher dealing with the library rigid parameters within which to work. Thus, understanding the internal functions of the library as a closed system could be achieved by both a functional and deductive-inductive methodology. Anthropologist Robert F. Spencer takes an optimistic approach to function- al analysis. ccThe functional approach is at base simple,'' he said, ccit seeks to do no more than assay the place of a par- ticular element of culture or societal in- stitution in relation to other elements."10 The casual tone in Spencer's remarks 10 Op. cit., Spencer, p. I. should not suggest that functional anal- ysis is to be viewed as the panacea of research. Quite the contrary. Function- al analysis is only one of many ap- proaches to scientific investigation, all of which should be evaluated for their ap- plicability to library science. Function- alism does have disadvantages which should be noted. ·. I. C. Jarvie pointed out one general disadvantage to functionalism which happens, at this stage in the history and development of library science, to have positive significance for the field. Jarvie said, "I shall argue, its lack of explana- tory power, its unsatisfactoriness as ex- planation, and the constricting effect of its assumptions about the nature and working of social systems. Its merits are mainly heuristic. 11 Jarvie's complaints echo statements made elsewhere to the effect that the main fault of the functional method as an analytic tool is its lack of verifiability and its tendency to be nothing more than metaphysical theory. As Jarvie said, its merits are mainly heuristic. But this is the point. What is needed in li- brary science at this point in time and at this stage of its professional develop- ment is metaphysical theory. Functional analysis leads directly towards heuristic considerations. Hopefully, out of func- tionalistic considerations to be devel- oped in the future by library theorists and researchers will come the function- al theories and principles which will constitute the basis for a philosophy of library science which has long been called for by leading theorists in the profession. • • u Op. cit., Jarvie, p. 18.