Libraries, and librarians, in Germany and the United States of America have studied, influenced, and learned from one another for many years. Often with a transatlantic perspective, various aspects of the profession were analysed and published:

Professional associations, other organizations and individual researchers in both countries have polled librarians, and in some cases made the results publicly available. For example, the European Studies Section of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) published its 2018 Membership Survey Report (ACRL European Studies Association, Research & Planning Committee, n.d.), while the umbrella organization, ACRL, does not publish the results of its regular membership surveys (M. J. Petrowski, personal communication, October 16, 2018). The consultancy Ithaka S+R has studied the attitudes and behaviours of US academic collection development and executive-level librarians (Schonfeld & Housewright, 2008) and made the dataset publicly available (Schonfeld & Guthrie, 2013). The Association of German Librarians (VDB—Verein Deutscher Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare) has in recent years not conducted a survey similar to that presented in this paper among its members (D. Oehlmann, personal communication, August 28, 2018).

But to date, there has been no direct empirical comparison of librarians’ individual views in Germany and in the USA, asking the same questions at the same time. The study described in the present article was aimed at closing that gap—regarding librarians’ perspectives and beliefs about the library profession, their own position, the library they currently work in, and the organization that their library is part of—in the hope that this may usefully inform future collaborative efforts and information exchanges between the two countries. These might focus on areas where this study reveals notable differences between Germany and the USA, such as:

This article focuses on library employees working in institutions of higher education, hereinafter referred to as “academic librarians” (see Results section for an analysis of the professional categorization) in Germany and the USA.

Of the 525 academic librarian respondents, 195 (37.1%) were from organizations located in Germany, 330 (62.9%) in the USA. The respondents’ highest academic degree (see Table 1) reflects differences in the typical education of library personnel in the two countries, aside from possible sampling biases (see Methodology section). In all following tables, statistical significance levels < 0.05 are indicated in green.

The “Masters degrees or equivalent” category includes those German Diplom-degrees that were given by Universities (and not Universities of Applied Science: “FH”). This degree level is by far the most prevalent in the USA, while Bachelors (for Germany including Diplom-degrees from Universities of Applied Sciences) and Doctorate degrees are more common in Germany than in the USA. Here and in other tables below, the “Germany – USA %” column reflects the %age among German respondents minus the %age among respondents from the USA, to show relative differences. Doctorate degrees, for instance, were held by 15.9% of respondents in Germany vs. 9% in the USA, for a %age difference of 6.9.

In the following tables, rows are sorted on the column “Germany – USA %”, to show the gradation of difference: the uppermost row shows that this characteristic is expressed strongest in Germany as compared to the USA (positive values), and the lowermost row shows that this characteristic is expressed strongest in the USA as compared to Germany (negative values).

The analysis of subject areas of the respondents’ academic degree(s) point out significant differences (see Table 2).

Together with the previous Table 1, Table 2 supports the stronger codification of being a librarian in the USA as having a Masters degree in library or information science, with Humanities and Social science degrees also notably more prevalent in the US than in the German sample. The differences in degree subjects may relate to the differences of the respondents’ types of work positions (see Table 3).

The “Other” category includes positions in the following areas: collection development/management (N=8); copyright/licensing/legal/repository (N=4); digital initiatives/scholarship (N=4); communication, marketing, outreach, assessment (N=8); subject specialist/librarian (N=8); administration (N=7); scholarly communications/open access (publishing) (N=13); and archives, preservation, special collections (N=7).

While there were no statistically significant differences between the German and American samples regarding how long they have worked in their current position or at their current institution, there were notable differences in how long they have worked in the library field in general: 28.2% (N=44) in Germany vs. 16.1% (N=50) in the USA for 5 or fewer years; 10.9% (N=17) in Germany vs. 19.4% (N=60) in the USA for 21 to 30 years. χ²(4) = 12.386, p < 0.05. These results show that respondents report a shorter work span in libraries in Germany or, respectively, a longer work span in the USA.

Not surprisingly, given the different higher education landscapes in the two countries, in Germany, 97.4% (N=190) of the respondents work in public institutions, but in the USA, only 61.4% (N=202); correspondingly, in private institutions, only 2.1% (N=4) in Germany, but 38.3% (N=126) in the USA.1 χ²(2) = 86.232, p < 0.001.

There were also some notable differences in the highest degree offered to graduates of the respondents’ institutions: Bachelors by only 1% (N=2) in Germany, but 7.9% (N=26) in the USA (presumably, the “four-year colleges”); Masters by 18.5% (N=36) in Germany, but only 11.9% (N=39) in the USA. There was little difference between the two countries, however, in the highest one offered being a Doctoral degree. χ²(4) = 31.854, p < 0.001.

The range of services offered to their faculty/researchers by respondents’ academic libraries in the two countries shows both remarkable differences and similarities (see Table 4). For example, geospatial research support is far more prevalent in the USA, as is ORCID profile support; while in Germany, creation of DOIs for research outputs is more common than in the USA. On the other hand, exactly the same fraction (just below 50%) of institutions in both countries offers research data management help, and publication support is also equally widely offered (˜ 55%).

Survey participants were also asked about the greatest challenges facing their libraries in the next five years, with up to three choices possible (see Table 5). In Germany, the comparatively greater concerns were regarding keeping up with technology, and copyright/licensing issues; in the USA, they were financial support, and institutional and library leadership quality.

Some of the “other” challenges included the following themes: institutional/library restructuring/competition/collaboration, including buildings/spaces thereby affected (N=13); need & retain more/better/diverse staff (N=6); need more or better spaces (N=6).

The survey participants were presented with a series of statements about their own library and asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement with them (see Table 6). The values associated with the answers are: Strongly disagree = 0; Somewhat disagree = 1; Neither agree nor disagree = 2; Somewhat agree = 3; Strongly agree = 4. In this and the following tables, the rows are sorted on the “Germany – USA Mean” column, which reflects the difference in the mean of the two countries’ respondents’ answers.

It is noteworthy that the greater disagreement with “My library receives adequate funding…” in the USA, compared to Germany, echoes “receiving adequate financial support” being the greatest challenge for their library in the next five years among US-respondents (see Table 5). Respondents in the USA also have a notably lower belief of staffing in their library being adequate and employee morale being high. Compared to Germany, they agree notably more that their library or institution expects librarians to engage in scholarly or research activities, and to seek professional association leadership roles; this likely again reflects the differing higher education landscapes and professional cultures in libraries (see Tables 1 & 2) in the two countries, aside from the possibility of sampling bias.

The survey participants were also asked to reflect on their own position (see Table 7), using the same agreement-disagreement scale as in Respondents’ views of their own library. The differences between the means of the German and American respondents were not nearly as high as in that area, barely exceeding ¼ point at the most.

Lastly, the survey participants were asked to reflect on the library profession (see Table 8), using the same agreement-disagreement scale as for their views of their library and their own position.

There were only two statements with statistically significant differences, with German respondents feeling somewhat more (by ⅓ point) that libraries have lost relevance over time and that in other, similarly developed countries, libraries are more respected. However, for the latter statement, “Neither agree nor disagree” was selected by 37.9% of respondents in Germany and 57.4% in the USA, reflecting ambivalence about it, or possibly disinclination to speculate.

The survey participants were presented with several scenarios and asked to gauge the likelihood of them affecting the library profession (see Table 9). Here, the values associated with the responses for their analysis are: Very unlikely = 0; Somewhat unlikely = 1; Neither likely nor unlikely = 2; Somewhat likely = 3; Very likely = 4.

The German respondents felt it more likely (by ½ point) than those in the USA that attracting a new generation to the profession will become more difficult, and that for scholarly articles, Open Access will emerge as the predominant publishing model. The American respondents felt it more likely (by ⅖ of a point) than those in Germany that one or a few commercial entities will dominate the global scientific information infrastructure, and that libraries will be forced to reduce purchasing or subscribing to publisher-controlled information sources due to their rising costs. The least likely scenario in the views of both German and American respondents was that academic/research librarians’ salaries would improve in the future.