The CFO of a medium-sized campus found a vendor to outsource library services, asserting that this will save the campus money. What should the director do to convince the CFO that this isn’t a good solution to the campus’ financial woes?

• Example scenario outline
• Example supporting infographic

• Audience

• • Primary: Chief Financial Officer
  • Secondary: Additional stakeholders (President’s Cabinet, students, faculty, etc.)

• Message

• • Focus: Make the case for the importance of the academic library and its value to the student experience. 
    • • Back it up with data — Actual effect on university budget; impact on retention, long-term academic success, engagement in research, etc.
      • Compare the pros and cons of outsourcing versus retaining library resources and services (hidden current and future costs, time lost in pre-planning and transitioning, loss of control, loss of institutional knowledge and expertise, etc.).

• Delivery method

• • Contingent on a number of factors:
    • • The CFO’s preferred communication style
      • Your relationship with them
      • Decision timeline
      • Channel: Could range from email, to one-on-one conversation, to infographic report, to full-scale presentation.
      • Schedule: Depends on the decision timeline, method of delivery and frequency.

• Source

• • The owner of the messaging (in this case, the library director) should consider the following: 
    • • How stakeholders with buy-in can help support the case
      • Who on campus can serve as allies (deans, students, staff, others), and what resources will they need to support the messaging?

Tailoring your approach to your audience—especially their unique roles and priorities—is key to making a strong case.

Primary Audience: The CFO
Your central mission is to demonstrate that the library and its staff are:

• Invaluable to the student experience

• Leaders in preparing for the future of higher education

• A strategic investment—not a cost to be cut

Position the library as a driver of student success, retention, and institutional reputation—core concerns for any CFO managing long-term financial sustainability.

Secondary Audience: Broader Stakeholders
This may include cabinet members, faculty, and students. These groups not only benefit most from library services, but can also serve as strong advocates. Their support can reinforce your message and build institutional momentum to keep the library fully integrated and resourced.

An effective strategy for crafting talking points is to clearly state your message focus, then outline how you’ll support it with compelling evidence.

Message Focus:
Make the case for the library’s essential role in student success, its value in a shifting higher ed landscape, and its ability to bridge in-person and virtual learning.

Audience Mindset:
CFOs approach decisions pragmatically, often focusing on budget impact. In this context, data speaks loudest—and libraries have strong numbers to back their value.

Data-driven points to emphasize:

• Libraries have been receiving a shrinking piece of the pie for years. How much money could outsourcing really save the university if the library already takes up such a small percentage of the overall budget? 
• Libraries have been the most strategic units on campus in terms of embracing a technologically fluid existence. Long before instructors in the classroom had to abruptly pivot to virtual or hybrid instruction, libraries had been adopting new methods of existing and thriving in a technologically advanced world with a diminishing need for tangible resources.
• Dozens of scholarly articles assert that students who use library resources and engage directly with staff are retained at a significantly higher rate than those who do not. Moreover, they are more likely to succeed academically in the long term. Point out that every student the library helps retain is x amount of tuition revenue saved. 

Additional metrics can highlight the library’s contributions to research, faculty collaboration, and instructional quality. The more your team can quantify its impact, the more persuasive the case.

Help the CFO Compare Options:

A strong message also anticipates the alternative: outsourcing. The library director should help the CFO see the true cost of this choice, including:

• Hidden costs (legal, tech infrastructure, service contracts)
• Loss of control over collections and ability to adapt services
• Staff time required for planning and transition
• Loss of ownership of data and intellectual property

These are budgetary and operational landmines—not cost savings. As the expert in library services, the director can lay out these risks clearly and constructively.

Once the message has been developed and the evidence to support it is curated, a delivery method can be determined. The channels the crisis communication team will use to deliver the message are contingent on a number of factors, including:

• The library director’s relationship with the CFO
• The CFO’s preferred communication style 
• Decision timeline

The most important question to ask in regard to determining a delivery method is, what will get your audience’s (in this case the CFO’s) attention?

At this point, the expectation is that the crisis communication team will be able to articulate a clear case for retaining library services with some urgency. But they don’t have to go it alone. The library’s stakeholders – those who benefit from having services reside in-house – are likely willing and want to support the cause. With the appropriate resources, these individuals can easily be mobilized as allies.

When a staff member’s actions violate institutional values—especially in a public or visible way—it's critical to act swiftly, speak clearly, and reaffirm the library’s commitment to integrity, inclusion, and accountability.

Recommended Response Framework:

• Acknowledge the situation and apologize for the harm caused.

• Affirm the library’s values and make clear that the individual’s actions do not reflect them.

• Communicate any disciplinary action taken and outline steps to prevent similar issues in the future.

Example Message:

“We are deeply sorry for the harm caused by the recent statements made by [individual, if appropriate]. These views do not reflect the values of our library or institution. We are taking immediate action in line with university policies and are committed to upholding a safe, respectful environment for all.”

Why This Matters:
Clear, direct communication in moments like these builds trust. Stakeholders need to know the situation is being taken seriously and that your team is acting with integrity—not avoiding accountability or minimizing harm.

This approach helps:

• Reassure your community that the library remains aligned with campus values

• Prevent misinformation and speculation

• Model the kind of transparency and leadership expected in higher education today

Whenever possible, work in collaboration with your institution’s HR and communications teams to ensure consistency and compliance with campus-wide policies.

When technology fails—whether due to system outages, vendor issues, or internal disruptions—it can have immediate and widespread impact. In these situations, transparency, reassurance, and timely updates are key to maintaining trust.

• Response Strategy: Acknowledge the issue, apologize for the disruption, and communicate that a resolution is in progress.
• Example Message: “We’re aware of a technical issue currently affecting access to library materials for students and faculty. We apologize for the inconvenience and want to assure you that we’re working with our service provider to resolve it as quickly as possible. We’ll continue to share updates as we have them.”
• Why This Matters: Proactively addressing the problem helps reduce frustration, shows that the library is actively managing the situation, and prevents misinformation. Stakeholders feel reassured knowing the issue is being handled and that they’ll be kept in the loop.