20 · ARL Annual Salary Survey 2013–2014
The Revised 2013–2014 ARL Salary Survey
The ARL Annual Salary Survey 2013–2014 reports salary data for all professional staff working in ARL member
libraries. The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) represents the interests of libraries that serve major North
American research institutions. The Association operates as a forum for the exchange of ideas and as an agent for
collective action to influence forces affecting the ability of these libraries to meet the future needs of scholarship.
The ARL Statistics and Assessment program, which produces the salary survey, is organized around collecting,
analyzing, and distributing quantifiable information describing the characteristics of research libraries. The
ARL Annual Salary Survey is the most comprehensive and thorough guide to current salaries in large US and
Canadian academic and research libraries and is a valuable management and research tool.
The job categories and job codes for the university libraries in the ARL Annual Salary Survey 2012–2013 were
revised and modernized after an extensive review process led by the Task Force on Reviewing the ARL
Statistics, the ARL Annual Salary Survey, and the ARL Supplementary Statistics. Members of the ARL Statistics
and Assessment Committee and the task force interviewed ARL directors during the Spring of 2011 and
collected feedback that helped them articulate the key issues, questions, and revisions for annual data collection
purposes. This feedback was shared with ARL library directors and salary survey contacts, and the final list of
job categories was approved by the ARL Board in April of 2011.
The ARL Annual Salary Survey 2013–2014 reflects the continuation of this work. For the second consecutive year,
the salary survey collected working job titles for the university libraries to evaluate the new job codes and their
use in response to feedback from survey coordinators. Also, five new job categories were added to the ARL
Annual Salary Survey 2013–2014: SS for Digital Specialists with Subject expertise; and HFA, SCI, SBS, and AREA
for subject specialists in the Humanities/Fine Arts, Sciences and Technology, Social/Behavioral Sciences, and
Area Studies, respectively.
These new codes highlight the subject-based and subject-specific work of professional librarians in ARL libraries,
thereby providing a more nuanced description of the scope, work responsibilities, and emerging roles of
librarians in research libraries. Please see the instructions for the ARL Annual Salary Survey 2013–2014 on p. 131
for a more complete list of the new and revised job codes.
Initial diagnostics showed that some of the new job categories had too few cases. These categories have been
aggregated into larger groups. For the second consecutive year, the broader Administrative Specialist category
and the Administrative Support category, ADMSPEC (no subgroup) (n=4) and ADMIN (n=176), respectively, were
combined to create one category for those who provide general administrative support that may also encompass
marketing, communications, and IP permissions work. The broader Digital Specialist category (DIGITALSPEC
(no subgroup), n=13) was combined with two subcategories with the lowest number of cases: Digital Specialist
with Subject Expertise, a new category this year (SS, n=53) and Institutional Repository Curator (IR, n=28). Scholarly
Communications (SCHOLAR, n=60) is reported separately this year. Finally, for the second consecutive year,
the broader Functional Specialist category (FSPEC (no subgroup), n=153) and the Coordinator, Team Leader (non-
supervisory responsibility) category (CTL, n=28) were combined to create one broad category for individuals whose
specialized work is not subject based and who do not have significant supervisory responsibilities.
This revision of the ARL Annual Salary Survey job categories was conducted with the understanding that the
salary survey attempts to provide a standardized schema to fit more than 100 different and complex research
library structures. So, any such standardization is viewed as a reasonable and practical schema that meets
management and planning needs to a certain extent, yet it is likely that it will leave important evidence outside
any adopted framework. The ARL Statistics and Assessment Committee and the ARL Board Task Force on
revising the annual surveys recognizes that the revision of the salary survey job categories is an iterative