Introduction

As academic universities have evolved, so have their libraries and what their libraries offer. One such evolution has been the proliferation of leisure reading collections, also commonly referred to as popular reading, recreational reading, or extracurricular reading collections, in which titles of various genres are offered, and which are often, but not always, separated from other collections in browsable displays. Regarding material collections, there is inconsistent discourse about what type of literature is necessary in academic libraries, particularly when some collections, such as leisure, include titles that are likely to be offered by public libraries, or are easier to individually purchase.

Popular titles can face conflicting perspectives in terms of support for inclusion in academic libraries, and much of the literature regarding what leisure collections academic libraries currently hold in their stacks focuses on fiction holdings. Few articles discuss the presence of non-fiction popular titles in academic libraries and where, or how, they are held. As business librarians, the authors found it interesting that many popular business titles can be considered leisure reading, but also serve as a staple part of a general academic collection. Popular business books play a key role in providing practical guidance, insights, and inspiration to students, faculty, and researchers in the business and management domain, and can fulfill important roles in the curriculum, as demonstrated by explorations of the popular economics genre in the classroom (Mills, 2014). These texts often go beyond theoretical concepts, with a broader perspective on business practices, leadership, entrepreneurship, innovation, and more. Popular business books facilitate the application of academic theories to real-world scenarios. As such, collecting non-academic works in the business field could serve as a bridge between scholarly research and the wider business community, shedding light on current trends and developments, and offering insights into the latest thinking among practitioners and thought leaders.

Therefore, the authors seek to explore how libraries are approaching popular business books in their collections in an attempt to understand the academic perceptions of such titles. To do this, the authors conducted an exploratory investigation of the catalog holdings of Academic Business Library Directory (ABLD) libraries, a diverse group of libraries that all have a strong business library presence. Through this study, the authors hope to help move towards a better understanding of the position of non-fiction popular business titles within academic libraries.

Literature Review

Much of the literature on leisure reading was written in the late part of the 20th century and in the early 2000’s. The research primarily consists of libraries describing the process of promoting leisure reading collections within their libraries, assessing student reading behavior, or discussing the circulation statistics of their leisure reading collection. There is some research about leisure and how it can help with stress and mindfulness (Dewan, 2023). Finally, there is some interesting literature about university student leisure reading habits, especially in other parts of the world. Researchers Brookbank, Davis and Harlan do excellent work detailing the history of leisure reading literature within academic libraries in their article discussing the status of popular reading collections in academic libraries, published in 2018. Through this historical overview, Brookbank, Davis, and Harlan assert that, after a period in which leisure was considered unnecessary in academic libraries, perceptions began to shift. Behler (2011), for example, notes that throughout the 21st century, academic libraries became more focused on the overall user, rather than being solely preoccupied with a user’s academic needs. As such, librarians began to think, and write about, how their collections and services should adapt to make reading a lifelong habit (Behler, 2011).

In the early 2010’s, research began to emerge discussing the position of specific popular reading genres within academia. Many of these authors investigated ways in which academic libraries supported research related to literature often considered only as pleasure reading. One of the first works written on this topic was Crawford and Harris’ discussion of the presence of best sellers in academic libraries (2001). Taking as a given that best sellers should be part of academic library collections, the focus of their article was on how long best sellers should remain within a collection, until they stop circulating, or perhaps forever, in order to maintain cultural heritage and build a robust collection. To examine collecting practices, the authors explored a consortium of libraries using a predetermined list of top-selling books to document the presence or absence of each item in the library collections. Findings indicated that among the 110 best-seller fiction items included in the study, all but one was owned by at least one of the twenty libraries included in the study. Among the nonfiction works, 105 were owned and fifteen were not. The authors expressed surprise that fifteen non-fiction best-sellers were absent from any library holdings, suggesting a neglect or lack of interest in acquiring items of cultural significance, despite their status as best-sellers. The authors recommended future research to investigate the decision-making process in collecting best-selling items and what kinds of librarians may oversee choosing popular titles for academic libraries. Their study illuminates the purpose and role these materials can play as enduring components of academic collections.

Mulcahy (2006) continued the investigative path set by Crawford and Harris by undertaking a comparable study, albeit with a specific focus on science fiction novels found within academic collections. A selection of science fiction titles were checked against the holdings of 112 Association of Research Libraries (ARL) libraries. Mulcahy’s investigation aimed to assess the extent of marginalization experienced by science fiction novels within academic libraries. As such, his investigation was focused on collection patterns concerning award-winning or widely recognized science fiction works compared to lesser-known ones, as well as considerations such as the gender and nationality of the science fiction authors. Mulcahy’s research revealed that most ARL libraries do not collect science fiction to the extent that would support in-depth research. He concluded his article by emphasizing the need to investigate whether academic libraries are actively cultivating robust general collections for popular literature, or if they are relegating such responsibilities to special collections or specialized libraries. Wagner (2010) conducted an almost identical study to Mulcahy’s, referencing his methodology, but with graphic novels. Wagner finds that the presence of graphic novels in library holdings is even more inadequate compared to that of science fiction. She notes that this is concerning, especially considering graphic novels often serve as reflections of popular thought and contemporary culture. Wagner emphasizes the significance of graphic novels in enhancing the curriculum, supporting research initiatives, and enriching the collections of academic universities. Regarding further research, Wagner suggests a study examining the specific cataloging and shelving practices of comics in academic libraries, noting that such placement studies can yield tangible insights into the attitudes of academic libraries toward such materials and illuminate their intended role within the academic library setting (2010). Finally, Gerhart’s article discussing the placement of popular fiction in academic collections (2011) takes research on collecting popular material one step further. While other studies only examined the extent to which academic libraries collect specific genres of popular material, Gerhart looked at what happens to popular materials once they are in the collection. Like Mulcahy’s and Wagner’s studies, Gerhart chose to examine the holdings of the ARL libraries and selected thirty-one titles of current popular fiction from the “Hardcover Fiction” lists of the New York Times Best Sellers over three years. The author noted where each title was shelved and the name of the collection it was shelved with in the ARL libraries. The results of the study indicated great diversity in the ways that ARL libraries manage popular fiction titles. While all the institutions held at least one title, the titles were placed in varying locations, though Gerhart did find that popular fiction was being placed within library stacks at higher rates than within popular browsing collections. Overall, Gerhart’s study indicates there is no standard model for popular fiction placement. Gerhart speculates this could be because of the varying collecting missions of individual libraries and does not necessarily have to be seen as something negative. In the conclusion of this article, Gerhart suggests further studies could result in recommendations for successful popular fiction placement models in order to bolster use and understanding of subject-specific collections.

The existing literature highlights a notable interest in understanding how academic libraries view and integrate popular titles into their literature collections. Despite research on the holdings of fiction genres, there is a gap in the study of non-fiction genres and thus a lack of literature on popular business books and their collection practices. Motivated by their roles as business librarians, and the recommendations for further research discussed in the literature review, the authors of this study were prompted to investigate the presence and placement of popular business titles in academic collections. The authors believe that libraries may be missing an opportunity to support business leisure, underscoring the importance of paying more attention and intention to the collection of popular business materials, regardless of location within the library.

Objectives

This study includes an examination of popular business title holdings in the catalogs of libraries at Academic Business Library Directors (ABLD) institutions with an accompanying evaluation in order to explore the place of popular business books in academic library collections. The study examines the following questions:

• Do academic business libraries collect popular business titles?

• If libraries do collect popular business books, are they shelved alongside leisure reading materials or elsewhere in the library collection?

• Finally, what does the data suggest about collection practices for popular business books and leisure reading collections?

Identifying common practices around collecting popular business titles will be useful for practitioners supporting leisure reading and business collections.

Methods

To address these objectives, the authors collected data on library holdings of a sample of recently published popular business titles. The purpose of the sample titles was to serve as a proxy by which the authors could surmise whether libraries acquire popular business titles and where in their collections such titles can be found, such as in a leisure collection or integrated into the stacks. Titles were selected from New York Times Business Best Sellers lists collected from January 2018 to June 2022 based on the authors’ assumption that libraries may utilize such lists to inform collection development decisions, and based on Gerhart’s methodology as discussed in the literature review. While other publications maintain popular titles lists, New York Times provides direct access to their methodology and monthly lists on their website, and the authors found it to be both a reputable and convenient source for the information needed (New York Times, n.d.). Aiming to focus on the most popular titles over the period, the authors narrowed the list down to the titles that appear on the New York Times Business Best Sellers lists four or more times, identifying 13 representative popular business titles for the study (Table 1). Subjects covered across these titles include expected topics such as success, leadership, communication, crisis management, business history, and biography, as well as happiness, economic development, wealth, and poverty.

The authors searched the catalogs of libraries represented in ABLD, a forum for directors of academic business libraries in North America. These libraries were chosen due to the study’s focus on business titles and the potential that business books would be of particular interest to the libraries that serve the top business schools in North America. It is important to note, however, that the institutional structure as well as the business library structure within these institutions differ across the libraries in ABLD. ABLD libraries are found in universities of varying sizes, ranging from those with less than 10,000 students to those with over 40,000. These institutions can be either private or public, and ABLD libraries are present in both Canadian and American universities. Additionally, the number of business librarians in these libraries varies, with some having multiple business librarians and others having only one, among other differences. As such, though ABLD libraries suited this initial exploratory study, it is important to remember that accessibility and priorities regarding resource acquisition vary across all the libraries, undoubtedly influencing collection practices.

At the time of the study, ABLD’s membership included representation from thirty-nine libraries (Appendix). The authors searched each library catalog for the thirteen titles and collected data on whether the title was held, the location, and the format. Modeling methodology off Gerhart’s, if the location listed in the catalog was difficult to understand, a search through the accompanying library’s website was completed in order to determine what type of collection it was. For example, Arizona State’s Sun Devil collection is a popular title browsing collection separate from their stacks, which was discovered after searching the descriptions of catalog locations on the Arizona State Library website. While physical spaces and reporting relationships to the business school versus the library vary across ABLD, all had catalogs connected with the university library. Since the authors’ searches garnered results beyond just the business library and these titles would be readily available to business library patrons, the authors recorded data relevant to titles available anywhere on campus or online. The authors conducted a sample collection of data, which allowed them to develop and refine a set of location and format codes. Next, the authors collected and coded all data manually and then reviewed to ensure that entries were identified correctly by location and format.

For location, the authors coded each title from each library using the following categories: General, Leisure/General, Business, Leisure/Business, Non-Business Subject, Leisure/Non-Business, and Online (Table 2). The category Leisure/General was used to indicate items appearing in leisure, popular or similar collections within a general collections library (main library, undergraduate library, graduate library, or otherwise non-subject specific library). For example, titles cataloged under “New releases/popular titles,” “Popular Collection”, and “Recreational Reading” and located in a general collections library were categorized as Leisure/General. The Leisure/Business category was for items appearing in leisure, popular or similar collections within a business library, while Leisure/Non-Business referred to items appearing in leisure, popular or similar collection within a non-business, subject-specific library, such as a law or science library. The General, Business, and Non-Business categories each comprised titles found in the stacks of those respective types of libraries; they were not identified as being displayed or showcased in leisure types of collections. The final location category used was Online, referring to any book that was available in an online format. Since online could refer to e-books or audio, and both print and CDs could have physical locations, the authors also categorized the titles for each library based on format: e-book, print, audio, and CD (Table 3). In a few cases, all item locations were not visible unless users logged in with institutional login information and in these instances authors recorded as many locations that were indicated in the catalog record. The assembled data was analyzed to explore the authors’ research questions.

Finding

Presence of popular business titles in collections

The authors conducted an exploratory analysis of the data collected to better understand the presence and placement of popular business books in academic libraries. An important initial question was whether popular business books were included in academic library collections at all. Overall, data showed that the libraries in this study did collect these thirteen representative business popular titles, with 512 items recorded across all thirty-nine libraries. (This item count does not include duplicate copies in the same location type.) As suggested by this total, some libraries held multiple copies of certain titles. Duplication will be discussed in a later section.

This finding met the authors’ expectations that libraries with strong business support do collect popular business titles, as shown in Figure 1. More interestingly, while all 39 ABLD libraries held at least two of the popular titles, most libraries collected a moderately high number of the representative leisure business books, with 41% of the libraries (n=16) holding nine to 12 of the sample titles. Four libraries (10%) held all thirteen titles. Additionally, it was common for libraries to hold the same title in multiple locations. Only 150 out of 512 items identified in the study were held in only one location type, which demonstrates how frequently libraries hold duplicative copies of popular business titles. The high levels of business leisure collecting across ABLD libraries suggest enthusiasm, support, and a welcomed place for these books in academic library collections.

Figure 1.

How many libraries hold popular business titles?

Location: Leisure or Stacks?

The authors were interested to know more about the exact placement of popular business books in academic library collections, i.e., the actual location of the physical holdings as identified in library catalogs. In this study, more of the sample business books were found to be located in the stacks of General (n=201), Business (n=40), or Non-Business libraries (n=62) than in designated Leisure/General (n=42), Leisure/Business (n=17) or Leisure/Non-Business (n=14) collections [Figure 2].

Figure 2.

Where are popular business titles in academic library collections?

The authors also reviewed all location data to determine whether the placement pattern held on a title-by-title basis as well. Indeed, for all but one title, there were more occurrences of the sample titles in stacks than in leisure categories. Only the title From Strength to Strength was found more frequently in leisure (7) than in stacks (5). It was also the only title with more online occurrences (9) than print. This may be because From Strength to Strength incorporates elements from various subject fields rather than business alone. While the book offers insights into business ventures, it also emphasizes personal improvement and reflection across multiple aspects of life. This versatility aligns it with the characteristics of self-help or other types of personal development books, which are commonly found in leisure collections and online leisure book platforms.

Further data collected on format will be discussed in more detail in the next section.

Table 4.

Location of each title occurrence across libraries.

Title	Leisure	Stacks	Online	Total
Bad Blood	7	33	17	57
Dare to Lead	6	31	16	53
Empire of Pain	10	24	16	50
Range	5	32	12	49
Maid	7	34	7	48
Leadership: In Turbulent Times	6	34	5	45
Atomic Habits	5	24	14	43
When	5	26	7	38
Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order	2	16	14	32
The Ride of a Lifetime	4	18	9	31
The Infinite Game	4	12	7	23
Vanderbilt	5	14	3	22
From Strength to Strength	7	5	9	21
Total	73	303	136	512

Since the eighteen libraries in the study without popular business books shelved in leisure could skew results toward stacks, the authors looked more closely at the location data from libraries with leisure collections to confirm the placement pattern. For libraries with some type of leisure collection, the ratio of business books in stacks to business books in leisure was over 2:1. These findings suggest that while academic libraries are actively engaged in collecting popular business books, these materials are not as well-represented in leisure collections as in stacks.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to determine whether academic libraries, particularly those with strong business library services, collect popular business titles and if there are any common themes among the holding patterns of these titles. Effectively, the study does provide insight into the availability of popular business books in academic libraries, confirming that libraries represented in ABLD do frequently have these materials available to patrons, whether in the general library on campus, another subject-based library, online, or in the business library itself. It is important to note that there may be external reasons as to why some titles are more widely held. For example, Bad Blood, a commonly held item, was published in 2018 while From Strength to Strength, less commonly held, was published in 2022. Fiscal constraints during the COVID-19 pandemic could have had an impact on why certain libraries hold different books.

There is less consistency across libraries in terms of where these titles can be found, although usually the books were identified in the general stacks. The authors find that the location of the books may hint at how librarians perceive popular business titles, but more research would be necessary to determine academic and long-term value; as in, are these titles ones that would belong in a permanent collection.

Additionally, the presence of popular business books predominantly in the stacks rather than in leisure collections suggests a potential distinction between business bestsellers and other types of leisure materials. For example, popular business titles may not be shelved as often in leisure sections due to potentially not being perceived to be as fun or appealing as other recreational reading genres, despite their classification as bestsellers. Indeed, as previous literature showed, leisure collections lean towards fiction over non-fiction, so this finding may be attributable to this tendency (Brookbank et al., 2018). Still, a few libraries had leisure collections that welcomed popular business materials, such as a “Career and Student Success” collection in a general library, a name that implies a perceived role for popular business books that have a career orientation and leisure collections in support of lifelong learning. The authors noted a variety of other names for leisure collections, such as leisure general and non-business collections that went by names such as “Browsing,” “Popular Reading,” “Current Literature,” “Bestsellers,” and “Leisure Reading” and business leisure collections promoted as “Notable Business Books” and “Business Trends.” Other names of leisure reading collections that featured popular business books included “Sun Devil Reads”, “New Books”, “Great Reads”,” Impulse Borrowing", " “Browsing”,” New and Noteworthy”, and “Good Reads”.

The variety of names suggest that leisure collections are not one-size-fits-all and there is likely much diversity and nuance to the collection policies for each individual collection. Generally speaking, based on the results of this study, the authors would hypothesize that policies for leisure collections (outside of those in business libraries) do not likely specify the potential role for popular business books in leisure reading collections, but further research on leisure collection policies would need to be conducted.

It is also important to consider what library roles are responsible for collecting leisure materials. If business librarians are involved, it would be reasonable to think they may be more aware of, and inclined to select, popular business titles for collections. The data collected that can most reliably be attributed to and represent the direct work of business librarians (the fifty-seven items identified as location type Leisure/Business or Business out of the total 512 titles) does not suggest business librarians are often involved in collecting leisure materials. The authors note, however, that this is a very conservative estimate of business librarian involvement. The statement suggests that based on the available data, it’s unclear whether the items categorized as "General" in the study were chosen specifically by business librarians. While this is the case in the authors’ own institutions, it might not be the case elsewhere. This ambiguity arises because business librarians could be involved in selecting items for general collections or other subject-specific leisure collections. Additionally, there could be variations in the level of involvement of business librarians in acquiring popular business titles across different institutions. Further qualitative research exploring both libraries at higher and lower levels of popular business book collecting would contribute nuance to the exploratory findings of this study. Additionally, the libraries that feature business leisure collections would be of interest for further research since findings suggest these libraries may have well-coordinated collection efforts across location types. Such research might contribute to the creation of a placement model for popular business materials in library collections.

In terms of collection practices related to formats and duplication allowances, the findings indicated a fair amount of duplication in titles, even across formats; many titles live in more than one location within a library. In some cases, this could very well be intentional. However, there is also the possibility that duplication of titles within the same library is an indication of lack of awareness in terms of who is purchasing what. A business library would not necessarily have to spend money purchasing items that can easily be included in the leisure reading collection, which is especially helpful if there are separate funds for subject-specific libraries and the leisure reading collection. In these cases, coordination and collaboration between business librarians and leisure collectors would be helpful in order to move towards a more cohesive, library-wide collection.

For libraries reluctant to collect leisure materials, the data shows that popular business books do have a foothold in academic library collections, even in libraries without dedicated leisure collections, echoing comparable results to those in the studies by Mulcahy and Wagner. For libraries interested in establishing a business leisure collection or expanding their popular business resources, it is helpful to understand that these titles already have a presence in academic library collections. With the knowledge that popular business books are collected widely and a better idea of how these resources are distributed across location types, libraries can collect more intentionally and economically.

Limitations

The authors identify several limitations to their study. Firstly, the authors recognize that their study pool, ABLD libraries, only comprise a small portion of the academic libraries in the United States. Many other academic research libraries could also have business and/or leisure collections. As such, there is likely much more to discover in such libraries, or even at other types of organizations, such as community college libraries. Another limitation is that the study relies on how comprehensively catalog records convey item locations, which can vary and be challenging to discern for users outside the home institution. Some libraries have uniquely named areas or other nuances that make it difficult to understand exactly where an item is. Due to this, the authors took a conservative approach when deciding how to code collections and did not assume an item was in a specific collection if it was not abundantly clear by catalog description or by a description about the collection found on the library’s website. Additionally, there were some instances in which all item locations were not visible unless users logged in with institutional login information. Finally, libraries may have differences in how they choose to organize their leisure collections. For example, it is possible that some leisure collections are populated by older titles, such as classics, and not by newer items. Therefore, even if these libraries might consider the business leisure titles included in this text to be leisure, they may not have placed them there due to collection organization policies.

Conclusion

This exploratory study sheds light on the current state of popular business titles in academic library collections, an area that has been underexplored in library and information studies (LIS) research. Given that more than half of these libraries had a moderately high to high number of sample titles and all had at least two, the authors can confirm the definite presence of business leisure reading of some sort in academic libraries. There is more discrepancy in what is collected and where they are collected, implying important differences in how they are collected, as well as their inherent purpose. Even libraries that held multiple items on the bestsellers list placed the titles in varying spaces within their own institution, which could be for several reasons, such as individual title perception, or potentially that various library units collect business popular titles.

While at least some academic value can be attributed to popular business titles based on their widespread presence in these libraries, the authors suggest further research in order to pinpoint the value perception of popular business titles in academic libraries. For instance, investigation into collection policies would be needed in order to understand who oversees purchasing items for leisure or similar collections, item-type requirements, and more. Concurrently, it would be useful to deploy surveys aimed at academic librarians within these libraries, as this would allow for a more particular understanding on how current business librarians view popular business titles and where they believe they should be placed within libraries. Furthermore, it would be interesting to investigate whether and how popular business titles are being used by faculty within course curriculum.

Given the widespread presence of leisure collections across ABLD institutions, this study concludes that the prevalence of popular reading is increasing in academic libraries. However, there is still room for growth. In terms of business titles in particular, libraries interested in establishing a business leisure collection or placing popular titles within their already existing leisure collection can see the opportunity to do so based on the results in this study. No matter the current state of leisure reading within an institution, the authors suggest intentional, coordinated collecting across library units in order to be cost-effective and prevent unnecessary duplication.

While popular business titles warrant inclusion in academic libraries, there remains a need for further understanding of how they are perceived, categorized, and utilized within these institutions. The authors of this study hope to see further research develop within these areas, as well as new literature related to subject-specific leisure reading in the future.