Yale University Library

Service Quality Improvement Council

 

June 13, 2001
3:00-4:30 p.m., SML 409

Agenda

  1. Profiles of Council members from the retreat (Holly Grossetta Nardini)
  2. Separate reference and instruction committees (Alan will propose separate instruction and reference committees and will ask Council members to identify key elements of committee charges.)
  3. Service standards for Franke Periodical Reading Room
  4. Promoton of SQIC activities

Minutes

Present: Mark Gentry, Holly Grossetta Nardini, Carol Jones, Danelle Moon-Geraci, Danuta Nitecki, Kimberly Parker, Alan Solomon (Chair), Paul Stuehrenberg, Jae Williams

Absent: Sue Crockford-Peters, Fred Martz, Sandy Peterson, Kate Reynolds, David Stern, Joan Swanekamp

I. Profiles of Council members from the retreat. Holly Grossetta Nardini briefly reviewed some of the findings of the 12-8-00 "future of public services" retreat. Expectations raised at the retreat included:

  • More clearly define public services and augment the scope of initiatives that are appropriate for the Council to undertake. With this objective in mind, the suggestion was made at the retreat to introduce issues concerning electronic resources into the public services discussion.
  • Encourage a customer service -oriented approach to interactions between staff and library users. Staff training will play an important role in meeting this goal.
  • Integrate lessons learned from past service quality improvement programs into initiatives to improve public services in areas not yet scrutinized by the Council.

II. Service standards for Franke Periodical Reading Room. Alan Solomon explained that the proposed service contracts for the Franke Family Periodical Reading Room grew out of a general discussion on process improvement and a subsequent request to investigate process improvement in relation to the PRR and the dynamics of service changes in terms of service quality. Danuta Nitecki, Sue Crockford-Peters, and Alan developed a document listing what a library user can expect when he/she enters the PRR. A survey will be mounted in the fall to test whether the contract accurately reflects user expectations. Alan requested that the Council consider the draft document as a starting point or a guide for the development of similar service contracts to be applied to other areas. Council members were asked to comment on its utility. Comments included:

  • The document provides a practical model for attempts to establish service standard statements for other service areas.
  • Have current performance standards been measured? Alan noted that we do not have explicit standards in place now and that at present, we have no baseline measurements.
  • It was asked how service contracts are to be developed further. What is the next step? Staff will be asked to provide feedback on the service contracts. In the case of the proposed PRR services contracts, an existing group that is engaged in discussion on that service area will be asked to review it. Other service contracts will be forwarded to other appropriate groups when possible.
  • What criteria will be used to identify which services would most benefit by the application of service contracts? Alan explained that it is the responsibility of the Council to pinpoint service areas (and the committees working on improving those services) that can be helped by the development of service standards. He added that establishing three or four contracts over the following year will be an accomplishment.
  • Paul Stuehrenberg remarked that the development of a general method to produce continuous service improvement will involve working in the abstract and looking beyond more parochial, concrete service examples.

Alan added that comments specifically on the PRR service contracts are welcome and should be forwarded to him.

III. Separate reference and instruction committees. Alan suggested that issues concerning reference and instruction services are sufficiently different to justify the creation of two separate committees to look into each of these programs. The proposal to investigate "Reference Beyond the Walls" will be folded into the charge of the reference committee.

It was decided that separate committees for reference and instruction will be charged with establishing service statements for each program. The committees should identify activities for completion within a year and report the results of these investigations to the Council. The committees will be delegated the authority to make decisions on the service area charged to them. Final approval of decisions will be made by the SQI Council. In addition, these committees will be asked to hold periodic forums to discuss reference and instruction issues with staff. Alan will share these expectations with both committees. It will be the Council's responsibility to act in a supporting/advocacy role and to bring issues raised by the committees to the attention of other library groups.

More generally, Paul suggested that once the Council has shared what was referred to as the "a-ha experience" (accepting accountability for overseeing all aspects of the library's service quality improvement program, stretching the Council's efforts to affect systematic change, and changing perspectives to see the "bigger picture"), a clearer image of what we want library services to look like will emerge.

Alan confirmed that the Council has agreed to focus on the following topics:

  1. Document Delivery
  2. Assessment
  3. Circulation
  4. Reference
  5. Instruction
  6. Bibliographic access

Alan will work to finalize the membership of the proposed SQIC sub-groups.

Training issues will be forwarded to the Staff Training and Organizational Development Committee (chaired by Kate Reynolds).

IV. Promotion of SQIC activities. The following suggestions were made:

  • Invite the new University Librarian, Alice Prochaska, to meet with the Council to discuss service quality concerns and initiatives that the Council has adopted for the coming year.
  • Provide Alice with a brief review of the Council's work during the past two years.
  • Provide Alice with service statements that have already been developed.
  • Hold a library-wide forum and ask staff to think about and discuss service standards for the service areas in which they work.
  • Revisit the 12-8-00 retreat and it's outcomes at LMC before a forum is announced.
  • More generally, establish the expectation that units should develop service contracts as a component of process improvement.
  • Post a yulib-l message on the activities of the Council once subgroup membership has been confirmed.
  • Write up an entry on the work of the Council for Nota Bene.
  • Publicize an initiative undertaken by the Council and the product of that initiative as a concrete example of its work.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.

Image of pointing finger.

RETURN TO
SQIC HOMEPAGE

© 2001 Yale University Library.
Last modified July 18, 2001.
Send comments about this web site to the library web administrator at
Library Administrative Services.
This file is located at http://www.library.yale.edu/Administration/SQIC/SQIC184.html