Facilitator: Fay Kandarian
Panel Participants:
Ann Okerson, AUL
for Collection Development and International Programs
Kate Reynolds, Staff Training and Oganizational Development Officer
Joan Swanekamp, Chief Catalog Librarian
Diane Young Turner, AUL for Human Resources, Staff Training, and Security
Meg Bellinger, AUL for Integrated Library Systems and Technical Services
David Stern, Director,
Science Libraries and Information Services
Sue Crockford-Peters, Head of Access Services
Alice Prochaska, University Librarian
FAY: …because they’re not going to tell you how short a time they have, they’re just going to regret that they don’t have more time to answer everything. So we’ll start panel introductions with Ann, OK.
ANN: Hello, I’m Ann Okerson, I’m Associate University Librarian for Collections and International Programs.
KATE: I’m Kate Reynolds, I’m the Staff Training and Organizational Development Officer for the Library and Library Human Resources.
JOAN: I’m Joan Swanekamp, I’m the Chief Catalog
Librarian and the Head of the Catalog Department.
DIANE: I’m Diane Young Turner, AUL for Human
Resources, Staff Training, Organizational Development and Security.
MEG:
Hi, I’m Meg Bellinger, AUL for
Integrated Library Systems and Technical Services.
DAVID: David Stern, Director of the Science Libraries and Chair of the Service Quality Improvement Council.
SUE: Hi, I’m Sue Crockford-Peters, I’m head of
Access Services.
ALICE: And I’m Alice Prochaska, University
Librarian. Hello everybody, nice to see
you.
FAY: OK, so, the panel members here all have
strategic areas of responsibility, and they were responsible for all of the
handouts that you just had a chance to look through those summaries. Here’s what we’re going to do, I’m going to
call on tables in a specific order that will get all of the tables answered and
it will move the questions around the room.
So I’ll alert three tables at a time, for example the first three tables
will be table 10, table 14 and then table 20.
Now a logistics person will come to your table with a microphone. Spokesperson stand, use the microphone
please, even if you think your voice carries we still need it in this room, and
even more importantly we will be taping this so that it will be accessible to
others who aren’t at this meeting. Now
if someone asks a question that was your first question, go to your second
question. Each table is going to have a
chance to ask one question, which gives about only one minute for a
response. Now when you ask your
question, if you can direct it to the panel member that you’d like to respond
to, that will help save time also there.
At the end we’ll have a chance for maybe a few burning questions if we
didn’t get something that you really can’t sit still until you get the answer
to. We will also be collecting the
index cards with the questions, the Communications Committee will then look at
that for further response following the meeting.
All
right. Panel are you ready? OK.
Tables are you ready? All right. We’ll start first with table 10, then 14 and
20. So, table 10 please.
SPEAKER
#1 (Table 10): Hi. I’m having fun. My question is direct—or our question is directed to Alice. Given the recent article in the New Haven
Register about the 5 to 10% across-the-board cut in University staffing, how is
the Library planning to address all of these things that are in the handout
that they want to accomplish?
ALICE: I have just returned from a meeting, and my
apologies that I wasn’t able to be with you right at the beginning except to
say hello over coffee, a meeting that was summoned by President Levin to
discuss this very issue across the University, and I thought it was useful for
me to be there. We brainstormed various
ways in which the University as a whole can carry out the necessary economies
and efficiencies, and many of those ways include sharing work across the
University, cutting down on layers of bureaucracy and administration, and
looking at more effective ways of purchasing materials and dealing with the
equipment grants. So there are some
ways in which the Library will be making a small contribution to shared
efficiencies as part of the University as a whole.
Within
the Library, first of all we’re not looking at 10% cuts, we’re not looking at
lay-offs, I think it’s very important for everybody to appreciate that
fact. And I would just complete my
answer by saying that the strategic plan that we’re all discussing today is going
to be an enormous source of support to us in justifying our request for the
support that we need in this environment.
I can answer more questions later if anybody wants.
FAY: OK, Alice thank you. Table 14, then 20, and then 24. Table 14 please.
SPEAKER
#2 (table 14): Hi, my name is Frank
Boateng. Question is actually directed
to Training and Development, OK. How do
we keep people whose primary activities is not in one of these goal areas
informed about progress so that these summaries may mean something to them?
KATE: That’s a good question Frank. I think if I understand your question
correctly, “How do we keep people …
SPEAKER
#2: …how do we keep people whose
primary activities is not in one of these summaries? —you know, how do we keep
them informed so that, I mean we have a lot of people here that this may not
really mean—they don’t really understand it, sometimes.
KATE: Keep in mind that all staff members who work in the library play a part in achieving the strategic goals as set forth by the Library. Your supervisor should be able to help you clearly understand exactly what role your department or unit plays as well as outline the objectives that your unit must accomplish in order to help achieve the strategic planning goals. The most immediate source of information is your supervisor or department head. Ask your supervisor or department head to hold a staff meeting to explain your departments role and report progress about what is being accomplished in other areas of the Library.
FAY:
OK Kate, thank you. Something additional, maybe you’ll hear more
from the Communications Committee too around how we get information out.
OK,
so next is table 20, then 24 and table 5.
Table 20 please.
SPEAKER
#3 (table 20): I am Jeff. Our question is, what is the Lib—oh excuse
me—and this would be directed to Meg Bellinger as an integrated interfaces
question. What has the Library done to
facilitate using Voyager across functions, for example Circ. functions being
used in acquisitions?
MEG: Let’s see, the question is what has the
Library done to address cross-functional usage of Voyager?
SPEAKER
#3: Yeah, the example was brought by
someone from Circulation who was pointing out that functions are available in
Voyager nominally through the circulation interface, but frequently necessary
to be addressed from other functions than that. And rather than directing a question of cross-functioning and
then through the interface, is there some way that the Library could make more
of those functions available to cross-functional areas?
MEG: Well, I’ll answer that question somewhat
generally. We attended very recently a
meeting of the Ivy Plus users of Voyager at Columbia University, and I attended
that in order to be able to understand better what other of our sister colleges
are doing, our University environments are doing, in order to facilitate the
operationalization of the Voyager systems.
Some environments such as PENN have actually had Voyager for several years,
other environments such as Columbia just installed. Some organizations are really a little bit in advance of where we
are in terms of developing more effective macros, interfaces, for all of the
functions, that all the modules we have in place today. I think we’ve concentrated on specific areas,
and now that we have put Voyager fully into production we will be looking at
different modules [of] different functions in order to be able to introduce
more functionality and better processes.
And one of them will be—we’ll start with, will be in acquisitions where
we’re developing right now an agreement for a consultant to come in from
Princeton where they have developed several macros in order to address the
acquisitions’ Voyager problems.
FAY: OK, Meg thank you. And that was table 24, is that right? So next we have 5, 9 and 15—no 24 is back there, thank you
Andrew.
SPEAKER
#4 (table 24): I think we want to
follow up on the integrated services issues.
And so what we want to ask is how the Library’s going to aggressively
manage the integrated services project and how they are going to communicate
those developments to the University community faculty students, and even
Library staff that doesn’t even know how to use all of them? And I guess we’re addressing that to Meg.
MEG: I’m sorry, I didn’t hear the last one. Oh yes.
So, the question is how do we aggressively address the need to integrate
the projects, the efforts that are already in place, and to communicate our
integration to faculty students and others.
Right now what we are developing, and we will have in place by December
once we can reach some consensus of definition, is an Integrated Access
Council, similar to the, I think the Collection Development Council and the
SQIC, Service Quality Improvement Council.
The Council for Integrated Access will be sponsored by myself, and then
it will be chaired by some representatives I think that will be—represent not
just the Library system but also some of our involvement with ITS. The Council will have representation from
every kind of Library on the campus that we can include and still be effective
and flexible and agile, and then we will have a structure in place in order to
move forward some very important committee activity and communication activity. One of the areas that we are developing some
job descriptions for and also some leadership charge for is is the area of
metadata standardization. We need
metadata standards for our Best Practices in order to be able to maintain our
collections, distribute them and preserve them. So that’s just one of the committees that we are—that will be
created, and the Integrated Access Council intent is intended to coordinate
activities, be a central focus for information for the many, many parts of the
organization that are engaged in digital Library activity.
FAY: Thank you Meg. Table 5. Nine is next,
and then 15.
SPEAKER
#5 (table 5): Hi. My name is Daniel, and we actually had a
very similar question, so we are actually going to give Meg a break. So anyone who can answer this actually we
would really appreciate it. Do you have
any kind of cross-training programs, and when would that be available for
staff?
KATE: Many units within the library already cross-train their staff
members. I think you are referring to a Library-wide cross training program
made available to all levels of staff members. LHR is in the process of
developing a cross training program. Here is snapshot of the steps we will
follow in developing the program:
1) Conduct a review of "best practices" of peer institutions re:
cross-training programs
2) Hold focus groups to gain input from library staff members re: design,
content and other operational details and considerations
3) Create a draft program design to be reviewed by the Staff Training &
Organizational Development Committee and other staff members.
4) Form a design and roll out team, who may work jointly with the STOD
Committee and other staff members, to finalize design plan, communication
vehicles, identify, develop and recommend additional support mechanisms.
We are in the initial stages of development at this time, and as you can see
there will be plenty of opportunity for staff input regarding the development
of this program. We really need everybody's best thinking on these types
of initiatives and hope you will offer your ideas as we move through this
development process.
FAY: Alright.
Thank you table 5. Nine, 15 and
19. So table 9 please.
SPEAKER
#6 (table 9): Alice. Are there any plans for reassessing recent
organizational changes?
ALICE: The strategic plan is a work-in-progress,
and we will certainly look at the organization continuously, including asking
ourselves whether changes we’ve recently made are necessarily the best
ones. But we have no specific plans to
reassess specific changes right at this minute.
FAY: OK, table 15 is next, then 19 and 1. Table 15 please.
SPEAKER
#7 (table 15): Hi, my name is
Laura. Ours is for, our question is for
Diane Turner, and it’s on training and organizational development, and we would
like to know if there will be cross-training, if it will be allowed within
different grade levels, like can a B level train on a D level, and if no is
this a Union restriction or a management restriction, and how is this going to
be communicated to the staff?
DIANE: Good question. I think Kate referred to the cross-training plans that we
have. Oddly enough this has been an
agenda item that’s come forward as part of the Moving Forward/Spring Forward
meetings, and we do have a plan and it’s listed on the Training and
Organizational Development sheet that talks about focus groups as well as
Committee members being involved in the planning for that cross-training. Additionally, training in general is a high
priority. As you know, this was a high
agenda item as part of the negotiations, and we actually started to proceed
with the planning for training even prior to those negotiations. The Library really started with the learning
plan, so that each staff member has an opportunity as well as resources to
develop their skills and to work closely with their department head in matching
those skills/interests with the department’s needs. So we will continue to push forward on that, we will be working
not only within the Library but within the University with the Learning Center
to ensure that training continues to be high on our agenda and we move forward
with that agenda.
FAY: Thank you Diane. OK, table 19, and then 1 and 4.
SPEAKER
#8 (table 19): Hi, I’m Mark Gentry for
table 19, and we’re continuing the same vein, so we’ve got another question for
Diane and Kate. Someone at our table
mentioned the fact that employees are often recognized when they’re brand new
and when they retire. So somewhere in
between, with all the stress on training and development, we want to know if
you considered recognizing employees that hit those milestones in really
accomplishing, you know, new training and education as they’ve gone back to
school to try and improve their skills, graduated from college, finishing
training programs?
DIANE: Great question, and the answer in a nutshell
is yes. We have started to do some of
that, but clearly we haven’t done enough.
There’s been certificates and other ways of recognizing staff, but I
think the whole area of recognition is one that we need to pay closer attention
to. And as you know, we’ve been looking
at a bonus program within the Library system, and then also there’s a clause in
the upcoming contract, the new contract, on the bonus program. So we will be looking at monetary ways as
well as other ways of recognizing not just training but exemplary work. And that’s something that you will be
hearing more about in the coming months.
FAY: OK, thank you. Table 1 next, then 4 and 16.
SPEAKER
#9 (table 1): I’m Susan Klein. I work
in Preservation. Our question, I’d like
to direct this to Joan, but really it encompasses possibly all of you because
it has to do with how staff people, in the LSF in particular, can be trained to
process—to better move books through their processing system, particularly when
there glitches that Voyager shows up, encoder problems or linkage problems,
other than that? And in a sense it has
to do with cross training as well, because it’s where people can learn enough
of another job to prevent books going back and forth and back and forth to
people who have big backlogs, so you get the jist. Thanks.
JOAN: Where to start. I think that part of what the Catalog Management team does that
has been involved in retrospect of conversion is also a lot of problem-solving
for materials going to the LSF, and we are still developing procedures using
Voyager that will allow us to move large quantities of material efficiently,
and bump up against a lot of challenges in doing that. And I can say that we continue this work on
a daily basis, we’re trying to refine procedures, and with those then come
along training programs, documentation and so on that will need to be rolled
out. We’re really trying to put all of
those structures in place, we have pieces of them, I think we’ve moved all the
easy stuff though and what we’re left with are the hard things now. And that means that we need many more
procedures and then training programs to go along with those. Anybody else want to add to that? Sue might.
FAY: OK, we’re
going to go on to the next, and that’s table 4 please, and then 16, 18 and 6.
SPEAKER
#10 (table 4): Hello, my name is Eva,
I’m the new employee in the Beinecke, and our question is for the International
Programs Representative, and perhaps also for Alice.
Our
question is, how, if at all, the recently-announced budget cuts are going to
affect the planned expansions in International programs, and also if there are
any plans to focus on new funding sources or sources within the University to
support this?
ANN:
The International Programs’ goals, as you’ve seen them, actually don’t
call for a lot of additional resource.In that regard, it’s one of the more
modest programs. We’re going to be
relying very heavily on people who are already working in our organization; we
have great strengths in the international arena already in the Beinecke and
across the whole system. So I think our
emphasis will really be on pulling together and making our strengths and
capabilities a little more visible and coherent to the Library's users, i.e.,
the entire University community as well as prospective users around the
world. There is, if you noticed in your
sheets, an investment we’re making for a couple of years. We are recruiting for a Program Manager who
will be supporting our international activities. One of our plans is to develop an International Council, and the
new manager will be working with staff throughout the Library system to do
that. Additional investments the
Library will be making -- because the University is clearly increasing it
international programmatic outreach through teaching and learning emphasis is
some reallocation of our collections budgets -- not big but adequate to support
some of Yale's new emphasis.
FAY: OK, thank you. Table 16 next, then 18 and 6.
SPEAKER
#11(table 16): Tobin Nellhaus, Research
Services and Collections. This question
goes to Alice. I would like to know
what is being done to facilitate communication between departments?
ALICE: Sorry Tobin, could you repeat that.
SPEAKER
#11: Pardon my rough throat today. We would like to know what’s being done to
facilitate communication between departments?
ALICE: What’s being done to facilitate
communication between departments.
Well, you heard right at the beginning of this meeting from Mary Caldera
who chairs the Communications group, and that I think is one of our earnest
attempts to improve communications of every description. That committee will be eagerly seeking
ideas. We also just strongly encourage
everybody to look at the staff front door, and at the Library’s website in
general in order to learn more about what’s going on in different
departments. And as we develop our
strategic plan, and as we look at the efficiencies and cost savings that we
absolutely have to make, we will be trying to bring together the work of
departments in various different ways to do strategic things together rather
than doing strategic things separately.
But that’s a start on improving communications and I’d love to hear more
of the thinking that went into that question, and get some good ideas from all
of you.
FAY: Thank you. Table eighteen is next, and then
6 and 3.
SPEAKER
#12 (table 18): Carla Heister. In unlocking the collections. This is for Joan, because it’s unlocking
collections, and talking about efficiencies and loss of funds, are any more
staff going to be hired to help with the finishing and working in the unlocking
of collections?
JOAN: Thank you.
What we’re planning on doing as much as possible is using some of the
staff that have been working on retrospective conversion work, mostly clean-up,
and continuing some of the unlocking collections work. Their—many of the skills that they—would be
needed are exactly the same skills we’ve developed in the Catalog Management
team. There are some specialized skills
though that we don’t have, and one of the things we will be doing is also
seeking grant funding that will help us in some of these more specialized
areas, to help underwrite what can be a very, very expensive process. But we have so many wonderful collections
that are so unique we believe that we have a real good shot at foundation money
and grant money to help that process.
FAY: Thank you.
Next is table 6 and then 3 and 17.
SPEAKER
#13 (table 6): Hi. My question is for Ann, and we’d like to
know how the University decides which nations or cultures are focused on?
ANN: Well
I’ll give you a very quick answer, which is most of them. [laughter from audience] This University, I think, has enormous ambitions,
probably justifiably so, and I’m not sure it’s fully clear to all of us how
those priorities are set. The best I
can do is to tell you that in Program Development at the Yale Center for
International and Area Studies, the focus — in fact, the new foci -- now are on
expanding our investments in Korea and South Asia, both in major ways. Central Asia is a potential target of
interest; likewise Hellenic Studies is a target area; and Persian culture will
become an area of increasing emphasis.
Those are tall orders for us, and in part are supported—to get back to a
previous question — by grant proposals developed jointly with the Yale Center
for International and Area Studies.
Currently we are receiving grants from the U.S. Department of
Education's Title VI programs and the Niarchos Foundation. President Levin has been travelling
extensively in China and Asia. It’s
clear that East Asia is becoming a big focus for the University. But, if your question regards an explicit
process for alerting the Library years in advance regarding new programs, then
that is not the case nor is it probably realistic.. We find out about new initiatives as quickly as possible, through
a lot of good communications with YCIAS, and then we try to cooperate with the
faculty in developing funding strategies and other appropriate responses.
FAY: Thank you Ann. Table 3, 17 and 23.
SPEAKER
#13 (table 3): This question’s for
Joan. When will we see some agility in
actually implementing serial volume holdings control?
JOAN: This is a real quick answer—soon. We’re working on it. That’s coming very, very soon. Her question was about serials control, how
soon we’re going to get there. We’ve
got serials control to a certain degree, but Voyager offers some other
opportunities and we’re working towards that.
FAY: OK.
Table 3, that was yours. Table
17 and 23.
SPEAKER
#14 (table 17): Hi, I’m Liz Shaw from
Acquisitions, and our question is—we’re not sure, it’s either for Alice or
Diane perhaps. And we noticed that in
these one-page summaries there are a lot of committees and various other things
mentioned that people didn’t know about, so the question is what are the
criteria for participation on committees, and how are members selected and by
whom?
DIANE: Good Question. Committee members are appointed in a variety of ways, and one of
the great accomplishments that is listed in today’s documents that we have
achieved over the last year is that we’ve tried to pull committee members from
all levels of staff. And you will see
more of that; this is just the beginning.
We seek Committee members in the following ways: 1) There will be a
Yulib message asking for nominations or volunteers. 2) From time to time LMC
will ask for nominations. In making
selections we look to ensure that we have representation from all areas of the
Library System, and at all levels. 3)
We also ask for recommendations from supervisors. 4) We will sometimes look for those people who have a certain
expertise or knowledge base. These are
a few ways, but I would love to hear from you in terms of ways that staff could
become more involved.
FAY: OK, thank you Diane. Table 23 next, then 7 and 8.
SPEAKER
#15 (table 23): I’m Soli Johnson, from
Divinity, and our question is actually a follow-up, and we were wondering how
is the Library overall getting more clerical technical people involved in the
activities like the committees?
DIANE: Again, as much as we can we will be
communicating on Yulib, looking for suggestions, looking for recommendations,
volunteers, and nominations for committees.
We have been talking in LMC and in other arenas encouraging departments,
whether it’s a search committee or other committees, to ensure that we have
representation from all the levels of staff, that’s beginning. We are not close yet to even being at the
halfway mark in having the kind of high involvement that we’d like to have, but
there’s a start, and again we are open to other suggestions as to ways we can
enhance that or speed that up some.
FAY: OK, thank you. Table 7, then 8 and then 22.
SPEAKER
#16 (table 7): Our question too could
be addressed to several people at this table.
What plans are in the works for supporting comprehensive improvements at
the branch libraries, as has already been applied at CCL and SML in the areas
of collection management, such as removing excessive overflows, in the area of
training such as training that is specific to Yale and specific to positions,
and in the area of funding staff levels at particular quali—using particular
qualitative and quantitative measurements?
SUE: I’m going to take a stab at that. As has been mentioned already a little bit,
the focus for moving things to the LSF has of necessity been at Sterling, but
there has been an effort, as some of you know, to at least keep some movement
from most of the school and department libraries, and the LSF review group
which meets on a monthly basis, is keenly aware that we need to do more, and
every year issues a call for each unit to submit its space—maybe that’s not the
right phrasing—submit what it would like to send to the LSF in the next
year. That process, I see no reason why
it wouldn’t continue as it has. And the
corollary to that is that units that need to be able to rearrange their
physical space following things being sent to the LSF, also can draw upon the
LSF project funding for that purpose, and there are some school and department
libraries that have done so already.
Those that have not should probably be talking to Danuta to be sure that
your needs and schedules are well understood.
I see the red sign.
FAY: Sue thank you. All right, 8 next and then 22 and 26.
SPEAKER
17 (table 8): I guess our question is a
little bit complimentary, it’s for Alice.
It occurred to our table that, at least as expressed in these handouts,
many of the strategic plans are somewhat still Sterling-centric. And our question is how do you envision
incorporating school and department libraries in these strategic plans?
ALICE: That’s a very good question. Everything is still too Sterling-centric, in
case anybody didn’t hear it, and how are we going to involve the school and
departmental libraries more. Well, one
of the ways we do that is to try to involve somebody from the school and
departmental libraries on all of the committees, and not just one person but
numbers of people. And Martha, you did
Sterling service on the committee that recruited Meg not so very long ago. We are very keen to see that sort of
involvement. There are other ways as
well, communications issues that we are working on very hard. And when I hold events of any social
description, I do try to mix the places where they’re held. I have visited Divinity Library quite a few
times, Social Sciences I’m planning to descend on again, I don’t know where
Sandy is but I am planning to descend on Social Sciences again as soon as
possible. The Science libraries as soon
as it’s possible to find a space where one of my coffee mornings can be
held. But basically we want input from
all of the departmental libraries, and we need your help in telling us, we at
the center, as much as we can come out to you to ask you for it. That’s just a beginning, we really need
ideas and perhaps some of those can come forward today.
FAY: OK, thank you. And that was table 8, and so now is 22, 26 and 12.
SPEAKER
#18 (table 22): Hi, I’m Julie
Cohen. Our table has a question for
David Stern. What does the service
quality improvements SQIC activities update really mean in plain English?
DAVID: What it really means in plain English is
that user-oriented priorities are being identified using measurable objectives,
and we are training people appropriately to understand how to use user-oriented
priorities to redesign their operations to make things as efficient and
satisfying as possible. There are examples on here of particular projects
that have been accomplished using that re-oriented approach, and that will be
farmed out to other locations as we identify the areas that are most in need of
redesign efforts. The key issues are: user-based satisfaction surveys,
rethinking processes in order to implement best practices, and thinking in
terms of service quality (user services) rather than re-engineering
(efficiencies).
FAY: OK, thank you. Table 26, then 12 and 13.
SPEAKER
#19 (table 26): This is a question for
Joan. What initiatives are on their way
to review original criteria for moving materials to LSF?
JOAN: Sue made a reference earlier to an LSF
review group that includes representatives from all areas of the Library, and
we look quite regularly at the criteria for materials moving to the LSF. One of the things that I referred to earlier
is developing procedures that allow us to move things that have been difficult
to move in the past. We’re spending a
fair amount of time trying to reconcile those procedures for moving
serials. Almost anything—anytime you
start splitting up our serial holdings things can go wrong, and we’re trying to
identify all of the processes that we need in place to be able to begin to do
that. We’re spending a lot of time on
that, I think that in the next couple of months you’ll see some real benefits
coming from those deliberations.
FAY: OK, thank you. Table 12 and then 13 and 21.
SPEAKER #20 (table 12): Hi, my name is Linnard Inabinet from Shipping and Receiving, and this question is directed to Diane Turner. Could you elaborate a little bit more on the bonus programs for the staff?
DIANE: Over the last year in LMC we’ve been looking
at a bonus program, and one of the concerns that was expressed in those
discussions was that we couldn’t, at that point, offer bonuses for all levels
of staff. I’m really, really pleased
that as a result of the recent negotiations there is a section that outlines
best practices and a bonus program.
That program will be developed in each unit on campus, including the
Library, working with staff in each unit.
The criteria, the overall University criteria, has not been established
yet. The maximum amount of each bonus
as outlined in the contract is $500.
But over the coming months there will be lots of discussions about
developing such a program. Staff will
be hearing more. The implementation
date for the bonus program is in 2005.
Does that answer?
FAY: OK, thank you. Thirteen, 21 and 25 next.
SPEAKER
#21 (table 13): Hi, I’m Gwyneth Crowley
for table 13, and we have a question for Meg.
Could you please share with us a concrete example and a fuller
explanation for the last area on your one-page summary RE the federated
approach?
MEG: OK, the question was could I share a concrete
example of the federated approach.
OK.
FAY: Want to think about that minute, Meg, and we’ll come back to
you? OK, that may require a bit of
thought. OK, so while Meg’s doing that
we’re going to go to table 21 and then table 25.
SPEAKER
#22 (table 21): Hi, I’m Megan Gaffney,
I work in Document Delivery. This
question’s for Ann. We’re wondering
about digital preservation. Could you
explain a little bit about methods and plans that we have?
ANN: Yours is a broad, general question about
digital preservation, which is an area that is close to many of the programs,
departments, and staff members in the Library.
Digital preservation is supremely important because, as you all probably
know, digital materials are inherently fragile and we don’t have the assurance
that anything that is created today will necessarily survive 10 years out let
alone 50 or 100, just as we know that materials digitally created 10 years ago
may not have survived through to today.
So, just as is preservation of print materials, digital prservation is
now a major focus for the Library. The
Library is active in several aspects.
There is a very important electronic record archives initiative in Manuscripts
and Archives, and I’m sure staff connected to those explorations would be happy
to tell you about their work. MSS&A
are doing some important investigations, which shows great promise certainly
for "born digital" University records and possibly beyond that. Outside of that, the Library has been
involved in a couple of pilot projects with other groups, such as our
Mellon-funded Yale-Elsevier Electronic Archive project (YEA, 199-2001), and
starting in January of 2004 the Library is going to join something called the
LOCKSS Alliance (LOCKSS, developed under the auspices of the Stanford Library,
stands for "Lots Of Copies Keep Stuff Safe)", which is a grand
experiment in network caching of electronic journals and similar resources on a
collaborative basis across institutions like ours.
FAY: OK, thank you Ann. We’re going to back to Meg now, and then we’ll go to table 25, 11
and 2.
MEG: There was just so many examples I had to
pick one. Let me talk a little bit
about the appointment of the Eli Interface Implementation Library, which has
been a real effort I think in collaboration and federation. This is a position that will report directly
to David Stern, but will have significant matrix, dotted line responsibilities
and accountabilities and partnerships within the Library Systems office. So we as a team, Danuta, Myself, David,
Fred, Audrey and Karen, created the job description, had some disagreement,
came to some consensus, and I think that, you know, through it learned a great
deal about how we each—all of our groups—are concerned about ensuring that we
have shared means in order to achieve the goals that are outlined in the
strategic plans that you all have on your table, and this is one position that
will certainly clearly do so.
FAY: OK, our last 3 tables are 25, 11 and 2. At the end of that I’ll be asking if Alice has
any summary comments to give, and if you have any burning questions. So we’ve got 3 more that will complete our
round, so table 25 and then 11 and 2.
SPEAKER
#23 (table 25): Susan Brady, Divinity
Library. This question is for Kate
Reynolds. Please tell us more about
“Each One Teach One,” and specifically how does it work effectively, and how is
it going to be advertised?
KATE: The Each One Teach One (EOTO) directory is a
database that allows library staff members seeking assistance with language,
technical or non-technical tasks, to contact staff volunteers who are willing
to share language expertise or other technical or non-technical skills in a
one-to-one situation. The EOTO, which is in the final stages of
development, is a project of the Staff Training & Organizational
Development (STOD) Committee.
The STOD committee expects to unveil EOTO to the library community the end of
January 04, and will invite other members of the library to comment on the
product before its library-wide introduction and provide recommendations for
its rollout. Watch YULIB for the message and volunteer your thoughts.
In the meantime, you can peek at the site to get an idea of the operating
guidelines at: http://www.library.yale.edu/training/stod/eotodirectory.html
SPEAKER
#24 (table 11): I’m Fred Martz from
Systems. The question from our table is
are there any plans for a C&T staff from Sterling and the school and
department libraries to communicate with each other in regard to job-related
tips and tricks, or shortcuts, in other words sharing the expertise?
DIANE: I think that really touches upon the
cross-training plans that we have, or we will be working closely with all
levels of staff to develop, and the focus groups that Kate has mentioned. So, in answer to your question, there are
plans. They have to be developed much
more fully, and through the Communications Committee and other means we will be
communicating that over the course of this year.
FAY: OK, and table 2. We saved the best for last, is that right? OK, just checking.
SPEAKER
#25 (table 2): This question is open to
anybody on the panel who’d care to answer it, and it deals with the realm of
ongoing workloads, which by their very nature then would seem to be important
workloads, and fixed term positions for staff.
And the question is, if the work is there, and it’s going to be there,
why is it being filled with fixed term positions of staff who are trained, then
leave, then someone comes and has to be trained again, and they leave, and they
leave, and the cycle continues?
FAY: OK, thank you.
ALICE: Just to give Diane a break, In the Library
Management Team and in LMC, we try very hard to figure out which are the permanently
needed positions, but we don’t always know, especially as the Library’s work
grows and develops. So quite often you
will see a pattern of a job being advertised and posted as a fixed-term
position partly because we may not have the long-term money in our budget,
sometimes it’s because the money is funded from outside on a grant which has
only a fixed-term attached to it. But
often we will learn during the period of that term whether the work needs to
continue or whether we can amalgamate that work with the duties of some other
positions in the Library, and then turn them into permanent positions. So there is no commitment to trying to get
people to do just short-term work, to do long-term work on short-term
positions. Quite the opposite, we need
to work very intentionally and deliberately to figure out which are the
long-term needs and offer people permanent positions for that long-term work.
FAY: OK, thank you. If we’re right, we’ve had every table with an opportunity to ask
their most important question. Now we
have the opportunity for maybe one or two questions, if you have a burning
question that really needs to be answered before you feel we can move on. And if so, I’ll look out, and spokesperson
should raise their hand. If any table has
that burning question? OK, this is not
your last opportunity for questions, what you will have is the opportunity to
write questions down on the cards, those are going to be collected, you’ll also
have an opportunity to write your feedback and your comments shortly, and to
put those on the feedback pieces. OK,
table 12.
SPEAKER
#26 (table 12): This is directed to
anyone on the panel. Our table would
like to know exactly what is “360 Degree Feedback Assessment.”
DIANE: Oh, Mr. Linnard. One of the things that we really need to think more intently
about, as we work hard on the issue of communication is providing feedback to
all levels of staff. This feedback
should not be limited to the “top down” approach, that is only the supervisor
evaluating the staff member. I am
interested in developing a performance development system that builds in
feedback not only from supervisors, but also from colleagues. Staff provide feedback to supervisors and
input is derived from a number of those who are familiar with the work of the
person being evaluated.
ALICE
(conclusion): These questions are going
to help very significantly in the future planning at the management levels, LMC
and LMT, and then back up to all of you again, so I thank you for all of those
questions. I’d like to just focus on
two in particular which I think have a very general application. Right at the beginning of the session, just
after I had reentered the room from my previous meeting, somebody asked me how
the Library was going to deal with the financial situation at the University
that has been reported so widely in the press.
And later on I was also asked about the relationship between the school
and departmental Libraries, and the point I want to make that unites those two
questions is that we are all of us working on our plan for the future of this
Library as a team. Nothing that’s in
the strategic plan applies only to one part of the Library, it actually applies
to all. For example, International
Programs are not only to do with area studies, but also to do with all of the
collections that may be used by international scholars, or which relate in any
way to international affairs for scholars at Yale to use. And we need to think laterally as we think
about our plans, and think about the ways in which we can collaborate
together. And that brings me back of
course to the issue of cost cutting and efficiencies. We do have to look now in the current economic circumstances of
Yale, we do have to look at ways that we can share work increasingly and make
efficiencies, cut costs, be careful and deliberate about what we do when we’re
purchasing equipment, ask ourselves whether we really need to undertake certain
particular activities.
Our
strategic plan is a great start. The
University is proud of the way the Library has put itself out to be more
strategic and to think about its priorities.
We have a very strong basis for demonstrating that when we say we need
support we really do need it, and furthermore that we’re in an excellent
position to help the rest of the University and to provide the quality of
support that they expect from us. So I
really just would like to say that this meeting, which is going to focus from
now onwards on the ways that we measure our success in achieving our strategic
plans, this meeting has tremendous significance for what we do in the next year
and years to come with the University Library, as one of the most precious
assets of the whole of Yale University, and indeed an international asset. And we have a shared responsibility that
flows in all directions, between departments and between different levels of
work in the Library, we have a responsibility to communicate with each other,
to make sure we all know what each other’s work consists of, to find ways of helping
each other, to find ways of helping each other to develop and do new and
interesting things. And this is going
to be a very exciting time, even though we’re operating at a time of financial
constraint I don’t believe it holds great threats for the Library. Nobody should feel personally threatened by
it in any way, but what it is is a great opportunity for all of us to work
together more closely than we have been doing, for the Library to benefit even
more than it has been doing from the talents, skills, knowledge and experience
of the most amazing, really, really gifted staff, from the talents of all of
you and of all of our colleagues for holding the fort back in the different
Library buildings right now.
So
it’s a great opportunity, it is also a challenge, and the rest of this meeting
will be helping us to begin to look at the ways in which we measure how we meet
that challenge, how we take advantage of that tremendous opportunity, and I
would like to hear more about all of the questions that had been asked from the
floor today. I hope we may have a
chance to hear a bit more independently over the—during the breaks, and all of
these good ideas that are going to flow will actually be a tremendous support
in the work that we have ahead of us together.
FAY: OK, thank you Alice. And a thank-you also to the panel, it’s hard
to be able to respond to questions just in that quick minute. I think you’ve done a great job, thank you.