- Email: [email protected]
Achieving a vision of a statewide academic library network
” MANAGING TECHNOLOGY edited by Charles B. Lowry
Achieving Academic
a Vision of a Statewide Library Network
by Jennifer Cargill and Ronald D. Hay
The basic support of library management systems and inter-institutional telecommunications are vital if libraries are to be effectively positioned for the future. The demonstrable need for these elements of an IT infrastructure do not necessarily lead to institutional action, nor does common interest always result in multiinstitutional collaboration. The Louisiana experience illustrates that the keys to success are leadership, risk taking, a vision for the future, the search for opportunity, and the creation of an atmosphere of trust and cooperation. Even funding obstacles need not stop technological innovation, which once started can take on a momentum all its own.2.B.L.
L
ouisiana is a state of contrasts, diversity, and creativity probably best known for the New Orleans Mardi Gras, a healthy interest in superb food, and a strong tradition of populism in government. Louisiana, like too many other states, also has a history of inadequate funding for the number of state-assisted higher education institutions. Four boards oversee higher education with the Board of Regents, the coordinating board for the higher education system in the state, being charged by Louisiana’s Constitution with formulating and periodically revising a master plan for Louisiana higher education. In 1990, to provide input for the pending revision of the master plan, the Board established nine task forces to investigate specific planning issues and critical areas within higher education. The Task Force on Libraries was one of those created, to be chaired by the then Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Provost at LSU, Carolyn Hooper Hargrave, an individual with a strong commitment to libraries and years of experience in Louisiana higher education. The First Steps This Task Force, with representatives from several university libraries, began meeting and discussing the critical issues academic libraries must address to position themselves for the 1990s and the 21st century. The Task Force concluded immediately that if academic )ennifer Executive
Cargill
is Dean
Director,
State University
of Libraries,
Office
and A&M
and Ronald
of Computing College,
D. Hay is
Services,
Louisiana
Baton Rouge, LA.
libraries ever expected to effectively enter into cooperative ventures in the future, they must be automated. Of the 19 academic libraries in the then 20 institutions under the coordination of the Board of Regents, only 6 had made substantial progress toward automation. Between 1990 and 1993 the Task Force discussed and eventually created a statewide network concept. They devised a strategy for automating the academic libraries, obtained initial funding, implemented the network project, and by Fall 1993, had the first network libraries online. This was achieved with no obvious initial source of funds and no formal state endorsement: there was no statewide network in existence at the inception of the project. How did it happen that so much was accomplished without administrative mandate or legislative funding? Simply put, the state-assisted academic libraries, LSU’s Office of Computer Services, and the LSU Libraries were determined to bring academic library networking to Louisiana and demonstrate its importance to the education community and the economic development of the state. It happened through a large collaborative effort. The Task Force on Libraries had identified the key to a hopeful future for the state’s academic libraries-the need to automate and link the libraries. They submitted a proposal for legislative funding for the 1991 session to create an academic network; the proposal was not funded. As the Task Force completed its Board of Regents’ assignment to provide input for the master plan, however, the academic libraries, both state-assisted and private, determined that the cooperative momentum was too important to lapse. Therefore, they created a successor organization: the Louisiana Academic Library Information Network Consortium (LALINC). LALINC members plunged ahead with the project, determined to accomplish the network goal, not giving up after the failure to secure a state appropriation for the entire project. The concept of a statewide library application also stimulated the state’s Office of Telecommunications Management (OTM) to undertake the creation of a telecommunications statewide network. Such a network, dubbed LaNET, would link the academic institutions and other state agencies, and would provide a communications highway for a variety of other applications and connections.
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 19, no. 6, p. 386-387 01994 by the Journal of Academic Librarianship. All rights reserved.
Dividing Into Manageable Pieces To manage the creation and administration for the academic library network, the scope of the project was divided into manageable pieces. NOTIS would be the automation software of choice because it was already dominant among the Louisiana academic libraries. Louisiana State University and A&M College in Baton Rouge held a license for NOTIS that permitted sharing of the software by any number of separate institutions as long as the software remained resident on a single LSU mainframe. The extension of LSU’s software became the focal point of the creation of the network. The LSU Libraries and its personnel, and the LSU Office of Computing Services and its personnel, had a positive track record of effective collaboration which could be brought to the project. LALINC members then evaluated the state-assisted institutions with no library automation; four geographically dispersed academic libraries were selected to become the Phase I network group. These four had other common characteristics: the apparent “readiness” for automation and a willingness to commit institutional resources. Of the remaining state-assisted institutions, five were selected for Phase II implementation. Of the other state-assisted academic libraries, one decided not to become a part of the network but to automate independently using a different software package, and another decided to drop its NOTIS license and join the network. The remaining libraries that lacked systems were grouped tentatively to become Phase III institutions as the network further developed.
Up and Running Fortunately for the network enthusiasts, Louisiana has a higher education grants program administered by the Board of Regents which provides seed money for academic research and other projects, funds enhancements, and provides matching monies for professorships and chairs. Through the enhancement and matching grants programs, we secured funding to launch Phase I. The matching grants program required that funds be solicited from private industry and that effort began. Monies to allow the Phase II libraries to access the library network and become network ready was successfully applied for through the U.S. Department of Education Title II program competition. We then were able to hire a network staff, order equipment, contract for database conversion, make connections, and schedule training. The network began to become a reality. The library network acquired the name of LOUIS (for Louisiana Online University Information System), creating some amused confusion with LOLA, the LSU Libraries’ online catalog, and LOIS, the LSU Law Center Library online catalog.
Lessons Learned What can be learned from this technological collaboration with cooperation among several academic libraries, the institutional computing centers, state agencies, governing boards, and private sector firms? Cooperation, collaboration, team work, team building, synergism, and matrix management became
characteristics of the LOUIS project. The LOUIS project stimulated OTM to create the state network (LaNET) within a short time frame. LaNET and LOUIS are also the cornerstone applications that will benefit distance learning applications, agricultural extension services, literacy training, medical imaging, geographical information exchanges, as well as other endeavors. The project excited the private as well as the public sector. We received pledges of support by a host of private industry giants. We hope such pledges will stimulate the identification of permanent state funding to sustain the network. The LOUIS project created an opportunity to dramatize that expenditures for technology should be viewed as an investment, not just a cost. With the infrastructure available-people, hardware, software-we could initiate the project. Thanks to the project, state and university officials can appreciate the important role that technology itself and technology people play in Louisiana education. Collaboration may be a much touted concept but creating the opportunity to build the library network for Louisiana, to fund the project, and to implement the various phases of the project has required that we build partnerships that did not previously exist. We have had to exploit non-traditional funding sources and to develop an organizational team that comprises people with different work cultures, some of whom have had little history of working together, e.g., the LSU Libraries and Computing personnel, state agency staff, vendors, and politicians. LOUIS has received tremendous support and encouragement from the Commissioner of Higher Education, individual members of the Board of Regents, and the Board staff. These individuals working closely together with the LOUIS project team strengthened the LOUIS effort and made the project possible. Though there was no statewide mandate to develop the library application, no state funding directly allocated for the project, and participation was strictly voluntary, the academic librarians volunteered to work together to effect implementation of the network concept. The realization of this statewide network will also provide the foundation for a much larger statewide information network. In the Fall of 1993 LSU was awarded $2.48 million from the U.S. Department of Education under the Title II-B program; these monies will begin the extension of the network throughout the state. Equally important, the creation of the Louisiana network will position the state to be a full partner in the national networking initiatives. In the next issue Sheila Creth discusses the Information Arcade at the University of Iowa, an experience in the convergence of information technology with the teaching/ learning process in a library setting. Individuals interested in contributing guest columns should send a p&is of their proposed essay to: Charles Lowry, University Librarian, Editor, “Managing Technology,” JAL, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries, Hunt Library, Frew St., Pittsburgh, PA 15213. Or phone: (412) 268-2446; Fax: (412) 268-6944; E-mail: [email protected].
v
the Journal of Academic Librarianship, January 1994
387
Achieving Academic
a Vision of a Statewide Library Network
by Jennifer Cargill and Ronald D. Hay
The basic support of library management systems and inter-institutional telecommunications are vital if libraries are to be effectively positioned for the future. The demonstrable need for these elements of an IT infrastructure do not necessarily lead to institutional action, nor does common interest always result in multiinstitutional collaboration. The Louisiana experience illustrates that the keys to success are leadership, risk taking, a vision for the future, the search for opportunity, and the creation of an atmosphere of trust and cooperation. Even funding obstacles need not stop technological innovation, which once started can take on a momentum all its own.2.B.L.
L
ouisiana is a state of contrasts, diversity, and creativity probably best known for the New Orleans Mardi Gras, a healthy interest in superb food, and a strong tradition of populism in government. Louisiana, like too many other states, also has a history of inadequate funding for the number of state-assisted higher education institutions. Four boards oversee higher education with the Board of Regents, the coordinating board for the higher education system in the state, being charged by Louisiana’s Constitution with formulating and periodically revising a master plan for Louisiana higher education. In 1990, to provide input for the pending revision of the master plan, the Board established nine task forces to investigate specific planning issues and critical areas within higher education. The Task Force on Libraries was one of those created, to be chaired by the then Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Provost at LSU, Carolyn Hooper Hargrave, an individual with a strong commitment to libraries and years of experience in Louisiana higher education. The First Steps This Task Force, with representatives from several university libraries, began meeting and discussing the critical issues academic libraries must address to position themselves for the 1990s and the 21st century. The Task Force concluded immediately that if academic )ennifer Executive
Cargill
is Dean
Director,
State University
of Libraries,
Office
and A&M
and Ronald
of Computing College,
D. Hay is
Services,
Louisiana
Baton Rouge, LA.
libraries ever expected to effectively enter into cooperative ventures in the future, they must be automated. Of the 19 academic libraries in the then 20 institutions under the coordination of the Board of Regents, only 6 had made substantial progress toward automation. Between 1990 and 1993 the Task Force discussed and eventually created a statewide network concept. They devised a strategy for automating the academic libraries, obtained initial funding, implemented the network project, and by Fall 1993, had the first network libraries online. This was achieved with no obvious initial source of funds and no formal state endorsement: there was no statewide network in existence at the inception of the project. How did it happen that so much was accomplished without administrative mandate or legislative funding? Simply put, the state-assisted academic libraries, LSU’s Office of Computer Services, and the LSU Libraries were determined to bring academic library networking to Louisiana and demonstrate its importance to the education community and the economic development of the state. It happened through a large collaborative effort. The Task Force on Libraries had identified the key to a hopeful future for the state’s academic libraries-the need to automate and link the libraries. They submitted a proposal for legislative funding for the 1991 session to create an academic network; the proposal was not funded. As the Task Force completed its Board of Regents’ assignment to provide input for the master plan, however, the academic libraries, both state-assisted and private, determined that the cooperative momentum was too important to lapse. Therefore, they created a successor organization: the Louisiana Academic Library Information Network Consortium (LALINC). LALINC members plunged ahead with the project, determined to accomplish the network goal, not giving up after the failure to secure a state appropriation for the entire project. The concept of a statewide library application also stimulated the state’s Office of Telecommunications Management (OTM) to undertake the creation of a telecommunications statewide network. Such a network, dubbed LaNET, would link the academic institutions and other state agencies, and would provide a communications highway for a variety of other applications and connections.
The Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 19, no. 6, p. 386-387 01994 by the Journal of Academic Librarianship. All rights reserved.
Dividing Into Manageable Pieces To manage the creation and administration for the academic library network, the scope of the project was divided into manageable pieces. NOTIS would be the automation software of choice because it was already dominant among the Louisiana academic libraries. Louisiana State University and A&M College in Baton Rouge held a license for NOTIS that permitted sharing of the software by any number of separate institutions as long as the software remained resident on a single LSU mainframe. The extension of LSU’s software became the focal point of the creation of the network. The LSU Libraries and its personnel, and the LSU Office of Computing Services and its personnel, had a positive track record of effective collaboration which could be brought to the project. LALINC members then evaluated the state-assisted institutions with no library automation; four geographically dispersed academic libraries were selected to become the Phase I network group. These four had other common characteristics: the apparent “readiness” for automation and a willingness to commit institutional resources. Of the remaining state-assisted institutions, five were selected for Phase II implementation. Of the other state-assisted academic libraries, one decided not to become a part of the network but to automate independently using a different software package, and another decided to drop its NOTIS license and join the network. The remaining libraries that lacked systems were grouped tentatively to become Phase III institutions as the network further developed.
Up and Running Fortunately for the network enthusiasts, Louisiana has a higher education grants program administered by the Board of Regents which provides seed money for academic research and other projects, funds enhancements, and provides matching monies for professorships and chairs. Through the enhancement and matching grants programs, we secured funding to launch Phase I. The matching grants program required that funds be solicited from private industry and that effort began. Monies to allow the Phase II libraries to access the library network and become network ready was successfully applied for through the U.S. Department of Education Title II program competition. We then were able to hire a network staff, order equipment, contract for database conversion, make connections, and schedule training. The network began to become a reality. The library network acquired the name of LOUIS (for Louisiana Online University Information System), creating some amused confusion with LOLA, the LSU Libraries’ online catalog, and LOIS, the LSU Law Center Library online catalog.
Lessons Learned What can be learned from this technological collaboration with cooperation among several academic libraries, the institutional computing centers, state agencies, governing boards, and private sector firms? Cooperation, collaboration, team work, team building, synergism, and matrix management became
characteristics of the LOUIS project. The LOUIS project stimulated OTM to create the state network (LaNET) within a short time frame. LaNET and LOUIS are also the cornerstone applications that will benefit distance learning applications, agricultural extension services, literacy training, medical imaging, geographical information exchanges, as well as other endeavors. The project excited the private as well as the public sector. We received pledges of support by a host of private industry giants. We hope such pledges will stimulate the identification of permanent state funding to sustain the network. The LOUIS project created an opportunity to dramatize that expenditures for technology should be viewed as an investment, not just a cost. With the infrastructure available-people, hardware, software-we could initiate the project. Thanks to the project, state and university officials can appreciate the important role that technology itself and technology people play in Louisiana education. Collaboration may be a much touted concept but creating the opportunity to build the library network for Louisiana, to fund the project, and to implement the various phases of the project has required that we build partnerships that did not previously exist. We have had to exploit non-traditional funding sources and to develop an organizational team that comprises people with different work cultures, some of whom have had little history of working together, e.g., the LSU Libraries and Computing personnel, state agency staff, vendors, and politicians. LOUIS has received tremendous support and encouragement from the Commissioner of Higher Education, individual members of the Board of Regents, and the Board staff. These individuals working closely together with the LOUIS project team strengthened the LOUIS effort and made the project possible. Though there was no statewide mandate to develop the library application, no state funding directly allocated for the project, and participation was strictly voluntary, the academic librarians volunteered to work together to effect implementation of the network concept. The realization of this statewide network will also provide the foundation for a much larger statewide information network. In the Fall of 1993 LSU was awarded $2.48 million from the U.S. Department of Education under the Title II-B program; these monies will begin the extension of the network throughout the state. Equally important, the creation of the Louisiana network will position the state to be a full partner in the national networking initiatives. In the next issue Sheila Creth discusses the Information Arcade at the University of Iowa, an experience in the convergence of information technology with the teaching/ learning process in a library setting. Individuals interested in contributing guest columns should send a p&is of their proposed essay to: Charles Lowry, University Librarian, Editor, “Managing Technology,” JAL, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries, Hunt Library, Frew St., Pittsburgh, PA 15213. Or phone: (412) 268-2446; Fax: (412) 268-6944; E-mail: [email protected].
v
the Journal of Academic Librarianship, January 1994
387