- Email: [email protected]
SASS Acquisitions Systems Committee
ALA Annual Conference 1992
After the Electronic Revolution, dent’s Program, 1992
91
Will You Be the First To Go? Report of the ALCTS Presi-
Following the traditional ALCTS awards ceremony and short business meeting, Arnold Hirshon, ALCTS President, hosted a lively program that addressed the merging of information and access, and the shifts in our profession that are occurring because of revolutionary electronic changes. The keynote speaker was Theodore Nelson of Project Xanadu. Using an historical backdrop, Nelson reminded the audience of the twists of fate that predictions can take, citing as an example the 1932 projection that robots would take over household chores such as ironing shirts. Instead, permanent press was invented. His lesson: the problem will be solved, but not always in the way in which we envision it. Nelson urged librarians to return to the principles encased in literature, where a system of information transfer from the surface of the text to the eye to the mind is well in place. This surface structure may change during the switch from print to electronics, but the system itself will continue to work. His parting piece of advice: “Don’t fight what’s coming and don’t believe everything they tell you.” Nelson was followed by other speakers addressing various parts of the same theme. Peter Graham, Rutgers University, spoke on the broad topic of preservation of electronic information, noting that intellectual preservation presents the biggest challenge in terms of authenticating text. Thomas Duncan, University of California at Berkeley, focussed his remarks on how electronic publishing will change academic research. Our concept of what constitutes literacy has to shift to accommodate new forms of electronic communication. Susan Martin, Georgetown University, urged librarians, particularly those dealing with the public, to be active participants in the development and use of new technology, and she discussed the difficulties facing librarians as we seek to redefine our roles in an electronic environment. The program was summarized by the ALCTS Vice-President/President Elect, Liz Bishoff, of OCLC. Bishoff also introduced the theme of her program as ALCTS President, “The Electronic Revolution: How Will We Respond to the Challenges?” Karen A. Schmidt Acquisitions Librarian University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library 246 Library 1408 West Gregory Drive Urbana, IL 61801 KSCHMIDT@ UIUCVMD. BITNET
After Acquisitions Automation: Managing Staff Reorganization: Sponsored by the LAMA/SASS Acquisitions Systems Committee
Report of the Program
Anyone who took the title of this program at face value and attended expecting guidance on how to manage staff reorganization after automation was in for a rude disappointment: they were too late! The core message offered by the program’s panelists counseled that effective management of staff reorganization begins before automation; those who wait until after automation to begin addressing staff organization can expect to confront an inordinate share of managerial troubles, headaches, conflicts, etc.
92
ALA Annual Conference 1992
This and other useful views and advice on managing the human element came from three librarians recently involved in staff reorganizations that accompanied the introduction of automation or migration to a new automated system in their institutions. Philip Tramdack of Cleveland State University (shortly to be of Trenton State College) presented the systems office view of the automation/reorganization process. William Jarvis, Washington State University, approached the topic from the smaller library perspective (based on his prior experience at Lehigh University), while Colleen Cook of Texas A & M University took the angle of the larger library. Tramdack began his remarks by emphasizing that planning for the postimplementation stage of automation must be an integral part of the preimplementation stage. He referred to implementation stages because one can be misled by thinking of “after-automation”; it is better to view automation as an ongoing process, rather than as a project that one completes and then proceeds to other tasks. In considering how automation affects. personnel, Tramdack likened the process of automating acquisitions to “moving an island population to the mainland.” Those managing the move can minimize the trauma by conducting it in an organized, efficient fashion. Tramdack encouraged acquisitions librarians, when embarking on the automation process, to familiarize themselves with basic systems analysis/project management principles. Although librarians have been successfully implementing automated systems, they will find themselves considerably more effective, perhaps avoiding redundancies, superfluous activities, or drops in productivity, with the application of even simple systems analysis and planning techniques. For example, he suggested that, in addition to using techniques like flowcharting and inventorying, the librarian should put the acquisition system in the context of a transaction system (a model used in the commercial / industry / corporate world). This technique views the system as a structure with input, outputs, and processes, which in turn allows meaningful analyses of missions and purposes by identifying points of contact and asking: what goes in, what happens to it, what comes out? These techniques and principles are readily available to librarians through any basic textbook on systems analysis. Tramdack closed by cautioning librarians not to undertake systems analysis unless they are serious about using the results. Conducting such an analysis and then ignoring it risks reinforcing the prior habits and activities of the staff, which may be counterproductive in the new automated environment. Jarvis addressed automation and staff reorganization in the smaller library by reviewing three case studies from his experience at Lehigh University: (1) consolidation/reduction of order card files, which had been maintained to compensate for a gap in automated capabilities; (2) introduction and fine tuning of online invoice processing; and (3) implementation of an online preorder inventory. Jarvis shared a number of useful observations based on those experiences. In the smaller library environment workflow, reorganization is less a matter of moving lines and boxes on a chart and more a matter of reorganizing an individual’s work, since each staff member usually performs a number of related tasks that in larger organizations would be more segmented. Automation, in the smaller setting particularly, facilitates the “one-transaction order process,” allowing preorder and order activities to be performed at one terminal, in one sitting. Compared to the manual environment, the complexities of automated systems intensify the specialist and managerial work in the smaller library. Although automated capabilities are generally introduced to enhance workflow productivity, managers need to recognize when they are automating for the sake of automating and have the courage to reject options that introduce
ALA Annual Conference 1992
93
excessive intricacy into the workflow. Jarvis also pointed out that compared to the larger organizations usually featured in management literature, most (ARL) libraries are small organizations. Cook advocated the exercise of dynamic leadership in the automation/reorganization process, and lest anyone mistake her message for idle homage to worn virtues, her later remarks made clear that she was referring to leadership that demanded a great deal from the acquisitions manager. Moreover, she asserted that acquisitions librarians occupy a unique position within technical services for shaping the successful implementation of an integrated library system. Her compelling articulation of the issues provided a strong antidote against any identity crisis that acquisitions librarians in the audience may have been nursing (and both her message and delivery made it easier to forget the frolic of the Gay Pride Parade passing just outside the hotel). To provide background, Cook reviewed the reorganization that came as part and parcel of the NOTIS implementation at Texas A 8z M University’s Evans Library. In this instance, the reorganization included virtually the entire library, but Cook detailed the restructuring of technical services, supplementing her remarks with before- and after-organization charts. A new workflow, eliminating redundancies and streamlining operations, had been designed to take maximum advantage of the NOTIS system. Despite anticipated resistance, it was agreed that training and retraining of staff would conform to this workflow, rather than conform the workflow to the prior geography of staff expertise. In other words, where the workflow required order staff to select cataloging records, they were trained to do so and, contrary to previously inviolable turf considerations, the re-searching of these records by cataloging staff was largely eliminated. Physical arrangements were also made to conform to and support the organizational changes. Cook cited two quantitative measures of success for the implementation/reorganization: within eighteen months, a cataloging backlog of 10,000 volumes was eliminated while maintaining the regular cataloging workflow; OCLC searches were reduced by 20 percent in the first year. Cook emphasized the leadership skills required to bring about a successful staff reorganization that takes full advantage of automation. Acquisitions managers must not only understand their own operations, but must also grasp the vision of the whole automated system and the interrelationships among modules. Managers further must articulate, communicate, and contextualize that vision for staff at various levels and in terms and objectives appropriate to the different audiences. Resistance to drastic change is inevitable and conflict unavoidable, requiring tenacity on the part of the manager, but a tenacity that is tempered by listening skills, flexibility, and hard thinking. Cook also addressed the troublesome line between staff empowerment and abdication of leadership responsibility. “Providing input is not the same as making a decision.” Staff involvement in the process is critical, not only to incorporate their positive contributions, but to avoid the trap of micromanagement. But Cook stressed that managers must clearly delineate up front the role employees will play in the decision-making process, to avoid false expectations or resentment by staff who feel patronized. The discussion following these three presentations mostly dealt with conflicts and competition between organizational units when implementing a system. Judging from questions put to the panel, it appeared that many in the audience had come to associate the introduction of automated systems with the eruption of internecine hostilities. To prevent these from derailing a successful implementation, the presenters suggested explicitly defining the power or influence each person or unit would have in the process; clearly delineating the scope of everyone’s role will help prevent both disenfranchisement and unrealistic expectations. Com-
94
ALA Annual Conference 1992
municating to staff how a new system improves overall performance, even if their own particular operation is not enhanced, also helps them accept the change to a new system when they prefer the old. Ron L. Ray Head, Acquisitions Department Rutgers University Library 1350 Davidson Road Piscataway, NJ 08855 [email protected]
Article Document Delivery and Its Implications for Serials Librarians: LITA/ALCTS SS Interest Group on Serials Automation
Report of the
Following the introduction of candidates for the office of Vice-Chair/Chair-elect and Secretary and balloting, Chair Marcia Anderson introduced the speakers: Pamela Bluh of the University of Maryland Law School Library, Martha Whittaker of CARL Systems, and Tracy Casorso of the Digitized Document Transmission Project of the North Carolina State University Libraries. Bluh began her presentation by delineating the situation existing prior to 1990. Traditional interlibrary loan was the general medium for exchange of information between libraries. This process was self-contained within the library. The process was handled for the user by the librarian and relied on information contained in other libraries. In the past few years this has changed, and Bluh used the year 1990 as a marker for the turn in librarians’ thinking and action. She defined resource sharing as synonymous with document delivery. The new era is marked by resource sharing between libraries and information brokers. Within libraries, resource sharing is closely tied to fully integrated acquisitions and collection management programs. Another significant change is that end-users can access information outside the library directly. While fiscal constraints impose some limits, continued technological advances have made resource sharing easier. Librarians need to be aware that libraries can be sidelined in this process and must maintain a philosophical sensitivity to the integral nature of library operations. The great debate is currently, “Acquisition versus Access.” This is spurred by fiscal uncertainty. Libraries are faced with maintaining the status quo or experiencing negative growth. Inflation continues to erode library materials budgets. Reliance on one methodology is no longer appropriate. Libraries must do more than give lip service to resource sharing; they need to shift to providing access to information, and they must carefully weigh the values of delivery systems. Bluh concluded by sketching a scenario for the future. Document delivery will not be a substitute for acquisitions, but a partner. Acquisitions policies must be refined to include collaborative efforts. Libraries must capitalize on technological advances. Librarians must develop effective education for users. Focus must be placed on an awareness of existing collections and anticipating users’ future needs. Above all, libraries must diversify with regard to planning, procedures, policies, and practice so as to preserve the library as the creative hub of the organization. Whittaker began by calling her listeners’ attention to some buzz words. Last year, the frequently heard phrase was “collecting just in time rather than just in case.” This year “velocity of information” and “disintermediation” are more popular. A striking example of
After the Electronic Revolution, dent’s Program, 1992
91
Will You Be the First To Go? Report of the ALCTS Presi-
Following the traditional ALCTS awards ceremony and short business meeting, Arnold Hirshon, ALCTS President, hosted a lively program that addressed the merging of information and access, and the shifts in our profession that are occurring because of revolutionary electronic changes. The keynote speaker was Theodore Nelson of Project Xanadu. Using an historical backdrop, Nelson reminded the audience of the twists of fate that predictions can take, citing as an example the 1932 projection that robots would take over household chores such as ironing shirts. Instead, permanent press was invented. His lesson: the problem will be solved, but not always in the way in which we envision it. Nelson urged librarians to return to the principles encased in literature, where a system of information transfer from the surface of the text to the eye to the mind is well in place. This surface structure may change during the switch from print to electronics, but the system itself will continue to work. His parting piece of advice: “Don’t fight what’s coming and don’t believe everything they tell you.” Nelson was followed by other speakers addressing various parts of the same theme. Peter Graham, Rutgers University, spoke on the broad topic of preservation of electronic information, noting that intellectual preservation presents the biggest challenge in terms of authenticating text. Thomas Duncan, University of California at Berkeley, focussed his remarks on how electronic publishing will change academic research. Our concept of what constitutes literacy has to shift to accommodate new forms of electronic communication. Susan Martin, Georgetown University, urged librarians, particularly those dealing with the public, to be active participants in the development and use of new technology, and she discussed the difficulties facing librarians as we seek to redefine our roles in an electronic environment. The program was summarized by the ALCTS Vice-President/President Elect, Liz Bishoff, of OCLC. Bishoff also introduced the theme of her program as ALCTS President, “The Electronic Revolution: How Will We Respond to the Challenges?” Karen A. Schmidt Acquisitions Librarian University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library 246 Library 1408 West Gregory Drive Urbana, IL 61801 KSCHMIDT@ UIUCVMD. BITNET
After Acquisitions Automation: Managing Staff Reorganization: Sponsored by the LAMA/SASS Acquisitions Systems Committee
Report of the Program
Anyone who took the title of this program at face value and attended expecting guidance on how to manage staff reorganization after automation was in for a rude disappointment: they were too late! The core message offered by the program’s panelists counseled that effective management of staff reorganization begins before automation; those who wait until after automation to begin addressing staff organization can expect to confront an inordinate share of managerial troubles, headaches, conflicts, etc.
92
ALA Annual Conference 1992
This and other useful views and advice on managing the human element came from three librarians recently involved in staff reorganizations that accompanied the introduction of automation or migration to a new automated system in their institutions. Philip Tramdack of Cleveland State University (shortly to be of Trenton State College) presented the systems office view of the automation/reorganization process. William Jarvis, Washington State University, approached the topic from the smaller library perspective (based on his prior experience at Lehigh University), while Colleen Cook of Texas A & M University took the angle of the larger library. Tramdack began his remarks by emphasizing that planning for the postimplementation stage of automation must be an integral part of the preimplementation stage. He referred to implementation stages because one can be misled by thinking of “after-automation”; it is better to view automation as an ongoing process, rather than as a project that one completes and then proceeds to other tasks. In considering how automation affects. personnel, Tramdack likened the process of automating acquisitions to “moving an island population to the mainland.” Those managing the move can minimize the trauma by conducting it in an organized, efficient fashion. Tramdack encouraged acquisitions librarians, when embarking on the automation process, to familiarize themselves with basic systems analysis/project management principles. Although librarians have been successfully implementing automated systems, they will find themselves considerably more effective, perhaps avoiding redundancies, superfluous activities, or drops in productivity, with the application of even simple systems analysis and planning techniques. For example, he suggested that, in addition to using techniques like flowcharting and inventorying, the librarian should put the acquisition system in the context of a transaction system (a model used in the commercial / industry / corporate world). This technique views the system as a structure with input, outputs, and processes, which in turn allows meaningful analyses of missions and purposes by identifying points of contact and asking: what goes in, what happens to it, what comes out? These techniques and principles are readily available to librarians through any basic textbook on systems analysis. Tramdack closed by cautioning librarians not to undertake systems analysis unless they are serious about using the results. Conducting such an analysis and then ignoring it risks reinforcing the prior habits and activities of the staff, which may be counterproductive in the new automated environment. Jarvis addressed automation and staff reorganization in the smaller library by reviewing three case studies from his experience at Lehigh University: (1) consolidation/reduction of order card files, which had been maintained to compensate for a gap in automated capabilities; (2) introduction and fine tuning of online invoice processing; and (3) implementation of an online preorder inventory. Jarvis shared a number of useful observations based on those experiences. In the smaller library environment workflow, reorganization is less a matter of moving lines and boxes on a chart and more a matter of reorganizing an individual’s work, since each staff member usually performs a number of related tasks that in larger organizations would be more segmented. Automation, in the smaller setting particularly, facilitates the “one-transaction order process,” allowing preorder and order activities to be performed at one terminal, in one sitting. Compared to the manual environment, the complexities of automated systems intensify the specialist and managerial work in the smaller library. Although automated capabilities are generally introduced to enhance workflow productivity, managers need to recognize when they are automating for the sake of automating and have the courage to reject options that introduce
ALA Annual Conference 1992
93
excessive intricacy into the workflow. Jarvis also pointed out that compared to the larger organizations usually featured in management literature, most (ARL) libraries are small organizations. Cook advocated the exercise of dynamic leadership in the automation/reorganization process, and lest anyone mistake her message for idle homage to worn virtues, her later remarks made clear that she was referring to leadership that demanded a great deal from the acquisitions manager. Moreover, she asserted that acquisitions librarians occupy a unique position within technical services for shaping the successful implementation of an integrated library system. Her compelling articulation of the issues provided a strong antidote against any identity crisis that acquisitions librarians in the audience may have been nursing (and both her message and delivery made it easier to forget the frolic of the Gay Pride Parade passing just outside the hotel). To provide background, Cook reviewed the reorganization that came as part and parcel of the NOTIS implementation at Texas A 8z M University’s Evans Library. In this instance, the reorganization included virtually the entire library, but Cook detailed the restructuring of technical services, supplementing her remarks with before- and after-organization charts. A new workflow, eliminating redundancies and streamlining operations, had been designed to take maximum advantage of the NOTIS system. Despite anticipated resistance, it was agreed that training and retraining of staff would conform to this workflow, rather than conform the workflow to the prior geography of staff expertise. In other words, where the workflow required order staff to select cataloging records, they were trained to do so and, contrary to previously inviolable turf considerations, the re-searching of these records by cataloging staff was largely eliminated. Physical arrangements were also made to conform to and support the organizational changes. Cook cited two quantitative measures of success for the implementation/reorganization: within eighteen months, a cataloging backlog of 10,000 volumes was eliminated while maintaining the regular cataloging workflow; OCLC searches were reduced by 20 percent in the first year. Cook emphasized the leadership skills required to bring about a successful staff reorganization that takes full advantage of automation. Acquisitions managers must not only understand their own operations, but must also grasp the vision of the whole automated system and the interrelationships among modules. Managers further must articulate, communicate, and contextualize that vision for staff at various levels and in terms and objectives appropriate to the different audiences. Resistance to drastic change is inevitable and conflict unavoidable, requiring tenacity on the part of the manager, but a tenacity that is tempered by listening skills, flexibility, and hard thinking. Cook also addressed the troublesome line between staff empowerment and abdication of leadership responsibility. “Providing input is not the same as making a decision.” Staff involvement in the process is critical, not only to incorporate their positive contributions, but to avoid the trap of micromanagement. But Cook stressed that managers must clearly delineate up front the role employees will play in the decision-making process, to avoid false expectations or resentment by staff who feel patronized. The discussion following these three presentations mostly dealt with conflicts and competition between organizational units when implementing a system. Judging from questions put to the panel, it appeared that many in the audience had come to associate the introduction of automated systems with the eruption of internecine hostilities. To prevent these from derailing a successful implementation, the presenters suggested explicitly defining the power or influence each person or unit would have in the process; clearly delineating the scope of everyone’s role will help prevent both disenfranchisement and unrealistic expectations. Com-
94
ALA Annual Conference 1992
municating to staff how a new system improves overall performance, even if their own particular operation is not enhanced, also helps them accept the change to a new system when they prefer the old. Ron L. Ray Head, Acquisitions Department Rutgers University Library 1350 Davidson Road Piscataway, NJ 08855 [email protected]
Article Document Delivery and Its Implications for Serials Librarians: LITA/ALCTS SS Interest Group on Serials Automation
Report of the
Following the introduction of candidates for the office of Vice-Chair/Chair-elect and Secretary and balloting, Chair Marcia Anderson introduced the speakers: Pamela Bluh of the University of Maryland Law School Library, Martha Whittaker of CARL Systems, and Tracy Casorso of the Digitized Document Transmission Project of the North Carolina State University Libraries. Bluh began her presentation by delineating the situation existing prior to 1990. Traditional interlibrary loan was the general medium for exchange of information between libraries. This process was self-contained within the library. The process was handled for the user by the librarian and relied on information contained in other libraries. In the past few years this has changed, and Bluh used the year 1990 as a marker for the turn in librarians’ thinking and action. She defined resource sharing as synonymous with document delivery. The new era is marked by resource sharing between libraries and information brokers. Within libraries, resource sharing is closely tied to fully integrated acquisitions and collection management programs. Another significant change is that end-users can access information outside the library directly. While fiscal constraints impose some limits, continued technological advances have made resource sharing easier. Librarians need to be aware that libraries can be sidelined in this process and must maintain a philosophical sensitivity to the integral nature of library operations. The great debate is currently, “Acquisition versus Access.” This is spurred by fiscal uncertainty. Libraries are faced with maintaining the status quo or experiencing negative growth. Inflation continues to erode library materials budgets. Reliance on one methodology is no longer appropriate. Libraries must do more than give lip service to resource sharing; they need to shift to providing access to information, and they must carefully weigh the values of delivery systems. Bluh concluded by sketching a scenario for the future. Document delivery will not be a substitute for acquisitions, but a partner. Acquisitions policies must be refined to include collaborative efforts. Libraries must capitalize on technological advances. Librarians must develop effective education for users. Focus must be placed on an awareness of existing collections and anticipating users’ future needs. Above all, libraries must diversify with regard to planning, procedures, policies, and practice so as to preserve the library as the creative hub of the organization. Whittaker began by calling her listeners’ attention to some buzz words. Last year, the frequently heard phrase was “collecting just in time rather than just in case.” This year “velocity of information” and “disintermediation” are more popular. A striking example of