Chow / Bucknall Library Technology and User Services

Planning, Integration, and Usability Engineering
1. Auflage 2011
ISBN: 978-1-78063-290-2
Verlag: Elsevier Science & Techn.
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 6 - ePub Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, 170 Seiten

Reihe: Chandos Information Professional Series

Written as a technology guide for students, practitioners, and administrators, the focus of this book is on introducing current and future trends in library technology and automation within the larger context of strategic and systems planning, implementation, and continuous improvement. Technology is an essential resource for attaining both organizational and patron goals, and planning needs to emphasize the alignment between the clearly defined goals of each. For this alignment to occur on a consistent basis goals must be designed, or engineered, in a systematic fashion where technology fulfils the need to deliver the desired outcomes in an efficient, cost-effective manner. The concept of usability engineering is also examined, where the technology is planned, designed, and implemented in such a way as to maximize utility and ease-of-use for users and employees. Readers of this book will understand both the why and the how of library technology, planning, and implementation articulated in a simple, easy-to-understand fashion. - Delivered from academic, public, and school library media perspectives - Current and emerging technologies are discussed along with their current and future application in the field of library and information science - Technology planning and integration is explained using a systems design process with scenarios and case studies that are articulated in a step-wise, holistic fashion

Dr. Anthony S. Chow teaches library management and technology as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Library and Information Studies at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Anthony also serves as an educational consultant specializing in online information and evaluation systems and has overseen the IT for a large academic unit, managed training and quality assurance for an Internet company, and oversaw computer based instruction training for a government agency. His dissertation was published as a book entitled Systems Thinking and 21st Century Education.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Chow, Anthony S.

Bucknall, Tim

Leseproben

2

Strategic planning, organizational goals and technology: what and for whom?

Abstract:

Where does one begin in deciding what technology is best for one’s library? The close alignment between organizational and user goals is critical in identifying and implementing the appropriate technology solutions. This chapter walks step-by-step through the process of conducting a needs assessment and developing a strategic plan, and discusses the relationship between following the process and creating a world-class working environment for employees and users alike. Readers are provided with a blue-print for how to develop one on their own. Once a strategic plan is created that paints the strategic goals of both the organization and the users it hopes to serve, the appropriate technology to facilitate attainment of these goals can then be identified.

Key words

strategic planning

needs assessment

vision statement

mission statement

values

core competencies

SMART goals

goals and objectives

user services

world class

Technology is expensive, requires frequent maintenance and becomes outdated quickly. Selecting the appropriate technology based on the needs of users and the organization is critical. Technology is a means not an end. The ‘need’, a collective term for the fundamental ways in which various users utilize the organization’s goods and services, represents the ultimate organizational ‘ends’. Defining clear ends is paramount to ensuring precious, limited budgets are allocated as efficiently and effectively as possible. The ADDIE systems design model represents a robust systems approach to ensuring organizational goals are clear, accurate and aligned to both user and funding agency goals.

Utilizing the ADDIE model as a framework (Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement and Evaluate) (Clark, 2010), three major organizational planning tools can be implemented in a systematic, step-wise fashion – needs assessment, strategic planning and budgeting. As discussed in Chapter 1, Joe Harless finally conceded that the needs assessment must be the first step in the ‘A’ or Analyze stage, the first step in the ADDIE process.

Needs assessment

Assessing needs is a straightforward concept. But conducting one that is valid, reliable and current is difficult. We view this as a four step process:

 determine whose need actually should be identified;

 assess the need by communicating with each constituency group using multiple methods;

 collect statistics around existing resources and usage patterns (i.e. circulation history, computer usage, etc.);

 analyse the results and create a priority list of each group’s goals.

These analyses and identified goals serve as the foundation for beginning the second phase of the ADDIE process, the ‘D’ or Design phase.

Whose needs should be considered and assessed? Kaufman’s Organizational Elements Model (OEM) (Kaufman et al., 2001) holds that there are three primary needs any organization must consider: Mega (societal); Macro (external to the organization); and Micro (organizational). The mega level views society as the primary customer or stakeholder of any organization’s goods and services; the value added by an organization represents the goals of society or the local community that the organization resides in. The macro level represents the organizational goals of the parent or funding agency. The micro goals are the specific goals of the organization itself. The need – expressed in the form of specific, measurable goals – of all three organizational levels should be aligned.

Step 1

At each of the three levels there are influential people, documents and stakeholders that should be consulted. The mega or community level for academic libraries, for example, might be taking a look at community (even national or international) priorities in terms of economic development, quality of life and research emphasis of faculty and students. For school libraries the mega level might focus on parents, employers and community leaders that can answer the question, ‘What should our children and students be able to do with what they are learning in school?’ and, more importantly, ‘How can school libraries help with this?’ For public libraries, the mega level certainly could be helped to be defined by local community citizens of all ages, leaders (i.e. board of supervisors or commissioners, etc.) and state and local trends.

The macro level reflects the external environment that has a direct impact on that organization’s goals (i.e. the priorities of those funding the organization) and should be directly linked to previously identified mega goals. For academic libraries, this certainly would involve, at minimum, the goals and priorities for a state-level governing body (for public) or corporation (for private) and then hierarchically work its way down to the university, the university’s leadership and also any Friends of the Library boards. For school libraries, this would also start at minimum with state-level educational priorities as well as the local board of education and superintendent and then within the school itself, school administration and PTA. For public libraries, certainly again at minimum start at the state-level bodies that are helping shape the goals of the state as well as local governing bodies such as the city council or board of supervisors, mayor and Friends of the Library.

Understanding the larger contexts of mega and macro will help the organization properly align its own goals (micro) to the priority goals of society and its primary users, as well as those of relevant local governing bodies and primary funders. While it may initially appear that such an approach may too rigidly limit creativity and autonomy, ultimately it helps ensure that the larger goals of the organization’s environment are known and understood. While aligning organizational priorities to those of larger constituencies makes intuitive sense, commitment to this process is up to the discretion of the organization.

Step 2

Once the core constituencies are identified, step two in the process is discovering their needs in a valid, reliable fashion. Obviously, asking them directly is easiest to do, but how does one most appropriately do that? Interviews with ‘power’ users – high-level decision-makers (that help establish large-scale visions but may not know much about frontline operations) represent one essential point of data. Collecting documentation that articulates mission and vision statements and priority goals is a second seminal piece of information. Learning directly from the primary users of your organization through interviews, focus groups, natural observation and surveys is also essential. A key aspect to remember is that such discovery usually will not be for research purposes so the pressure of having to implement a perfectly valid survey, focus group, or set of interview questions should be alleviated to a large extent. Gathering data, as potentially invalid and non-generalizable as it may be, will still help more clearly understand need at mega and macro contexts than with no data at all; the process itself in this case is the most important.

Nevertheless, it is important to keep in mind that each constituency will have its own unique perspective on user needs and that no one group can accurately speak for all. For example, the most frequently consulted group are the public services staff, because they are the library employees with the most direct contact with the public and should arguably thus be the most aware of user needs. But that group is typically too intimately aware of the library’s services and resources to be able to truly see things from a user viewpoint and they tend to interact with a very small percentage of the overall user population. Users are sometimes consulted during the needs analysis phase. One might assume that this group would be able to give relatively accurate assessments of their own needs, but that isn’t always the case. A few years ago, we conducted user surveys in several library instruction classes. We asked our students, ‘Would you use chat reference if we offered it?’ and an overwhelming percentage answered in the affirmative. But when we implemented the service, only a very small percentage actually utilized it. In this case, there was a tremendous gap between those who thought they would use it and those that actually did. It is important to keep in mind that surveys, focus groups and interviews test perceptions – and that those perceptions may not always match up with reality.

Of course, there is another significant reason to ask people what they want; any effective action plan will need the buy-in and cooperation of multiple groups. Those groups will be most enthusiastic if they feel they have had a meaningful opportunity to provide input.

Step 3

The subjective opinions of varying groups provide valuable information, but are best used when combined with more...