Two Libraries, One Plan: Combining and Refining Technical Services Across Two Campuses Living the Future 6: Wow! Where Next? April 5-8, 2006

Representing the Library Technical Services Denison-Kenyon Work Redesign Team Andrea Peakovic Library and Information Services Kenyon College Gambier, OH Ellen P. Conrad William Howard Doane Library Denison University Granville, OH

Our Context  Both are members of the Five Colleges of Ohio consortium (plus Oberlin, Ohio Wesleyan, & College of Wooster)  Share an online catalog & joint storage facility  All are members of OhioLINK Statewide union catalog Direct, patron-initiated borrowing from any institution  Consortial purchase of 100+ databases  Denison and Kenyon are similar in size, acquisitions and technical service staffing

Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Grant January 1, 2004 – August 15, 2005 Goal of the Project “To improve access to information resources and create value-added services for our patrons through the cooperative efforts of the libraries of Denison University and Kenyon College”

Planning Groups  Pre-planning committee Study and brainstorm  Reengineering the Corporation (Hammer & Champy)  Planning task force Charge: To create a robust system for combined library technical services in which the focus in on constantly evolving patron information needs, research patterns, and desires. The system must be flexible, transferable, malleable, and adaptable. And so they did!  Implementation team

Objectives of the Project  Apply dramatic efficiencies to 80% of what we currently purchase  Streamline receipt and delivery  Reallocate resources to enhance our collections so they better serve our users  Empower our technical services division to create new services and manage information in all formats  Enable our users to fully realize the liberal arts in an age of electronic information

Key Planning Processes  Vision Statement  Planning Assumptions and Principles  Workflow Model  Final Plan

Significant Task Force Activities  Task force retreat  All-staff retreat  Workflow evaluation by outside Consultants  Background information Reading plans Web searches Conferences  Living the Future 5  Information exchange All-staff meetings Minutes & monthly reports distribution list  Drafting final plan

Task Force Retreat  Two-day retreat, Roscoe Village Task Force, Directors, and Consultant  Key Outcomes Work redesign principles Planning assumptions List of questions Environmental assessment Vision—the ideal Development of initial work redesign What we need to know and learn Group agreements Timeline

Evolution of a Vision…  "The organizational restructuring of the four libraries was discussed to allow for the consolidating of technical services functions. Monographs could be purchased and cataloged through a single monographic department for the four colleges. Serials might be acquired and processed through a single department. Standards for cataloging would need to be accepted by each of the four colleges, however, membership in OhioLINK would bring about this standardization." May 31, 1994 Paul Gherman, Kenyon College

Evolution of a Vision…  Grant Proposal: “A single collection management unit…responsible for:” [paraphrased] Acquiring resources in all formats; Managing resources to maximize usefulness; Improving users’ access to resources—both physical and virtual; Leading the Ohio5 consortial collection development initiatives; Managing the Ohio5 off-site storage facility; Continuously adopting, adapting and innovating ways to make research more comprehensive & efficient to use.  “This unit will organize its work process around the current and future needs of our patrons, making no assumptions about existing processes, while fully embracing technological and managerial innovations in our field.”

Vision Points from All-Staff Retreat  Categories we identified: Staff and staffing issues CONSORT Catalog Service User needs/desires Use of space Technical resources (vis-à-vis use of systems) Miscellaneous

Final Vision Statement  BE COURAGEOUS!  Act as a collaborative unit to best serve users at multiple locations  Provide intellectual representation of collection as a whole  Foster a culture of staff empowerment that effectively utilizes and rewards individual strengths  Enable research and development capacity for entire organization  Appreciate that as we combine our processes, there may be activities best implemented separately

Developing Key Processes  Process Map Grant proposal  Key Work Activities Map Retreat  Work Process Model Task force  Staffing Model Implementation team

The Workflow Model

Implementation  Three member implementation team began January, 2005  Workflows refined Staff involvement integral part of workflow refinement Frequent meetings with staff to encourage involvement and participation in the process  Combined approval plan initiated  Daily delivery between Denison and Kenyon  Staffing allocations and recommendations made

Combining Workflows  Implement workflows in phases, beginning with books Largest portion of our workflow Easiest to begin with  Use YBP for major vendor Use of GOBI for all ordering Utilize PromptCat records Materials arrive shelf-ready Received and cataloged at Denison All non-YBP materials are ordered and cataloged at Kenyon  Online electronic order form developed

YBP work processes  Electronic invoicing  Shelf-ready materials  Change PromptCat profiles  Design new property stamps  Transition orders to GOBI  Change shipping addresses  Develop mechanisms for quality control

Non-YBP work processes  Develop online order form  Create and modify vendor accounts  Train staff in invoicing and Millennium  Materials non-mainstream Foreign language and/or publishers Scores Art  Identify local cataloging practices

Lessons Learned  Details, details, details!  The devil is in the details! Property stamp Spine labels PromptCat profiles CatDate field in order records  Trial and Error Communicating while testing new processes  Time-consuming process  Expect work imbalances

Staffing Model

Staffing Recommendations  Collected staff preferences in new workflow Job positions/FTEs were not defined Staff expressed interest in multiples areas  Comparison of staff preferences and staffing allocations in model  Loose assignment of job duties Full job descriptions forthcoming

Team Structure  Two-tiered team structure Each staff assigned to two teams  Process teams: based on the staffing model Ordering/Receiving/FastCat Cataloging User Access  Material Type Teams: based on materials streams defined in the plan Books/CDs/Gifts Electronic/Gov Docs/Serials A-V Media

Professional Staff Roles  Professional staff structured differently at Denison and Kenyon Denison: Head of Cataloging, Head of Acquisitions, Deputy Director Kenyon: Head of Technical Services  Title change to: Head of Collection Development  Focus on work processes Professional staff positions were not included in allocations Some direct involvement in work processes  Electronic resources and original cataloging

Managing the New Combined Unit  Associate Director of Collection Services Newly created Kenyon position Manages combined unit  ½ time at Denison and Kenyon Supervises Kenyon support staff

Words to the Wise (from the Weary :)  Define and study concept of redesign  Develop group agreements for task force and working criteria  Use consensus for decision-making  Balance size of task force with good subject/work area coverage  Open and frequent sharing of information  Hire professional consultants  Realize change brings about conflict and hurdles

Reflections from Staff Retreat  Develop communication system first  Keep momentum moving Don’t sacrifice doing it right  Expect things won’t go smoothly Plan for surprises  Outcomes not immediate  It takes time and iterations  Retreat for all TS staff early in process

More reflections…  Hire or appoint a project leader early in the process  Keep selectors and other staff apprised of changes and contacts  Be upfront about real goals, even if it means downsizing  Remember and revisit your inspiration  Be courageous!

“Radical redesign means getting to the root of things: not making superficial changes or fiddling with what is already in place, but throwing away the old...inventing completely new ways of accomplishing work.” Hammer and Champy, p. 36

Stay Tuned for Updates bres/lwrtf/lwrtf.html

Bibliography Application to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation: Library Technical Services Work Redesign. [Grant proposal] Cochrane, Lynn Scott and Christopher D. Barth. “Cooperative Work Redesign in Library Technical Services.” submitted in October 2005 for publication in Library Administration & Management. Conrad, Ellen P. and Andrea Peakovic. “Denison University & Kenyon College Library Technical Services Work Redesign.” OVGTSL 2005 Annual Conference. 12 May Greever, Karen E. and Debra K. Andreadis. “Technical Services Work Redesign Across Two College Libraries.” Technical Services Quarterly forthcoming Hammer, Michael. “Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate, Obliterate.” Harvard Business Review (1990): Hammer, Michael and James Champy. Reengineering the Corporation. New York: HarperCollins, Hayes, Jan and Maureen Sullivan. Mapping the Process: Engaging Staff in Redesigning Work. [Wheeling, IL: North Suburban Library System], Plan for Library Technical Services Work Redesign. [Final plan] Snyder, Monteze M. et al. Building Consensus: Conflict and Unity. Richmond, IN: Earlham Quaker Foundations of Leadership Program, 2001.

“Radical redesign means getting to the root of things: not making superficial changes or fiddling with what is already in place, but throwing away the old...inventing completely new ways of accomplishing work.” Hammer and Champy, p. 36