What Would You Recommend if You Could?
My dean has asked me to give him a list of recommended Library 2.0-related projects when my sabbatical ends in March. He deserves kudos for suggesting such a thing. It's a hopeful sign when your dean makes such a request.
As a matter of fact, this blog began as a project to help me write this document for my dean. Through the blog, I'm acquainting myself with the 2.0 scene, mulling over ideas, experimenting with proposals, and learning from readers' comments. A lot that has appeared in this blog will find its way into my document.
I'm well aware that this is a golden opportunity. I can only hope that some of my proposals will ultimately see the light of day.
I also know that part of the success of this document will lie in its presentation. Rather than simply list a series of proposed projects - probably what is expected from me - I'll be addressing fundamental issues such as administrator buy-in, ongoing training, and the revamping of positions. We can't simply leap into numerous projects without laying the appropriate groundwork.
As I've considered the phenomenon of Library 2.0, I've come to realize that it is much more than what we do - much more than our innovations and much more than our accomplishments. Library 2.0 is, first and foremost, a mindset. If you can get your colleagues to adopt this mindset, exciting new practices have a chance to emerge from staff who are committed to them. And the library as an institution needs to accommodate this mindset by supporting a 2.0 way of life.
Ultimately, the biggest challenge in what I present to my dean will be the proposals for laying the groundwork for any action. This is how far I've come from the initial idea to present project proposals.
I'll publish the document on this blog when it's completed. In the meantime, I'm curious: what kind of a document would you write if your dean gave you the opportunity?
Comments
When I was asked to do something similar, I trawled about the net for a few weeks and drafted several reports. Then I concluded that I didn't know how everyone in the library did their jobs, what their users wanted and where the gaps were in their service...but the library staff doing those jobs already did.
Instead of writing a report, I ran a technology immersion project over 2 months instead..and made the "wiki editing" exercise a collaborative one where staff worked together to make a recommendations document about how we could use the tools.
In hindsight, I think that you'd need to do both immersion project and a more official report...but if you want to bring the staff with you, then getting them to understand the tools before they articulate the gaps Library2.0 could fill, is probably step one.
Very different from "expert opinion" making recommendation about what they should do. Moves a bit slower, but I think it provides a more solid base. YMMWV
Posted by: Kathryn Greenhill | January 8, 2007 06:03 PM
I probably wouldn't write a document per se, but rather a site that included links to examples of the technologies that I was presenting. Links to what other institutions are doing should be especially effective, along with prototype tools that you've already created. I can't wait to see what you come up with!
Posted by: Ann Tenglund | January 8, 2007 09:20 PM
Kathryn, I agree that an immersion component is important. This kind of thing will be recommended in my report, and I agree that as a training technique it can be effective. I'd want to develop any training with input from colleagues, so (if approved) it would be a post-sabbatical project.
Ann, I agree, and in fact have already decided that a Web site such as the one you describe is potentially a good idea. I say "potentially" because I've had experience working with a committee to develop a site that linked to examples of great ideas from other institutions that was not welcomed by my colleagues. All I can do is persist. And I also believe that basic institutional change must take place from the highest levels on down before a bevy of new ideas have a chance to take hold. I anticipate that this will be my biggest challenge.
Posted by: Laura Cohen | January 9, 2007 09:35 AM
I like the website idea for your proposal's format. Some of my colleagues didn't "get" the concept of wikis until I sent them a link to take a look at one. Also, it's vital to skip the "library-ese" and "technobabble" as much as possible in your proposal. it's easier to convince stakeholders of the value of these tools if you explain them in words they understand. I know that may seem like common sense, but...
Posted by: Sarah Clark | January 9, 2007 04:14 PM