Deep Dive on Scholarship, Discovery and Innovation

The second of the Deep Dive sessions as described in the What’s Next? summary from the January retreat is on Scholarship, Discovery and Innovation and is being developed in collaboration with Beth Sandore Namachchivaya, Associate University Librarian for Research. This session will be focused on the campus strategic plan goals related to research and inquiry and the Library’s engagement with these areas. We will have two campus speakers joining us to set the context for our discussion: George Chacko (Director of Research Information Analytics, Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research) and Antoinette Burton (Interim Head of Sociology and, starting July 1, Interim Director of Illinois Program for Research in the Humanities).

Register at: https://illinois.edu/fb/sec/2610193

Details:

Scholarship, Discovery and Innovation Deep Dive
ACES, Heritage Room
June 16, 2015
8:30 – Registration, Coffee and Snacks
9:00-Noon – Speakers, Discussions, and Prioritization

Deep Dive – Transformative Learning

This summer will feature three Deep Dive sessions as described in the What’s Next? summary that followed up on the January retreat and laid out the work for the coming months.

The first of these is the Teaching and Transformative Learning Deep Dive session and is being developed in collaboration with Sue Searing, Associate University Librarian for User Services. This session will be focused on the campus strategic plan goal of Transformative Learning and the Library’s engagement in teaching and learning. Chuck Tucker, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education and Innovation, will provide an opening talk to frame our discussions.

Please register https://illinois.edu/fb/sec/3398139 for this even no later than Tuesday, April 28 at 5pm so that we can finalize the catering order, etc.

Details:

Teaching and Transformative Learning Deep Dive
Latzer Hall, University YMCA
May 1, 2015
8:30 – Registration, Coffee and Snacks
9:00-Noon – Speakers, Discussions, and Prioritization

What’s Next? Following from the Library Retreat

At the March 19, 2015 All-Library Meeting Valerie Hotchkiss and Bill Mischo presented an update on the strategic planning process on behalf of the Strategic Planning Steering Team: AllLibraryMeeting-SP-2015March19 [PDF of PPT Slides]. They reported on the analysis of the input from the Library Retreat as well as the follow-up that is planned.

The Library Retreat resulted in an immense amount of data and many conversations – all helped to help scope the focus for the coming months. This image presents an overview of the upcoming events and structure for the strategic planning process including stakeholders and timelines:

AsResultofRetreat

The Strategic Planning Steering Team is particularly grateful to the Associate University Librarians, who are partnering in offering the Deep Dive Sessions, as well as the Staff Development and Training Committee, which has agreed to partner in following up on the suggestions to discuss issues related to staffing/moral/training/organizational culture. This later follow up will be timed to take advantage of the results from the ClimateQUAL survey that was recently conducted and take place in late spring/early summer depending upon when the results from the survey are received and what the findings are.

Ideas for Spring Discussions (Summary from Retreat)

As a final activity, each Retreat participant had the opportunity to identify “Up to Three Strategic Planning Topics I would Like to Propose for an Open Session Discussion During Spring 2015.” Participants submitted a total of 373 ideas! The Strategic Planning Steering Team again used a Wordle to reveal the themes in the responses.

SpringIdeas

 

 

 

Scenario Discussions (Summary from Retreat)

Group discussions at the Library Retreat were based on discussion prompts. The use of scenarios for discussion was meant to generate ideas to think with over the coming months and not to indicate any predetermined decisions or priorities.

20150109_092748Each of the total of 12 scenarios was discussion by four tables of participants, resulting in 60 pages of transcribed input from the recording worksheets that each group filled out. That is a lot of text! In addition to reviewing the worksheets, the Strategic Planning Steering Team used a visualization technique in order to reveal some of the common themes as represented by keywords. Here is the Wordle that represents all of the input:

finalwordleofallinputIn addition to this overall Wordle, the Strategic Planning Steering Team reviewed the Wordles for all of the individual scenarios. The scenarios and the Wordles for each scenario are available here: individual scenario wordles [Word Document].

Organizational Characteristics (Summary from Retreat)

At the Library Retreat, participants were seated in 24 small groups. The first activity was an exploration of the organizational characteristics of the Library. Each group had a set of 20150109_08572872 cards with descriptive words, which they sorted into three piles – The Library Is, The Library Should Be, and The Library Should Not Be. Each group also had 8 blank cards so they could add words to any of the piles if they desired to do so. The tables were abuzz with chatter and debate as the groups had to quickly come to consensus as they did the sorting.

Findings:

An analysis of all of the input from the groups resulting in these terms emerging as the most desired organizational characteristics for the future: actionable, consistent, cutting edge, diverse, efficient, empowering, flexible, fun, modern, proactive, simple, strategic, tactical, and visionary. As we continue our discussions in the spring and summer to identify specific strategies and actions for the University Library, these are a set of terms that will inspire and to which we can all aspire.

Analysis and Details:

The provided terms were: accessible, actionable, aggressive, approachable, authentic, bleeding-edge, casual, communal, conservative, consistent, cool, current, custom, customer focused, cutting edge, detail oriented, diverse, down-to-earth, driven, eclectic, efficient, elegant, elite, empowering, experienced, fair, flexible, focused, formal, friendly, fun, global, high-quality, hip, historic, in touch, informal, innovative, leading edge, market-driven, modern, narrow, pioneering, practical, premium, proactive, professional, progressive, reactive, relational, reliable, responsible, responsive, savvy, serious, simple, slick, smart, strategic, structured, tactical, technological, thought leader, timeless, timely, traditional, trendy, tried-and-true, trusted, visionary, welcoming, and wise. This chart shows the summary of how the groups sorted the provided terms: summary chart of characteristics [Word Document].

Groups were also able to offer additional terms. Groups added that The Library Is: bureaucratic, collaborative, devoted, dynamic, heart, relevant, respectful, user-driven, and valuable – with collaborative being added by two tables. Groups added that The Library Should Be: accountable, assertive, attractive and functional facility, branded, caring, central to educational mission, clear communication, collegial, democratic, discoverable, educational, equitable, inclusive, integrated with campus, mentoring, mission-driven, open minded, passionate, and well-financed – with inclusive being added by two tables as well. Groups added that The Library Should Not be: anachronism, compartmentalized, exclusive, hierarchical, stagnant, stuffy, supercilious, and vacuum/isolated.

Next Topics and Retreat Feedback (LIBNEWS-L 1/12/15)

From: “Hinchliffe, Lisa W” [mailto:libnews-l@lists.illinois.edu]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 4:38 PM
To: LIBNEWS-L@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: SP – Feedback on Next Topics and Retreat

Hello everyone. Winter weather continues as does our Library’s strategic planning process!

I invite everyone on LIBNEWS-L to provide your input on next topics for our strategic planning discussions and (for those who were able to attend) feedback on the Library Retreat.

The survey is available at https://illinois.edu/fb/sec/4077626 and will be available through the end of the day on Tuesday, January 20.

Thanks so much for all of your engagement thus far – it is so exciting to see the ideas that are emerging!

Best, Lisa

P.S. A summary of the retreat with the full set of discussion scenarios as well as the PPT slides and a few fun photos are available on the Strategic Planning blog (http://publish.illinois.edu/librarystrategicplanning/2015/01/12/library-retreat-jan9/).

 

*************************************************************************************************
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe
Professor/Coordinator for Strategic Planning/Coordinator for Information Literacy Services and Instruction
University Library, University of Illinois, 1408 West Gregory Drive, Urbana, Illinois 61801
ljanicke@illinois.edu, 217-333-1323 (v), 217-244-4358 (f)
*************************************************************************************************

Library Retreat (1/9/15)

More than 200 Library employees gathered on Friday, January 9, in the Ballroom of the Alice Campbell Alumni Center for the Library Retreat, which served as the kick-off event for the Library’s strategic planning initiative.

The Powerpoint Slides that were used in the retreat are provided here: RetreatSlidesFinal.

Dean Wilkin’s Opening Remarks

The Library Retreat opened with energizing remarks by the Dean and University Librarian John Wilkin. Dean Wilkin observed that strategic planning has different functions for organizations at different points in development. For a “lost” organization, strategic planning is an opportunity to find a purpose. But, for an organization with a strong sense of mission – like the University Library – strategic planning represents a more unique opportunity to sharpen and focus our vision and carefully choose a future path that builds on past success while breaking new ground. Dean Wilkin argued that libraries are masters of evolution and adapting to changing circumstances and that, while circumstances change, the Library’s purpose does not. Some changes are positive (e.g., the affordances of the Internet and the opportunity to work at scale) and others are more challenging (e.g., shrinking financial resources). We must be aware of the changes, keep a focus on the things that matter, and adapt to ensure that we can get those things done that matter. After a review of the Library’s Mission Statement, Dean Wilkin asked everyone to reflect on what makes our Library great and then concluded with this charge: “Let me be clear: our strategic plan must be broad and ambitious. It is also true, however, that we are leaders in some areas of work and must use that leadership to mobilize the library community to work collectively so that we can drive down costs and increase impact.”

Organizational Characteristics

Retreat participants were seated in 24 small groups. The first activity was an exploration of the organizational characteristics of the Library. Each group had a set of 20150109_08572872 cards with descriptive words, which they sorted into three piles – The Library Is, The Library Should Be, and The Library Should Not Be. Each group also had 8 blank cards so they could add words to any of the piles if they desired to do so. An analysis of the groups’ responses will be disseminated later in January.

Scenario Discussions

The next activities were small group discussions based on discussion prompts. Lisa Hinchliffe, Coordinator for Strategic Planning, explained that the use of scenarios for discussion was meant to generate ideas to think with over the coming months and not to indicate any predetermined decisions or priorities. Strategic planning is currently in a divergent, or idea generation, stage. The work of choosing and prioritizing will come later in the spring.

Each of the f20150109_092748ollowing six scenarios was discussed by four tables:

  • John Seely Brown, the author of The Social Life of Information, said that “The challenges we face are both fundamental and substantial. We have moved from an era of equilibrium to a new normal – an era of constant disequilibrium. Our ways of working, ways of creating value, and ways of innovating must be reframed.” How does the library currently approach innovation? What does it mean to reframe those innovation approaches? How should the library approach current or new staffing and organizational models that facilitate nimbleness? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • In Boswell: A Life, Samuel Johnson wrote: “When a man writes from his own mind, he writes very rapidly. The greatest part of a writer’s time is spent in reading, in order to write; a man will turn over half a library to make one book.” The monograph continues to be a valued form for scholarship in many disciplines, particularly the humanities. What services and resources are most aligned with the work of faculty and graduate students who write monographs? What additional resources and services could the Library develop that would be valuable to them? What partnerships – on campus and off campus – would enable the Library to make such developments? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, once said that it is important to identify what is constant and does not change. What, if any, are the enduring constants for the University and the University Library? How should these things inform our planning and programmatic development work? Which ones should we pay attention to for future planning? Which ones should we stop clinging to and why? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • As the CIC Library Directors continue to explore shared programmatic initiatives, the Library has an opportunity to re-think our local efforts. In light of the shared print repository program, the fact that different CIC schools have strengths in collecting, and the Library’s involvement in the HathiTrust/Google Books Project, what should be the Library’s priorities for its on-site tangible collections? How should user services be adapted or changed given this increased reliance on shared digital and print collections? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • As faculty and researchers embrace new research practices, new research methods, and new approaches to disseminating their scholarship, what roles should the Library adopt to support the full life cycle of scholarly knowledge production, dissemination, and preservation? Are there partnerships – on campus and off campus – that the Library should create and/or nurture in order to engage in these roles? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • In his October 27 address to the Library, the Provost identified “re-envision the student experience” as one of the University’s key initiatives. How did the Library contribute to the traditional student experience and what about those should be re-envisioned? What are the Library’s current contributions to this campus initiative and how well are these known on campus? What additional contributions could the Library make and what partnerships would enable doing so? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?

After a break, Retreat participants switched to new tables and a second round of scenarios were discussed:20150109_092836

  • The Library has a strong and unique partnership with the Graduate School of Library and Information Science (GSLIS). GSLIS students work as graduate assistants in our libraries, and library faculty and staff contribute to the teaching mission at GSLIS. GSLIS and the Library have a number of shared research projects and grants as well. What are the characteristics of our relationship that make it strong? How is it evolving? What ideas do you have for growing our work together? Are there other campus units where we should pursue a similar relationship? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • Many online information environments provide a personalized experience based on user analytics. For example, Google “learns” about an individual’s interests, search patterns, etc., and then uses that for relevancy ranked search results. Amazon does something similar and “pushs” recommendations to its users. It is now possible for such analytics and data mining to be applied to Library databases and other discovery tools. What would be the advantages for our users if we invested resources to create personalized information environments? Or, should the Library focus its resources on delivery of full-text and encourage users to search in Google, Amazon, etc. for discovery? Or, is there another approach? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • The Library manages one of the largest physical footprints of space on campus – hundreds of thousands of square feet. For this discussion, focus on the space that is for users. What is the purpose of having space for users? What are the different types of user spaces? Who benefits from this space and who does not? What could the Library do to better align the design of the space with our intentions for its use and user needs and experiences? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • In his October 27 address to the Library, the Provost identified “intensify our international presence” as one of the University’s key initiatives. What are the components of the University’s international presence – in teaching, research, service, etc.? What are the Library’s current contributions to this initiative and how well are these known on campus? What additional contributions could the Library make and what partnerships would enable doing so? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • Interdisciplinary is a way of life on most university campuses in the 21st “Launch large scale interdisciplinary research efforts aligned with the visioning future excellence themes” was an initiative highlighted in the Provost’s October 27th address to the Library. What are the Library’s current contributions to interdisciplinary research efforts? How does the Library track emerging interdisciplinary areas on campus? What additional contributions could the Library make to interdisciplinary research and what partnerships would enable doing so? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?
  • In his October 27 address to the Library, the Provost identified “increase and embrace diversity” as one of the University’s key initiatives. What are the components of the University’s diversity initiative – in the workplace, in teaching, as a focus of research, etc.? What are the Library’s current contributions to this campus initiative and how well are these known on campus? What additional contributions could the Library make and what partnerships would enable doing so? Of the ideas the group has generated, which three do you believe would be the most productive to pursue?

A summary of the responses for each scenario will be disseminated later in January.

Gathering Topic Ideas for Spring

As a final activity, each Retreat participant had the opportunity to identify “Up to Three Strategic Planning Topics I would Like to Propose for an Open Session Discussion During Spring 2015.” These ideas are being compiled into a single listing for analysis of themes and interest. A summary will be disseminated later in January.

Next Steps

The Retreat concluded with Lisa Hinchliffe, Coordinator for Strategic Planning, discussing next steps in the strategic planning initiative. They include compiling and disseminating retreat results, conducting a retreat evaluation and reviewing feedback, 20150109_112427scheduling focused discussion sessions, engaging campus stakeholders, and developing criteria for selecting and prioritizing ideas later in spring.

Dean Wilkin had the final word and extended his thanks to everyone for their participation and engagement.

Strategic Planning Steering Team Retreat Preparations (1/7/15)

The Strategic Planning Steering Team met on January 7 to finalize preparations for the Library Retreat. In addition to reviewing the agenda and logistics for the retreat, members of the Steering Team gave feedback on the penultimate draft of the discussion prompts for the retreat. We reviewed the organizational characteristics card sorting activity and finalized the form for gathering ideas for future topics. We also discussed the retreat evaluation/feedback form and the kinds of information that would be helpful to gather in preparation for strategic planning activities in the spring semester. With under 48 hours to go until the retreat, the meeting was filled with anticipation!

Conversation with the Associate University Librarians (12/22/14)

On Monday, December 22, I met with the Associate University Librarians to discuss strategic planning and, in particular, the topics for the Library Retreat. We discussed the advantages and disadvantages of using provocative statements, scenarios, and other types of discussion starters. Among the topics brainstormed were library space/facilities, user behavior and changes therein, workforce changes, the evolving scholarly record, partnerships, and liaison models. Our exploratory discussions were thought-provoking and served as a basis for drafting discussion prompts for the retreat.