A Lovely Online Memorial

http://www.erinsunshine.com

This is a lovely memorial site for a woman I don't know; I work with her brother-in-law and although we work well together, we don't work closely. "Erin Sunshine" was just 29 and died suddenly. This online memorial shows how many ripples a life can have; and now there's another ripple, because I've shared it with you.

Erin's family has kept her passing so positive; I think it's an inspiration to face life rather than an acknowledgement of death. They're having a party tomorrow, not a memorial. How lovely.

My dad wants a lot of beer and a New Orleans-style band at his party; I want Pachabel's Canon and lots of chocolate. No matter what, party is the operative word.

My thoughts are with Mike, his wife, and their family.

That Moneymaker-Shakin' Thing Again

From User Education Resources for Librarians, a pointer to a terrific item on working smarter, not harder.

The juiciest part (as far as I'm concerned):
The 80/20 rule says that 80 percent of your results come from just 20 percent of your efforts. Companies find most profits come from a few customers. And you'll find most of your output comes from a few of your tasks. So what? Well, look at the math. If you double the time you spend on real-output-producing activities and stop doing the others, you'll double your output and spend 60 percent less time! If you started with a ten-hour workday, you'll get twice as much done, working just four hours.

This is not just limited to profit-making ventures; 80 percent of the benefits of what libraries do comes from just 20 percent of our efforts. The trick is figuring out which activities are REALLY those 20 percent and focusing on those.

Consuming Podcasts

OK, here's what I've learned about listening to podcasts so far: Apparently my podcast attention span is about 15 minutes. During my listening times, I was perfectly pleased with the shorter items but then found that I'd get to a longer broadcast and skip out at about the fifteen minute mark.

I don't have this problem with audiobooks; I have even extended my walk a couple of times so I could hear a little more. However, the podcasts I'm subscribed to are all entertainment, and so I think the issue is that if it's not entertaining, I can always skip to the next item to see if it's better. And frankly, if I run out of content while I'm walking, I can take the darn earphones out and listen to the birds, or the cars, or whatever's around me. That's more entertaining than an hour of blather. It's a pretty high standard for a poor podcast to live up to!

If you listen to podcasts, what's your favorite feed? I'm open to suggestions.

Podcasting, the Diffusion of Innovation, and the Miracle of the Global Web

I've had my little red MP3 player for some time now, and I can honestly say it has served its purpose well. Audio recording and playback is clean, crisp, and easy, which is the real reason I bought it. And, as I thought when I purchased, the built-in FM receiver really is about all I need as far as music goes. I've also listened to an audiobook, and I even used the device as a portable hard drive one day when I was in a pinch. I can definitely say I've gotten $59 of value out of owning it.

Of course, the obvious thing to do with an MP3 player is to listen to podcasts, and I have yet to do so. My main excuse has been that the learning curve is too steep for the eventual gain. I haven't felt that the time expended to get it working would be worth the value of the content available. There's definitely a lesson here about the balance between innovation adoption and percieved benefit. There has to be a benefit somewhere for most users to make the effort, and I am no different. I may adopt a little earlier than many people, but I'm not one of those folks who gets a new toy just because it's new and it's fun to be first. I'm most definitely second wave.

I have now reached the tipping point with podcasting; I'm in need of more mobile content, and there seems to be some decent stuff out there. So, the hurdle then becomes finding a easy way to work with a non-iPod player. A quick look at the Wikipedia and I found PodCatcher on a Stick, a stunningly neat little piece of software out of Bauhaus-University Weimar in Germany. Germany!

This little miracle completely installs on the MP3 player itself, so I can update my feeds at work or at home. I just plug my player in, open the directory, and start. There's even some configuration I can do to get it to work on its own but I don't think I need to go that far. It just boggles my mind that someone in Germany has so neatly and cleanly solved my little problem; that I can find and access the solution; and that it's free!

I picked out some feeds (from Odeo, home of the 43Folders podcasts), added them to my PCOAS, and poof! Mobile audio! Of course, my paltry 256 MB of space filled up fast, but it should be enough to get me through a few strolls around the block.

OK, and I have to admit--I don't adopt just for the sake of adoption, but I do get a buzz off of this kind of thing. I'll let you know how it works on an ongoing basis.

Scenario Planning: A Postscript

I've been thinking about my scenarios and how to apply them. Personally, I think it's glaringly obvious that the way to survive all three scenarios is to embrace the concept of transferable skills. Even in the worst case scenario, those with "transferable skills" survive (and I wasn't thinking of my ability to answer a phone with nine lines, although that has come in handy a number of times).

What this makes me think is that I need to learn some programming, and sooner rather than later. There's a great post on Caveat Lector about why librarians don't code and some good reasons why they should. According to this item, I would technically count already as I can "code" MARC 21, but I'm really thinking PHP/MySQL may be the answer.

However, I absolutely do not think that transferable skills have to be technology skills. In the worst case scenario (library closes), maybe a reference manager could move to managing the help desk or hospital information, or into something like alumni relations. In the middle-of-the-road scenario (variation but no major change), this same reference manager could be looking at integrating a BI class into every introductory course taught on his or her campus. In the best case scenario (radical change), a free-thinking reference manager could be finding ways to move reference away from the desk. Roving through the cafeteria? It might work!

Finally, and any of you who read the scenarios probably realize this, but these came out to be more about scenarios for me than for libraries on the whole. To that end, it was a tremendously useful process. I don't know that I will ever be the director (here or anywhere), but I do know that I've pitched a new version of "federated" searching that pretty much exactly mirrors that in the best case scenario, and I think our users are going to LOVE it. It's what they have been asking for since I began asking them what they want. It will be long, hard work, but hopefully I'll be raising a glass to the "new catalog" in 2007 as well.

WDT

Scenario Planning: The End Result

My last scenario almost wrote itself as the philosophy that underlies my visions became clear:

• Worst case: librarians rigidly hold on to old models (pre-Y2K models) and die as more nimble competitors do a better job at doing our job.
• Middle case: librarians do much what they have since their inception, holding onto traditional values but molding them to meet patron needs and other new challenges.
• Best case: librarians let go of all preconceptions and free themselves to do whatever is necessary to survive and thrive.

Now, just because I've tagged it as "best case," I definitely see some downsides to the best case scenario. Some of the staff in that scenario are uncomfortable with the changes being made, and that would need to be addressed. In addition, there is little attention paid to the archival function of libraries, which remains important even in a digital age. I'm sure there are other things missing as well.

However, I think the underlying idea of freeing ourselves to do what needs to be done would also allow us to answer complex questions like that of preservation. It's almost an open-source or organic model of librarianship; if we're free to think, free to follow our thoughts, and free to grow, I think we'll also be free to succeed.

WDT

Ups and Downs, but Mostly the Same

(This is the "middle of the road" scenario.)

It had been another long day in another long week, but it was over, and Jim was on his way to dinner with some of his good friends from other libraries.

When he arrived, one of his friends was already there and waiting. They exchanged pleasantries while the waitress took their drink order.

“So, who’s going to be here tonight?” Jim asked.

“Well, Jane’s on reference, Tom’s teaching, and Celia is home with a sick kid, so it just leaves you, me, and Amy,” his friend replied.

As if on cue, Amy walked in. They waved her over and as she joined them she said, “So few? I don’t think there’s been just three of us for years.”

Jim thought back. Yes, they had been getting together like this for almost five years now, and they almost always had five or six people. The quarterly gatherings were important enough to people that they usually cleared their schedules. Somehow, some quality book geek time with other librarians seemed to serve a purpose.

“Jane’s on reference?” asked Jim. “I thought they had turfed off evening hours to the parapros in her building.”

Amy answered. “Oh, yeah, they had, but they have a new director who is really back-to-basics and wants a librarian on the desk whenever they’re open.”

Jim and his other friend goggled. “Wow. Aren’t they open until 1AM? I wouldn’t want that shift. What else are they doing?”

“Well, Tom’s email said he wouldn’t be here tonight because he’s teaching, and he and Jane are in the same library. Jane was telling me it’s one of their new goals for each librarian to teach at least three bibliographic instruction classes this fall. It’s internal outreach. Aren’t you guys doing that?”

Jim’s friend snorted. “We aren’t doing much of anything like that. We moved all of our BI online a couple of years ago. We found that the number of people who access the modules is about equal to the number of people we were teaching in person, and we only have to update them once a year.”

She continued, “We are running a new collection use analysis, though, and it’s showing some really interesting trends. We’re trying to break up a couple of journal packages and just by the really high-impact titles.”

“Hey, that sounds neat,” said Jim. “Are you hoping to save money?”

“Actually, no,” his friend replied. “We’re just trying to streamline our interface and only give people what they really want. Any cost savings would be a bonus.”

“What a concept,” said Amy. “Actually buying less to improve access. Hmm.”

“Actually, that’s not so unreasonable,” said Jim. “When I was in the public library, there was a rule that weeding your collection would improve circulation, and it really worked. I don’t see why it wouldn’t happen the same way online.”

Amy and the other librarian nodded. “Weren’t you in the public library, like, 10 years ago?” Jim’s friend asked. “We were young when you were a public librarian.”

Jim laughed, but then sobered as he thought about it. “Oh, boy, you are right. Time flies. You know, that’s one of the things about this profession that just boggles my mind. It seems like we do the same things over and over; we just tweak this or alter that. The basic concept remains the same.”

Amy nodded. “That’s one of the things that I like about librarianship, though. There’s a sort of consistency and constancy about us. We collect things, we organize things, and we provide access to things. It’s been that way for thousands of years, and it will be that way for thousands of years more.”

“I agree,” Jim’s friend said. “There have been a lot of changes, but the fundamental mission remains the same. Whether you’re my library trimming titles or Jane’s library adding librarians, we’re both trying to improve access. The end result is the same, but the how is just window dressing.”

The waitress arrived to take their order and interrupted the flow of conversation. Jim sat back and thought. He loved these dinners, because he always came out of them so energized and firmer in the belief that librarians are good people doing good work. There were challenges in his library—there were challenges everywhere—but the fundamental mission was always the same. Amy and the other librarian started chatting about the latest bugs in the latest iteration of federated searching, and Jim just listened to them and smiled.

Scenario Planning: The Best Case Scenario

First, let me say that what you consider the best case scenario and what I consider the best case scenario may be totally different things. However, this is my answer to the assumptions that I posted some time ago. Here are my conclusions and the assumptions they are based upon:

We must meet patrons where they are instead of trying to force them into a place we want them to be.
1. Patron preference for digital over print will continue to increase
5. Patrons are going to be increasingly less willing to come to the library for materials
6. Patrons are going to be increasingly less willing to wait or pay for ILL
7. Patrons are going to be increasingly less willing to learn separate database interfaces
8. As more information becomes available, the idea of “good enough” information will completely overtake the search for “the best” or “all available” information

Budget limitations (always present even if budgets are not flat or decreasing) will force us to abandon traditional programs and to increase reliance on paraprofessionals in order to meet patron demands.
2. More materials will be freely available online although considerable content will still be within paid access “walled gardens”
3. Prices for print and paid-access “walled gardens” will continue to increase at a rate faster than inflation
4. Budgets will increase at a rate less than that of inflation causing ongoing shortfalls each year

I welcome comments and thank those of you who have already commented on the process.

Death and Transfiguration

“Get me another beer!” said the director to the waitress. The library staff with her laughed as the waitress retuned and poured.

“Speech!” yelled one of the librarians. “Oh, Lord, no,” said another.

“Well, I do think the occasion deserves a few words,” said the director, “and since this is only beer number two, this is probably the time.”

She looked around the table. “I have to tell you; five years ago this was not the vision I had for the library. I saw more librarians, doing more teaching, with instruction being our focus. I knew that traditional services were on their way out—circulation, interlibrary loan, and reference—and I honestly thought that bibliographic instruction was the answer.”

“In fact, we were midway though the original course correction when the wave hit, weren’t we?” she asked.

“Oh, yes,” said one of the librarians who had been through it. “We staffed the reference desk with paraprofessionals in 2004, and we changed interlibrary loan to copyright compliance around then, too.”

The director nodded. “Then, we spent a lot of 2005 and almost all of 2006 trying to integrate with the teaching mission. And when we were done, we weren’t much further along than we had been. We were busier,” she continued, “and that was good—better than the downward slide we had seen before we got ourselves out there. But it was certainly a struggle.”

“What made the difference?” asked one of the several assistant librarians sitting at the table. “What was the change?”

The director took a swig of her beer. “It was a lot of things, but frankly, I can pinpoint the day the change happened, at least for me. I was coming back from yet another meeting where I was there ‘in hopes’ of something coming up that we could work on, when I realized that I could do great things for the library if I could get out of being a librarian.”

“She means, ‘If I could move into management,’” an old friend on the staff said. The group laughed.

“That’s right; I wasn’t the director at the time. But that wasn’t the issue,” the director said.

“And you are a librarian,” said the AL. You’re one of the biggest library geeks I know!”

The director laughed. “In 2006, being a librarian meant working with faculty, working with the schools, meeting with students. We were expending a tremendous amount of energy and reaching only a fraction of our patrons. On the way back from that meeting, I realized, if I could get out of being a librarian, I could get into projects that had major impact.”

“Like the new catalog,” one of the staff threw in. “That went live in mid-2007.”

“That’s right,” agreed the director. “One of the first things I did after my epiphany was suggest that we devote as much money and staff to our electronic presence as we did to our physical facilities. Of course, my old boss laughed, but the idea started to take hold. We abandoned federated searching as a dead end and instead hired a systems librarian who integrated an open source ILS, a DSpace install, and our open source course management system into one big digital library database.”

The programmer chimed in, “And then we got that huge NLM grant to make it work with PubMed! Usage went through the roof! It’s been a huge success.” There were murmurs of agreement, as they were actaully out celebrating their most recent award for the project.

“The annual stakeholder analysis has been a big deal,” said the librarian responsible for assessment. “Every year, we base our planning on that analysis. It’s like we’re in a constant state of change.”

There were some uncomfortable looks around the table. The director just laughed. “Yes, we added and then killed virtual reference; we did a reconfiguration on the ground floor even though we just completed a remodel in 2005; we’ve tried and abandoned a lot of things. Why stick with something just because? If we’re not really serving the patrons, who cares? The annual analysis has also shown that patron satisfaction is increasing every year. We went from about 75% to almost 90% satisfaction rates, and this year’s goal is 93. It’s a sea change.”

The assistant librarian piped up again. “I still don’t see how you ‘got out of being a librarian.’”

The director smiled. “In 2006, there were really two kinds of librarians: the kind who waited for patrons to come, and the kind who went out and essentially drummed up business. I got out of doing the traditional ‘stuff’ that librarians do and was able to actually make a meaningful difference. I wasn’t sitting at the desk or sitting in faculty meetings; I was working; I was thinking. I was able to do great things for the library by not being a librarian.”

The AL still looked confused. “But, we do those things. We teach classes and do tours and all that stuff. We have three people on the desk these days, and one roving around upstairs. That’s more than there were.”

The director caught the eye of one of the other librarians and winked. “Yes, you do those things. That’s hugely different from 2005, where librarians were still intimately involved in those activities. We made a policy to hire competent paraprofessionals and new MLS holders to do that kind of work. Librarian work. The librarians plan it, design it, and oversee it, and you do it. It doesn’t mean the work isn’t important, or that what the librarians are doing now is somehow more important than that day-to-day patron touch. It’s just different.”

“You made the librarians management and made the paras librarians,” one outspoken staffer said. “You essentially killed the librarians.”

The director winced. “That’s an apt analogy, although I would argue that the librarians as they were would have died with or without my help. We transformed the librarians and transformed the library. And the numbers don't lie; it's been a huge success.”

After a bit of silence, she said, “Death and transfiguration. It awaits us all. Now, my beer is empty and this conversation has gotten entirely too heavy. We're here to celebrate! Jamie, what’s the news with your two-year-old?”

Scenario Planning: Update

I'm working on my best-case scenario, and I don't have time to finish it today, but it hinges on the following thunderbolt that nearly knocked me over on my way back from a meeting:

If I could get out of being a librarian, I could do great things for the library.

More on this later, but I didn't want to lose the thought.

WDT

Go Give Yourself a Hug. Right Now.

I have about 50 "deep thoughts" floating around, but none of them are ready for prime time, so today's a day for a fluffy post:

Take a moment, and think about something you really want to do, but for some reason feel you "can't". What is it? Do you want to go outside? Do you want to just read the comics and your friends in your feed aggregator but feel compelled to review the "real" content, too? Do you want to bend a rule to help a patron instead of making him or her jump through another hoop? Do you want to have lunch with someone you adore and whom you do not see nearly enough?

What we're looking for is one little gift that you can give yourself right now. Don't wait. Just do it. Don't feel guilty about it. I personally give you permission to do this one thing and to enjoy doing it.

I've talked with a lot of librarians, and many of us are very other-oriented. We are in a service industry, you know, so that's not surprising. What I want is for you to think about YOU, and give yourself a little gift--a hug, as it were.

Frankly, I've done all five of the above today and these small things have helped me tackle several other incredibly unpleasant tasks with more grace than usual (meaning some instead of none). By giving to myself, I've got just a little more to give to others.

Best wishes,

WDT