Rationale of the Review
In May 1998, the University Librarian, Murray Shepherd, initiated an Information Services Review. He asked the Information Services Review Team “to develop a longer term view of the information service needs of our user community and provide recommendations for how to address them.” He noted at the time:
By any measure of performance, the University of Waterloo academic community receives high quality library information services. … I am confident that the University of Waterloo Library staff has for years and continues to give excellent information service. The Library is committed to lifelong learning and continuous improvement through evolution.
With gradual transformation over the past 30 years, the present [Library] organisational structure has served us well. Nevertheless, in a TRELLIS/TUG post SERP environment, in order to maintain the strength and quality that we have a reputation for, we need to pause and examine our strategic priorities and the manner in which we are organised to accomplish them.
The Information Services Review was undertaken at a time of remarkable change within the Library, the University of Waterloo, and the library system in Ontario. Libraries have long collected, developed and preserved print collections, and have taught clients how to use them. The digital environment offers the librarian an enhanced, and possibly even more important role. Librarians add value to information and data in the digital library just as they have in the print environment. Their role is evolving as they develop new ways to organize and manage internet resources and help users understand and evaluate what they are retrieving on the web or in a database. As information technology continues to change, libraries and librarians have an exciting opportunity to guide the academic community in its use of information technology.
In undertaking this review, the Information Services Review team addressed many issues, including partnership opportunities, the need to provide services in both print and digital environments, and workload. All of these present challenges, and none come without their associated costs. In developing a longer term view of library information services, the Review Team is confident that the UW Library will be able to meet the challenges ahead.
"Building on Accomplishment: A Plan for the University of Waterloo’s Fifth Decade"
The Information Services Review Team reflected upon the UW Institutional Planning
Commission's report " Building
on Accomplishment"
[http://www.adm.uwaterloo.ca/infoprov/Planning/final_plan97/f-fulldoc1.html].
Six of the Commission’s recommendations seemed most relevant to the Library’s mission:
The UW Library - A snapshot
The UW Library is composed of two divisional libraries, the Dana Porter Library and the Davis Centre Library; one branch library, the University Map and Design Library; and the Optometry Learning Resource Centre. The UW Library works closely with the UW federated and affiliated colleges, the Conrad Grebel College Library, the Renison College Library, and the St. Jerome's University Library.
UW collaborates with the University of Guelph and Wilfrid Laurier University as one of the three members of the TriUniversity Group of Libraries (TUG).
The following statistical information provides a snapshot of the scope and magnitude of UW Library services offered during 1997-98:
For more information, see the 1997-98 Annual Report
SWOT Review and Staff Consultations
The first of the Terms of Reference [http://www.lib.uwaterloo.ca/News/UWLibDocs/ISReview/terms.htm] for the Information Services Review Team directed that the Team “conduct an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges [threats] for information services." The purpose of this SWOT exercise was:
To determine those factors apparent in an organisation’s internal and external environment that fall into the above categories.
To analyse the relationships between these factors to leverage internal strengths to take advantage of external opportunities, to determine where to invest and where to divest, and to identify those areas in need of damage control.
Kathryn Deiss, senior leadership Officer for Training and Leadership Development, Office of Management Studies, Association of Research Libraries, conducted the initial portion of the SWOT exercise in a daylong working session on 21 July 1998. During that workshop, members of the Information Services Review Team identified a number of important issues. The team was able to highlight three areas where issues could be more thoroughly examined through consultation sessions. These areas were:
These three categories provided the basis for a series of consultation sessions to which Library staff involved in information services were invited.
These sessions were conducted in three half-day sessions facilitated by Linda Teather, Co-ordinator, Library Systems Support Services. Participants were provided with relevant background information for each of the three sessions.
Provision of Information at Library Service Points (Physical & Electronic)
Library Instructional Programs: General and Course-related Workshops
Notes were taken at each session and were made available for future reference:
Longer Term Goals
The third of the Terms of Reference for the Information Services Review Team asked that they "develop a longer term view of the information service needs of our user community and provide recommendations for how to address them." The Information Services Review Team proposes the following six goals to offer direction and courses of action:
Goal 1: Connect library users to information services and resources in ways that are meaningful and effective to them.
Goal 2: Develop stronger relationships with faculty members, students, academic departments and other relevant units.
Goal 3: Expand upon and improve curriculum-integrated library instructional programs.
Goal 4: Promote information services and resources to targeted groups of users at strategic times in the academic year.
Goal 5: Assess and evaluate library services continually to ensure they meet the needs of the academic community.
Goal 6: Develop an organisational structure and foster a culture that supports information services staff in working towards shared goals in a flexible and supportive environment.
Issues and Recommendations
Goal 1: Connect library users to information services and resources in ways that are meaningful and effective to them.
Reference service is the direct, personal assistance given to students, faculty and staff seeking information. The UW Library shares the focus of most academic libraries that we should help users help themselves. There are some exceptions to this approach, particularly with some specialized collections, such as maps, electronic data sets, government publications etc. Reference service, however, is more than moving information around or providing answers to questions. It is a complex interaction between the user, the reference librarian and the sources.
Two trends ensure that some form of reference service will continue within the UW Library: a) the increasing complex and constantly changing print and digital environment; b) the growing number of users who access our resources and services without even stepping into our libraries. By examining current reference services within and outside the library, we can highlight some pressing issues and opportunities.
The In-library user
The information desks are intended to be the central place where library users can ask reference questions. As a result, a considerable number of staff hours are committed there. Yet how effective are the reference desks? Is the time of a highly-trained reference librarian well spent directing people to the washrooms or the telephone? More prominent signs may address basic questions, although many staff are convinced that users will ask anyway.
How can the user take full advantage of the skills of the reference librarian? The question has no easy answer. Appointments with liaison librarians are reportedly more successful with graduate students, new faculty and upper year students working on term projects. Yet undergraduates working to deadlines or wanting immediate answers may not have the time to consult with a liaison librarian. The library has experimented with "roving reference staff" to consult with users at the library workstations. This allows the staff to answer more complex questions than they might address at the reference desks. Preliminary evaluation of this service is favourable.
The user outside the library
How effective is UW reference service for users outside the library? At present we do not know, although technology may provide more opportunities to find out. An "outside" library user can question the staff in several ways. The most commonly used means is by telephone or email. The number of telephone requests is not recorded separately. Telephone users expecting a quick response may be disappointed if their call is directed to a busy reference desk. Those inquiring through ASKLIB, mail-to forms on webpages, or TUG comments are growing in number. Many liaison librarians set aside time to provide detailed answers to these inquiries, but users can also be disappointed if a fast answer is important. Much of this data is stored electronically and may allow us to answer questions that could improve the library's reference service.
It should be noted that three liaison librarians provide reference services by holding scheduled office hours within the academic department. Having ready access to the library's catalogue and a wide range of electronic resources facilitates this. Experience to date suggests that this is an effective and efficient service, which should be explored further.
Recommendations:
1.1 Learn more about the service needs of users. For example:
1.2 Build on-going evaluation and assessment of reference services and access tools (e.g. Library websites and TRELLIS) so library staff can review and revise them as needed.
1.3 Provide for ongoing close communications with targeted user groups to determine their needs, and to assess the Library's level of service and programme effectiveness.
1.4 Enhance reference service to UW users who are outside the library. Both mediated and unmediated services should be considered using innovations in technology, policy, and staffing.
1.5 Develop more self-serve or passive reference sources available in library and on our websites for those not in the library. For example, investigate:
1.6 Review models for providing in-library reference services, focusing on who provides them, when and where. (See Recommendations 2.1, 6.1 and 6.2)
Goal 2: Develop stronger relationships with faculty members, students, and academic departments.
The University of Waterloo Library is a leader in ensuring that librarians work closely with academic departments to provide information services and develop library collections. The liaison librarian program remains the cornerstone by which the Library works with faculty members and departments. It is a system of which we can be proud.
The challenge for liaison librarians is to balance three main areas of activity: reference services, user education, and collection management. These activities are informed by the librarians' ongoing contact with the academic departments to which they are assigned. Inevitably, liaison librarians use their time differently. In addition to their above-mentioned obligations, some may concentrate on web site development or the better organization of electronic information. Others work on committees pertaining to library materials budgets and the acquisitions system. Others spend a great deal of time on user education. Much depends on the needs of the academic departments as well as the librarians' priorities, interests, skills -- and time.
Throughout its deliberations, the review team noted feelings of uncertainty about the liaison librarian's ability to maintain an effective relationship with faculty. The reasons for this feeling have a lot to do with the varied nature of the job. In order to use our resources effectively, it is essential for the Library to know of the teaching and research activities of the academic departments. The more librarians know of course content, teaching methods, and what faculty expect of their students, the better the Library can position itself to provide support. Librarians should involve themselves in the academic planning process at every opportunity: at the faculty council, in department meetings, in personal contacts. Few academic enterprises ought to be undertaken without considering the librarians' role.
Recommendations:
2.1 Increase collaboration and communication with faculty, students and academic departments, formally and informally.
2.2 Develop mechanisms to involve faculty and students in the planning and review of Library information services.
2.3 Create a forum for liaison librarians to share best practices and set priorities.
2.4 Build upon and further develop our collegial working relationship with other units such as IST and Graphics Services.
2.5 Collaborate closely with the UW Learning and Teaching Through Technology Centre (LT3 Centre) to develop partnerships with others on campus and to introduce students and faculty to Library services available.
2.6 Explore and cultivate strategic partnership opportunities with other universities and external agencies, including our TUG partners.
Goal 3: Expand upon and improve our curriculum-integrated library instructional programs.
The role of the liaison librarian is doubly important, for the more faculty and teaching staff know about library resources and services, the better they will understand the importance of integrating "information literacy" into the curriculum. User education efforts are best directed through course-specific instruction. At this level, students can appreciate the variety of resources and research strategies that the library can provide.
Already many liaison librarians work closely with faculty to develop workshops and services specific to their students' needs. Other library staff contribute to instructional programs through such groups as the User Education Committee, or some of the general orientation activities. Other opportunities to investigate include:
Recommendations:
3.1 Plan and implement, in consultation with appropriate faculty members, library instructional programs where course requirements for undergraduates include a need for library/information research.
3.2 Develop specific measurements of the effectiveness of such instructional programs, and establish and enhance "feedback" and evaluative mechanisms.
3.3 Provide support to Liaison Librarians in their skill development in the planning, promoting and implementation of instructional programs, by for example investing in conference attendance and sponsoring workshops.
3.4 Provide an effective overview of the UW Library to new students.
3.5 Review the focus and efforts of the User Education Committee to be congruent with the above recommendations.
Goal 4: Promote information services and resources to targeted groups of users at strategic times in the academic year.
It became apparent to the Information Services Review that the University community does not have a complete view of the UW Library's role. Surveys note that many first year students find the Porter Library intimidating and overwhelming. Many other students, faculty and staff may share the incorrect perception that libraries are static institutions that have no relevance to their work, or to the University. In many ways, the Library seems an unknown, thus an untapped resource on campus.
Currently Library information services are promoted through our website, the fall and winter orientation brochures, user-ed programs, and poster and in library displays. Liaison librarians use a variety of ways to send news updates to faculty and grad students – e.g. by email, via the library rep, on paper or by attending departmental meetings.
Recommendations:
4.1 Develop a co-ordinated media relations and issues management plan tailored to Library information services.
4.2 Continue to prepare guides which provide users with easy to use and handy information on library services and resources.
4.3 Audit library signage to improve its effectiveness.
4.4 Consider means of making the Porter Library a more inviting and accessible space for faculty and students. For example:
4.5 Encourage and develop means for the internal promotion of library initiatives to library staff.
4.6 Redesign the UW Staff Intranet so it is a better communications channel, and takes advantage of new technologies.
Goal 5: Assess and evaluate library services continually to ensure they meet the needs of the academic community.
In recent years there has been a growing demand that public institutions be accountable for how they use their resources. The UW Library is aware of the need to develop assessment tools and mechanisms to evaluate the impact, quality, and effectiveness of library services. At present, the UW Library has a Community Needs Assessment Group and a Coordinator, Management Information Services.
Assessment involves more than just a process of compiling statistics. A "culture of assessment" will ensure that the Library remains focused on and responsive to users' needs. A meaningful, varied and sustained dialogue with library users is central to this process. It will ensure, for example, that users will help design and implement effective services. In the case of library information services, an assessment programme will help ensure the relevance of library programmes and services to teaching, learning and research at UW.
Recommendations:
See Recommendations 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 3.2 and 6.1.
Goal 6: Develop an organisational structure and foster a culture that supports information services staff in working towards shared goals in a flexible and supportive environment.
The "Building on Accomplishment: A Plan for the University of Waterloo’s Fifth Decade" report recognised workload issues within UW "as a matter of the highest priority" and in a series of five recommendations encouraged steps be taken to deal with the issues. In a memo of November 20, 1997 to Gary Waller, Associate Provost, Murray Shepherd noted the seriousness of these issues. The issue of balancing workloads remains a concern and was raised at numerous times during the Information Services Review Team's consultations with staff. Many of the Review Team's recommendations deal at root with how the Library can, to echo the Planning report,:
The Review Team wishes to reiterate recommendations 27 and 30 of the Planning Report:
During the consultations, information services staff emphasised that they felt their ability to deliver a high level of service to students and faculty has been severely restricted by the reduction in staff over the last decade and particularly at the time of the Special Early Retirement Program (SERP). One team member said quite simply, "We need to hire people."
For the Library to be able to allocate its resources effectively there must be means of ensuring that Library-wide strategic goals and priorities are clear and communicated to all Library staff. Without clear and specific goals, the Library risks creating an environment where staff take on more work, do it less well and we further exacerbate an already challenging situation.
The Library needs to continue its efforts to:
Recommendations:
6.1 Review groups and committees charged with information services responsibilities to ensure they are co-ordinated, their terms of reference and accountability are clear, and they are appropriately populated. For example:
6.2 Review staffing in the reference and collections development areas to identify where adjustments can be made to enhance services, and where appropriate develop cases for the recruiting of new staff.
6.3 Develop and implement planning models and organizational structures that will enable more effective setting of priorities, and implementation and operation of new services and initiatives.
6.4 Foster innovation by providing staff with guilt-free learning time so they can keep informed about new developments or applications in technology and service.
6.5 Develop ongoing staff training programs in the use of technology and on information service issues.
6.6 Establish an information technology forum and/or ensure there are opportunities for information services staff to be kept informed of innovations in the development and application of technology to support information services and programmes.
6.7 Establish a staff and user training and instructional facility in the Library.
Appendices
Terms of reference
Objectives
To conduct an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges for information services provided through the University of Waterloo Library, taking into account both internal and external factors affecting our ability to support teaching, learning and research.
To consult extensively, seeking the perspectives of faculty, staff, students and others engaged in, or affected by, information services issues.
To develop a longer term view of the information service needs of our user community and provide recommendations for how to address them.
To prepare a report outlining this information for the University Librarian by the end of December 1998.
Membership
The core team should include people responsible for allocating resources to ensure the provision of effective information services, as well as people engaged in the provision and evaluation of those services. Although not active members of the core review team, users of library information services will be consulted and offered opportunities to contribute to the review.
The team will make use of advisory/working groups, as need dictates and opportunity allows.
Members:
Susan Bellingham
Youssef Berbash (graduate student)
Anne Fullerton
Chris Gray (Systems resource person)
Mark Haslett (Facilitator)
Geoff Hayes (faculty member)
Margaret Hendley
Joan Macdonald
Ron MacKinnon (Secretary)
Maureen McCormack
Richard Pinnell
Shabiran Rahman
Susan Routliffe
Karl Spangler (undergraduate student)
John Sitler
Appendix
Issues
The following is a list of some issues for the consideration of the Review Team. It is not intended that the Team confine its report and recommendations to these topics.
Priorities
Information delivery and scholarly communication
Balancing workloads
Staff Training and Development
What can the Library do, in anticipation of future needs, to ensure appropriate training for information services providers?
Partnerships/Opportunities
Effective evaluation of information services
Groups to Consult
List of recommendations
1.1 Learn more about the service needs of users. For example:
1.2 Build on-going evaluation and assessment of reference services and access tools (e.g. Library websites and TRELLIS) so library staff can review and revise them as needed.
1.3 Provide for ongoing close communications with targeted user groups to determine their needs, and to assess the Library's level of service and programme effectiveness.
1.4 Enhance reference service to UW users who are outside the library. Both mediated and unmediated services should be considered using innovations in technology, policy, and staffing.
1.5 Develop more self-serve or passive reference sources available in library and on our websites for those not in the library. For example, investigate:
1.6 Review models for providing in-library reference services, focusing on who provides them, when and where. (See Recommendations 2.1, 6.1 and 6.2)
2.1 Increase collaboration and communication with faculty, students and academic departments, formally and informally.
2.2 Develop mechanisms to involve faculty and students in the planning and review of Library information services.
2.3 Create a forum for liaison librarians to share best practices and set priorities.
2.4 Build upon and further develop our collegial working relationship with other units such as IST and Graphics Services.
2.5 Collaborate closely with the UW Learning and Teaching Through Technology Centre (LT3 Centre) to develop partnerships with others on campus and to introduce students and faculty to Library services available.
2.6 Explore and cultivate strategic partnership opportunities with other universities and external agencies, including our TUG partners.
3.1 Plan and implement, in consultation with appropriate faculty members, library instructional programs where course requirements for undergraduates include a need for library/information research.
3.2 Develop specific measurements of the effectiveness of such instructional programs, and establish and enhance "feedback" and evaluative mechanisms.
3.3 Provide support to Liaison Librarians in their skill development in the planning, promoting and implementation of instructional programs, by for example investing in conference attendance and sponsoring workshops.
3.4 Provide an effective overview of the UW Library to new students.
3.5 Review the focus and efforts of the User Education Committee to be congruent with the above recommendations.
4.1 Develop a co-ordinated media relations and issues management plan tailored to Library information services.
4.2 Continue to prepare guides which provide users with easy to use and handy information on library services and resources.
4.3 Audit library signage to improve its effectiveness.
4.4 Consider means of making the Porter Library a more inviting and accessible space for faculty and students. For example:
4.5 Encourage and develop means for the internal promotion of library initiatives to library staff.
4.6 Redesign the UW Staff Intranet so it is a better communications channel, and takes advantage of new technologies.
5. See Recommendations 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 3.2 and 6.1.
6.1 Review groups and committees charged with information services responsibilities to ensure they are co-ordinated, their terms of reference and accountability are clear, and they are appropriately populated. For example:
6.2 Review staffing in the reference and collections development areas to identify where adjustments can be made to enhance services, and where appropriate develop cases for the recruiting of new staff.
6.3 Develop and implement planning models and organizational structures that will enable more effective setting of priorities, and implementation and operation of new services and initiatives.
6.4 Foster innovation by providing staff with guilt-free learning time so they can keep informed about new developments or applications in technology and service.
6.5 Develop ongoing staff training programs in the use of technology and on information service issues.
6.6 Establish an information technology forum and/or ensure there are opportunities for information services staff to be kept informed of innovations in the development and application of technology to support information services and programmes.
6.7 Establish a staff and user training and instructional facility in the Library.
University of Waterloo Library
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
519 888 4883
contact us | give us feedback | privacy statement | © 2011
University of Waterloo