Present: Christy Branston, Helena Calogeridis, Judy McTaggart, Jim Parrott, Richard Pinnell, Susan Routliffe (Chair and Recorder), Mary Stanley, Jackie Stapleton, Linda Teather, Melanie Watkins
Regrets: Rose Koebel
Minutes of previous meeting
The minutes of the meeting of May 27, 2003 were approved.
ISMC in the context of the Library's overall organizational structure
As part of the review of the Library's organizational structure, ISMC considered
whether the committee should continue more or less as is or whether there
is merit in organizing the work that the committee does in some other way.
The Committee also considered whether there are gaps in information services
work and how any such gaps might be addressed.
Members concluded that ISMC serves a valuable purpose and should continue, but perhaps with a reduced membership. The possibility of disbanding ISMC in favour of establishing ad hoc groups to deal with specific projects was raised but not pursued. Other points raised during the discussion are included below.
The interdepartmental nature of the membership has helped break down departmental barriers and establish links between departments and has led to improved interdepartmental communications. A good example of improved communications involves the Systems and ISR departments. For example, the Systems department is not usually caught off-guard by unexpected and urgent requests for support from the ISR department because Linda is a member of ISMC and keeps others in Systems advised of developments.
The interdepartmental membership also ensures that a wide range of perspectives and interests help inform ISMC decisions and outcomes; this prevents the Committee from becoming too focused on activity in only the ISR department. ISR is the largest of the departments doing work of interest to ISMC, but it is not the only one and it’s important to remember that it is not the only one.
In the context of a discussion about the number of committees that the Library has and the problems that that can create when committees are looking for new members, the possibility of reducing ISMC’s membership from 10 to 8 was suggested (included 1 librarian from each of Porter and Davis instead of the current 2). ISMC has a history of establishing sub- or ad hoc committees to follow through on some of the issues that the Committee deals with. Creating more sub groups could be one way of managing with a smaller core committee. In other words, bring in additional people as needed.
Gaps: three gaps, or possible gaps were identified.
Current gaps: training librarians for their collections management work, training librarians for instructional work. Possible solutions: 1) create a position responsible for overseeing all aspects of training in the department, 2) include responsibility for all training in the role of a departmental manager/managers 3) expand the mandate of the ISR Training Committee, 4) expand LINC’s mandate so that it includes responsibility for instructional training
Potential gaps: on-going management of the information commons that are being planned for Davis and Porter and the implications of the information commons for UMD and Optometry
We also talked about the number of committees that the Library has and whether we use committees as a way of dealing with staff shortages. There may be times when it would be more efficient and effective to have one person, rather than a group, responsible for particular activities. The downside of committees is people feeling too spread out, considerable time taken to make decisions and follow through, and the possibility of things falling through the cracks because no one person has overall responsibility. Advantages include early stage input by a range of people with different perspectives, understanding of the issues and constraints and acceptance by more than one person, opportunities to gain a wider range of experience and understanding of some broader issues than might be possible without committee.
Next Meeting: June 24, Porter 407.