Occasional Progress Report 13 – June 6, 2014

Hi everyone:

Here’s the latest on what’s been happening with 2CUL Technical Services Integration (TSI). This report, along with past updates, is also available in the Project Reports section of the TSI wiki.

  1. As noted in our April 30th progress report, the logistics of technical services integration have been far more complex than expected.  Our goal as expressed in the 2CUL grant proposal submitted to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation had been to ”integrate Columbia and Cornell technical services operations as much as possible, while retaining those local practices and workflows that must remain institution-specific.”  Issues concerning cross institutional supervision, accounting, and the delays in purchasing a shared library management system have made deep collaboration and creation of a new cross-institutional organizational structure impossible.  We realize also that attempting to manage two administratively separate technical services operations will erode savings and reduce efficiencies in both libraries.  After a series of meetings, we recommend reframing Technical Services Integration as Technical Services Initiative.  By removing the extremely challenging charge of integrating nearly 150 library staff, at institutions over 200 miles apart, without the possibility a single reporting hierarchy, TSI planners will focus on  areas of more promising collaborative projects and alliances.  Current examples include the Callisto and Serials Solutions Consortial Edition implementations.   We continue to believe in the value of collaboration and look forward to continuing to benefit from the expertise and energy of our 2CUL colleagues.  For more information on the new direction of TSI, please see Proposal: From Integration to the 2CUL Technical Services Initiative (TSI).
  2. JSMIN has also been discussing the results of the 2CUL Integration Survey.  The goal of this survey was to benchmark progress toward 2CUL. This survey measures perceptions of technical services integration in conjunction with satisfaction with current units and perceptions about each Library as a whole.  The survey supports our decision to focus on demonstrably productive initiatives rather than integration.  The TSI planners appreciate the candor expressed in the survey and share in the frustration and skepticism expressed over the slow pace of integration and the significant barriers to integration that have been uncovered. Survey results may be found on the Project Reports page under “Other Reports.”  Cornell and Columbia assessment staff have been interpreting the survey.  The most noteworthy conclusion from the survey may be that staff in all TS groups expect that TSI will decrease their satisfaction with regard to innovation, collaboration, efficiency, communication, decision-making, and risk taking – with the exception of the Columbia librarians who feel that the level of innovation at Columbia will remain unchanged by TSI and that their level of satisfaction with the amount of risk-taking at Columbia will improve.  JSMIN is still discussing whether to dig deeper into the survey results.
  3. Jim and Kate published an article on Phase One of TSI in the latest issue of Collaborative Librarianship.

That’s all for now.  As always, please feel free to direct questions to your supervisors or to any member of the TSI Steering Committee: Jim LeBlanc, Adam Chandler, Colleen Major, Chew Chiat Naun, Robert Rendall, or me. For questions about the survey instrument, contact Nisa Bakkalbasi (Columbia) or Gaby Gessner (Cornell)

-       Kate Harcourt (on behalf of the 2CUL TSI Steering Committee)

  • No labels