Knowledge management in libraries and organizations 9783110413014, 3110413019

Citation preview

IFLA Publications

Edited by Michael Heaney International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions Fédération Internationale des Associations de Bibliothécaires et des Bibliothèques Internationaler Verband der bibliothekarischen Vereine und Institutionen Международная Федерация Библиотечных Ассоциаций и Учреждений Federación Internacional de Asociaciones de Bibliotecarios y Bibliotecas

Volume 173

Knowledge Management in Libraries and Organizations

Edited by Leda Bultrini, Sally McCallum, Wilda Newman and Julien Sempéré

DE GRUYTER SAUR

ISBN 978-3-11-041301-4 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-041310-6 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-041315-1 ISSN 0344-6891 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Cover Image: Photo railtracks. Picture copyright Emilio Sim Typesetting: Dr Rainer Ostermann, München Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Contents About IFLA

Contents

 IX

Enrico Colaiacovo Preface  1 Leda Bultrini Introduction

 5

Premises 1

Michael Koenig Knowledge Management: Where is it Going?

Olivier Serrat 2 Toward a Library Renaissance

 17

 28

Part 1: Knowledge Management for Library Users 3

Klaus Ceynowa Information in the Digital Knowledge Ecosystem – Challenges for the Library of the Future  47

4

Andreas Degkwitz “Yes, We Can”, If We Take over Future Tasks!

5

Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju Open Access A New Dawn for Knowledge Management

55

 65

Alex Byrne 6 Endless Invention, Endless Experiment, Knowledge 7

Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong Inter-connected Network of Knowledge The NLB journey  87

 78

VI 

 Contents

Rebecca Hope Renard 8 Youth202 An Experiment in Teen-driven Knowledge Management

 103

Eva Semertzaki 9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places to Host a Knowledge Management Centre  118 Contents

Linda Stoddart 10 Information Outreach and Knowledge Sharing in the United Nations New Approaches  133 Giuseppe Vitiello 11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission

 144

Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia 12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations for Knowledge-management-tool Adoption  156 12 Se

Donna Scheeder 13 Knowledge Management: Toward Understanding in a Multicultural World  170

Part 2: Knowledge Management as a Tool for Changing Library Part 2: Culture Claudia Lux 14 Knowledge Management in Public Libraries

181

Anja Flicker and Thomas M. Paul 15 Theory in Action Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital Management at Würzburg Public Library 190 Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success 201



Contents 

 VII

Hannele Näveri-Ranta 17 Applying a Dialogical Approach to Development Discussions Management of Learning as a Catalyst for Change  214 Liz Walkley Hall 18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki 19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians Héloïse Lecomte 20 Knowledge Management Tools and Processes Helping the Birth of a New Library?  253 Mary Lee Kennedy 21 Knowledge Collaboration in Higher Education Contributors

 269

 263

 223

 237

About IFLA www.ifla.org IFLA (The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) is the leading international body representing the interests of library and information services and their users. It is the global voice of the library and information profession. IFLA provides information specialists throughout the world with a forum for exchanging ideas and promoting international cooperation, research, and development in all fields of library activity and information service. IFLA is one of the means through which libraries, information centres, and information professionals worldwide can formulate their goals, exert their influence as a group, protect their interests, and find solutions to global problems. IFLA’s aims, objectives, and professional programme can only be fulfilled with the co-operation and active involvement of its members and affiliates. Currently, approximately 1,600 associations, institutions and individuals, from widely divergent cultural backgrounds, are working together to further the goals of the Federation and to promote librarianship on a global level. Through its formal membership, IFLA directly or indirectly represents some 500,000 library and information professionals worldwide. IFLA pursues its aims through a variety of channels, including the publication of a major journal, as well as guidelines, reports and monographs on a wide range of topics. IFLA organizes workshops and seminars around the world to enhance professional practice and increase awareness of the growing importance of libraries in the digital age. All this is done in collaboration with a number of other non-governmental organizations, funding bodies and international agencies such as UNESCO and WIPO. IFLANET, the Federation’s website, is a prime source of information about IFLA, its policies and activities: www.ifla.org. Library and information professionals gather annually at the IFLA World Library and Information Congress, held in August each year in cities around the world. IFLA was founded in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1927 at an international conference of national library directors. IFLA was registered in the Netherlands in 1971. The Koninklijke Bibliotheek (Royal Library), the national library of the Netherlands, in The Hague, generously provides the facilities for our headquarters. Regional offices are located in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Pretoria, South Africa; and Singapore.

Enrico Colaiacovo

Preface

It was a dark and stormy night, there were monsoons to threaten the libraries in the Far East, hurricanes and typhoons in the North America, fire and wars in the heart of Europe. But libraries and knowledge were safe and available. Several changes occurred during the centuries: Gutenberg and the printing, Daguerre and the photographs, Scott de Martinville and the audio recordings, Axon and the videos, IBM and the computer-aided elaboration and storage. It was a dark and stormy night but… it was quite comfortable, because nothing had changed in the mission of libraries and librarians: preservation and availability of knowledge. The weaker the media and infrastructures, the more resilient were librarians. Recently some deep changes have occurred. The ways to generate, store and share knowledge are multiplying as never before. The information can be stored in hard and soft copies everywhere with a very low cost. The “shipping” worldwide of books and films is instantaneous and the technologies for data management are more powerful than we can imagine. Therefore, while the complexity of information and knowledge grows, the support to knowledge producers and users must follow the needs. Can we consider these days bright and smooth for librarians? Once more, the key to success is resilience. Librarians are looking for the change. The New Media Age is ongoing. This is the biggest challenge of our days and we cannot manage “as usual” this time. We are not facing the changes in communications, like in the case of the introduction of television or radio, which means “just” the introduction of new media for broadcasting. Nor are we facing the changes in storage technologies, like in the case of Gutenberg’s invention or audio and video records, that means “just” the introduction of new media for preservation and use. We are entering the global environment, in which everyone can be the source and the destination at the same time; knowledge is stored in a distributed infrastructure, the technologies for retrieval and use are not fully experienced, and they depend on several kinds of data features and knowledge models. In this scenario human capital remains one of the most important factors for the development of societies. While stable institutions like governments, universities, research centres and schools continue to play their classic role in education, information management and information gathering are more and more entrusted to the web search engines that require the ability of users to understand the quality of information and its effectiveness. This is not only a concern for private individuals but involves also professional aspects of learning. At the same

2 

 Enrico Colaiacovo

time, these are not only issues related to digital divide and digital rights: to be endowed with the needed skills is a problem for knowledge professionals too. In fact, in the knowledge societies the boundaries between private and professional knowledge become more and more vague and the sophistication of information and knowledge must be managed by specific services. The complexity of organizations is, itself, blowing up due to the increase of knowledge management complexity. Big Data is not just a kind of data management challenge for the production of information and knowledge and the widespread availability of knowledge sources is not the classical issue related to the growing amount of data. They involve decision making on where and how organizations must address the effort to take advantage of knowledge dynamics in an effective way. They must be considered as new ways to do business in the enterprises, as well as to build governance tools in the public sectors. But the changes are more deeply related to how organizations must work, how and what they must learn and, eventually, what will be the actual core business and the leading output of the work. The arguments on technology and methodology skills are more or less obsolete. In effect the challenge we are facing is how the organizations change to be lead actors in the knowledge societies, overcoming the traditional focus on process workflows and workforce skills segmentation. The content of this book is a collection of experiences of librarians while facing the complexity of information, organizations, and knowledge (both for individuals and communities). It contains several answers to classical questions about the future of libraries and librarians. Must they become competent in technologies? They are supposed to be already up to date, in order not to become material for archeologists and historians. Must they support citizens in the understanding of the enormous amount and complexity of information and knowledge? Yes, more than in the past, because of the emerging difficulties in information management. Must they understand the needs of organizations in the knowledge society? Yes, of course, but that’s not a trivial challenge. It’s time for a great empowerment of libraries and librarians, the same empowerment that people and organizations have already begun. How to do that? Reading this book it seems that librarians know the way: the smart society expects them to enter the organizations with an experienced approach and with the aim of taking care of operating principles, of working habits, and of learning processes. That means taking care of the core business: knowledge management. Governments and administrations, universities, enterprises, non-profit associations, professionals and citizens, all need the support of competencies and services related to information and knowledge management. The model of storing and forwarding documentation is past and useless.



Preface 

 3

Individuals feel they are in good hands asking the web search engine for anything, including health issues. It is a new relational and information environment; it overwhelms and breaks down personal rituals. Organizations must manage the same kinds of problems, even if with different levels of awareness. This is because we are in a start-up stage of a new age. In the industrial age business knowledge was stored in the machines’ patents and in the work procedures, designed by engineers and economists who were the leading actors of the development. The side effects of the change impacted the environment – on public health and economic balances. Doctors, biologists, naturalists, and social scientists were the main actors in the counteraction of the negative components of the industrial age outputs. In the new media age librarians must play a lead role, working closely with engineers and economists in the development of the knowledge society, with the purpose of properly embedding their particular skills into the social change. Probably in this case the side effects will not directly contribute to the climate changes, but individual and collective habits and knowledge will be affected. A more concrete explanation of this idea could be useful to understand why the support of libraries and librarians is really wanted. For this purpose we can consider a start-up company trying to do business in a complex economic area (e.g., the European Union or the Latin American area) where people speak different languages. There are several sources of laws, chambers of commerce and market category listings, the tender notice formats and distribution methods are not harmonized, the market regulations depend on the local laws, patent registers are not integrated. Then we can consider the huge amount of heterogeneous documentation that is available on the websites of the corresponding institutions. And, we must ask ourselves who are the people who are in charge of comprehending this scenario to support the decision makers in the approach to the entire economic area. In addition we can ask ourselves: which institution is called to provide a trustworthy ranking of such kinds of documentation sources? Which kinds of professionals are able to understand and manage the reliability of the documents and their versioning? Can someone give some help to correctly design the management of the growing amount of open data provided by institutions? The operating environment is just the beginning. After that, the start-up must manage several heterogeneous sources strictly related to the core business: datasets provided by national health organizations; analysis and records published by local market regulators and commercial institutions; industrial performance figures managed by economic organizations such as unions, industrial lobbies, institutions, and research centres; and local labour-market dynamics. Everyday these kinds of basic questions arise in innovative companies while they are looking for the starting point of a specific business, both in vertical and

4 

 Enrico Colaiacovo

mass markets. As expected, the big players are able to manage these issues, while the SME (Small/Medium Enterprises) and start-up companies need effective support. In the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, 63% of the workforce is employed in the SME, 17% in the start-up. The same start-up is responsible for 40% of job creation: they play in the market the same role played by children in society. They need to learn how to understand the business environment, how to manage their own knowledge, and how to manage the rise and fall of global information sources, including their ranking, reliability, and significance. To flourish in the knowledge society, start-up and SME companies need strong support of institutions and professionals of knowledge management. Someone must take care of them: libraries and librarians, who else?

Leda Bultrini

Introduction In December 2003, IFLA officially established the Section on Knowledge Management (KM). Apart from some experiences of the avant-garde, not only the practice, but also the conscious knowledge of KM was at the time rather an exception than the norm in the world of libraries. In 2004, in the introduction to the book Knowledge Management: Libraries and Librarians Taking up the Challenge, which collected the papers presented on the subject at IFLA events in the years immediately preceding, the editor of the book, Hans-Christoph Hobohm, rightly said that it was “intriguing though, that the information professionals like librarians who have practiced it [i.e. KM] throughout their professional lives seem only hesitantly to make it their topic” (Hobohm 2004, 7). More than ten years later much has changed, not only with regard specifically to its application by libraries, but also with respect to KM in general. Resistance, caused by its perceived vagueness, was swept away by persistence and the consolidation of KM in the horizon of managerial tools. Michael Koenig, whose provocation opens this book, proves this, relying on the power of numbers, and goes so far as to propose KM as the umbrella under which a number of information and management tools, that have emerged individually, are all geared to a common purpose. Both in the development of methodologies and in the application, the excess of attention to the technological and infrastructural aspects has passed, and other essential pillars have been put in evidence, such as people, culture, and organization. Also, KM has long since emerged from the confines of the corporate world, demonstrating the possibility and the necessity of its application to public institutions and non-profit organizations, in short, to every type of organization and, among organizations, on a scale surprisingly wide. Additionally, for more than ten years we have also seen the advent of the “digital society”; the extraordinary technological acceleration in the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector has changed in a radical and pervasive way not only the systems of education, research, and information, but even the habits in the lives of people. This fundamental aspect has impacted substantially the world of libraries, calling into question the very sense of their existence. The need for a comprehensive reinterpretation of the role of libraries and their function, of a radical innovation of the services they offer and the technical and managerial tools to achieve them, has lit a beacon on KM.KM appeared then for what it is: a key approach, indispensable to a continuously changing reality, that requires us to combine speed and proactivity with the scarcity of resources, trans-

6 

 Leda Bultrini

formation of functions with the continuity of deep institutional purposes, and promoting protection of democracy as well as support for development. Librarians, therefore, are gradually recognizing themselves as the actors of KM, serving organizations and communities and, at the same time, they are appropriating KM as a tool for the internal management of the library as an organization. KM appears then for what it is: a key approach, indispensable to a continuously changing reality that requires us to combine speed and proactivity with the scarcity of resources, to transform functions with the continuity of deep institutional purposes, and to promote protection of democracy as well as support for development. Librarians, therefore, are gradually recognizing themselves as the actors of KM, serving organizations and communities and, at the same time, they are appropriating KM as a tool for the internal management of the library as an organization.

Two Perspectives for Use of Knowledge Management Libraries are, in fact, with respect to KM, the crossroads of two perspectives: the first one is specific for libraries and considers KM as the mission of libraries. In this view, the mission is “management” of “knowledge” external to the library, intended for use by service users of the library or by those, who avail themselves of the skills of the individual professional. The second perspective places, to some extent, the library on the same level as any other organization in the world today and sees KM as a tool for managing the organization –– to enable the library to provide the best answer to the pressing needs of proactivity with respect to the continuous change of the surrounding reality; –– to cope with the turnover and the loss of human resources, maintaining and developing the wealth of internal knowledge and the necessary creativity to innovation; –– to interact productively with the community of which they are in service, to combine dynamism and stability. This volume attempts to seize the two visions, devoting Part 1 to KM as the aim of the library and Part 2 to KM as a tool for internal management. Of course, as it will be seen, the two dimensions tend to be intertwined, and the texts presented are not so easy to clearly classify as one type or other. The choice of their collocation



Introduction 

 7

is based mostly on the greater emphasis that an author gives to one of the two perspectives. In reality, effective and innovative KM in the service of users does not exist without an internal practice of KM methods as the key approach to the best evolutionary management of the library. In fact, one keyword reoccurs through the entire volume and it is “change”. Change involves renewing continuously the librarian and library roles as professionals and organizations. Change is necessary in the services offered. Change is evident in the way to organize, to operate, to read reality, and to build answers that will materialize in services. The dual perspective evoked introduces the text of Olivier Serrat, a premise to Parts 1 and 2, which clearly identifies the space that libraries are required to occupy in a world of overabundant information. The scarce resource today is attention, and the theme, dear to librarians, of the reduction of “noise” in the information retrieval is back under the renewed guise of crucial relevance. To “what” to do, Serrat adds suggestions on “how”, encouraging the application of KM as a tool, and showing its practicality.

Part 1: Knowledge Management of Library Users As mentioned, the advent of the digital society is the structural aspect which more than any other has determined the characteristics of the new context in which libraries are called upon to act. It has changed features of the social, economic, technical, and cultural (one might say almost anthropological) context, and at the same time introduced a requirement to adapt to that change. Digital transformation is, in fact, another common thread of the entire volume. The contribution of Klaus Ceynowa, at the opening of the Part 1, traces its impact on the process of knowledge production, questioning the possibility of describing and circumscribing it, as well as the nature and the very existence of that main product of crystallization and diffusion of knowledge, which is the “publication”. A futuristic perspective only in appearance, providing a whole new face to a central theme for libraries which is to discriminate and take charge of what is important enough. Andreas Degkwitz confirms the sunset on the horizon for the publication as a finished product of research. The publication takes the form of a digital equivalent of the print product, and emulates its static and two-dimensional nature. The library needs to manage knowledge represented by the products of the entire research process. It is no longer a text, but a dynamic aggregation of sets of texts and data, that ensures the continuity and recoverability through identifiers and

8 

 Leda Bultrini

metadata, to prevent the text and data from drowning in the deep space of the web. A very complex task, but certainly not foreign to the typical purpose of libraries. The digital society, of which Degkwitz and Ceynowa write, is a knowledge society, where knowledge is central to development, focuses on intellectual resources, and has university and institutions of higher learning as its key institutions. Academic and research libraries have, therefore, a central role in reflection on and application of KM. If so, knowledge must be more than ever a collective asset. Cutting-edge management cannot pursue its aims of essential tools for development and democracy if it is not accompanied by the opening of knowledge to free enjoyment and consumption. Therefore, Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju strongly relaunch Open Access, identifying the combination of Open Access–Knowledge Management, in particular in the university, as the winning approach. This allows KM to go beyond its original purpose of supporting the life of a single organization, turning it into an instrument for the development of society in general. However, the start of new research is not the only thing to trigger a process of knowledge production which looks entirely new and determines new dynamics of the so-called publication. And, it is not just the academic context that supports this revolution. Alex Byrne shows how the digital transformation of the existing collections of a public library triggers a similar process. Here, the digitized collections are not only better described than they have ever been, accessible and re-usable through new tools, such as social media, and placed within a network of links with non-textual materials (e.g., images of pages of manuscripts), but through the use and re-use by the user they can keep on enriching themselves in content and metadata through crowdsourcing. The librarian’s role, in this changed reality, is more crucial than ever, even more than in the past. Librarians are not only immersed in the circuit of the conservation and transmission of existing knowledge, but also in the production of new knowledge, which is the heart of KM. This is a challenge that requires a deep transformation of the organization, operation, and skills. To the case of the State Library of New South Wales, illustrated by Byrne, you can associate that of the National Library Board of Singapore, an institution at the forefront of KM practice, both for institutional mission purposes and as a tool for internal management. The text of Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong presents the work of building a huge collection of content on the history of Singapore. It is based on the creation of clusters of resources thematically linked with high quality associations through the use of text analytic technologies. In Singapore the stated purpose of allowing the “impatient” user to spend less time gathering the pieces of information, while assuring the quality of the result, leads



Introduction 

 9

back to another key concept: the old law of Ranganathan “Save the Time of the Reader”. Certainly the challenge of keeping up to the task today is very high and the article confirms the importance of an organizational culture already focused on innovation, risk-taking, collaboration between actors, but also the importance of adequate technical skills. The idea of knowledge enriched through the use and re-use by users, stressed by Byrne, reflects also the experience presented by Rebecca Hope Renard, concerning the District of Columbia Public Library. In this case, the role of the users becomes central. A particular category of users, mostly teenagers from disadvantaged neighbourhoods, is entrusted, in the context of the library, with the direct management of social tools for collecting, organizing and diffusing information and knowledge interesting and useful to them. This programme responds to a need for information which otherwise would remain unfulfilled. With this initiative, the library takes on the responsibility of reducing a participation divide of economically disadvantaged young people. The potential of the digital society will not be available to them, not only from the lack of technology (computers, wi-fi), but also the lack of the essential skills in order to take an active part. If the digital divide is also a participation divide, the library is called on to deal with both of them. If ten years ago the issue of KM was mainly reserved for corporate libraries, nowadays, as shown by the articles mentioned, it is a generalized approach in the whole library world. Corporate libraries and more generally special libraries share with academic, public, and school libraries the function of being support agents of development and innovation. They are all called upon to face similar challenges, from resource cutting, to the need to demonstrate their relevance, and from the ability to innovate, to being active agents of cooperation and exchange throughout the organization to which they belong. The article by Eva Semertzaki, invoking the characteristics of special libraries, warns against the risks they run, in times of scarce resources, of being considered superfluous in the digital environment. They may be treated as almost an unnecessary luxury just at the same time when, paradoxically, the intellectual capital of an organization is a key asset for its development. Semertzaki shows, by indicating examples of good practices, that recognizing and playing the role of a knowledge-management centre returns relevance to the library. This then acts as a catalyst for innovation and as an active support to the best decisions, demonstrating its effectiveness, even in economic terms. The most advanced and sensitive organizations feel the need for programmes and structures for KM as a tool of collective intelligence and as a method to improve their own efficiency. This sensitivity and attention is a great opportunity, but it can also become a risk to the library which does not grasp with determi-

10 

 Leda Bultrini

nation the opportunity that is offered. Linda Stoddart presents the case of the United Nations, within which an organizational review, which stressed aspects of KM, got underway in 2008, with promising prospects for the UN’s Dag Hammarskjöld Library. After seven years, the project on KM has gone on significantly, with major investments, and although it has not overcome information silos completely, thanks to technological tools, it is evident there is evolution towards a more integrated mode of KM. However, the library is not the protagonist of this evolution, whose guidance and whose responsibility has been entrusted instead to other structures of the UN. A challenge for now not won. On the contrary, the library of NATO Defense College, whose experience is described by Giuseppe Vitiello, has an active part, in collaboration with communication and information services, in introducing KM in the organization as an approach to deal with the digital transformation and to provide adequate services for the specialities of the organization. In the College, the sharing and availability of information are made particularly critical by the continuous replacement of the members of the two communities of practice which the library is required to serve: course members and faculty advisers. A complex path, dotted with setbacks, but not without significant results, illustrates how the theory of KM requires changes that fit and are in touch with reality. The size and characteristics of many organizations do not allow them to have an internal organizational structure that takes the form of a library. This does not prevent them from capitalizing on the professionalism of a librarian to find and apply solutions of KM. The librarian has the professionalism to be the best consultant to orient change management in any organization. Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia present an experience within a corporation facing the choice of management tools to be used. By examining pros and cons of Content Management Systems and Learning Management Systems and a possible integration of the two, an informed choice was made that satisfied needs identified through surveys of motivations, behaviours, and experiences of employees. The keystone of a successful experience is not technology or the instrument chosen (which are, in any case, important) but the ability to listen and involve members of the organization, and consequently the creation of a social arena that includes, invites to share, and fosters relationships and communication among colleagues. The prospect of an application of KM and the deployment of the skills of librarians is not, therefore, restricted to specific areas nor does it require specific dimensions of the organizational unit concerned. The counterpart of the importance that KM can have in the single or small organization is its potential – and its need – in the context of the globalized world, in which the digital revolution has created technical conditions of great benefit to the dialogue among cultures and civilizations. Having a leading role in multicul-



Introduction 

 11

tural collaboration is thus another side of the challenge facing librarians of the digital society. Donna Scheeder illustrates the potential of KM in the service of shared knowledge on a global scale through the case of the GLIN (Global Library Information Network) project, in which dozens of different nations work together. The global scale and diversity of the cultures emerge with new evidence of keywords whose importance cannot easily be grasped in other, more limited, contexts: the ability to recruit partners, the equality among them, the attention and respect for differences, and the ability to reach compromises useful and acceptable to all involved. And even in this case, standards to ensure quality, accessibility, and common understanding of information must be found. All texts collected in the Part 1, although oriented to illustrate perspectives and methods for managing knowledge and put it in place for the service of users, do not fail to emphasise that the technical, social, and cultural changes of the world that you want to accommodate are dramatic. The innovative and transforming services offered are enabled by a profound change in the internal management of the library, in the skills of librarians, and in their way of sharing knowledge within the library itself and with the outside.

Part 2: Knowledge Management as a Tool for Changing Library Culture Part 2 collects contributions in which the emphasis is on internal management and on KM as an essential tool to achieve the goals of the library in the digital society. To overthrow the old paradigm, which associates KM with special (corporate or research) libraries, Part 2 includes two papers dedicated to public libraries. Claudia Lux, bearing in mind two very different realities, a European continental one and one of the Gulf Region, indicates the many areas of operation for which KM can show its practical utility and stresses the importance of shaping choices to fit the specific characteristics of the single library and the culture in which it lives. A concrete experience of implementation of KM in the public library of a European urban environment is illustrated by Anja Flicker, through the case of Würzburg Public Library. She describes the daily practice of KM and the methodology chosen. The case of Würzburg Public Library shows that the library can become a reference model in terms of internal management and play a leading role in changing institutions. The cases that follow are all related to academic libraries. Overall they give a very rich panorama of the transformation taking place in academic libraries, of

12 

 Leda Bultrini

the challenges, and of the usefulness of KM to turn them into opportunities for change that reaffirm their relevance. Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza, and Regina Koury illustrate how the inevitable difficulties of a staff of small size and subject to change, rotations, and further reductions led to taking the road of KM as a necessary tool to make the most of knowledge capital owned: human, organizational, relational. Hannele Näveri-Ranta focuses on the need to develop knowledge and skills of the staff in an environment changing relentlessly and unpredictably. The chosen method is a dialogical approach to the design and implementation of staff development, where she describes the application process. The theme of the development and the enrichment of staff skills as a requirement to deal with change is also central in the experience of Flinders University Library, presented by Liz Walkley Hall. This author focuses on creating a culture of research as a prerequisite for an appropriate reading of a dynamic and complex context, and for developing the best synergy with researchers and research processes. The desire to create a renewed interaction with the research process, in particular to address the emerging issue of data management is the focus of the project illustrated by Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki. They take us back to the topic of knowledge no longer crystallized in the publication, and the subsequent need and opportunity for libraries to put themselves at the service of the whole process of research, supporting and enhancing efforts, and adding value to all its products. The tools of KM prove to be valuable both for sharing within the association and libraries taking part in the project and in their interaction with the faculty, ensuring the multiplicity of perspectives that is the basis of the quality of decision making. The theme of cultural diversity already encountered in Part 1 reappears in the report by Héloïse Lecomte concerning the setting up of the University Library for Languages and Civilizations in Paris. A radical organizational change accompanied the need to manage in a common public space, while ensuring neutrality and respect for different perspectives that included a cultural diversity of global scale. An enormous project, implemented over several years, has produced, even with the difficulties encountered, a growing awareness of the necessity of KM and its progressive penetration de facto into the current methods of management. The book ends, significantly, with a text that puts at the centre, right from the title, collaboration. Mary Lee Kennedy describes three initiatives of Knowledge and Library Services at Harvard Business School (HBS) aimed at sharing knowledge among practitioners worldwide and the faculty, supporting course learning objectives through a knowledge center, and creating an institutional memory programme as the collective effort of all components of the HBS. The active and



Introduction 

 13

visible participation of the various actors in the projects was, of course, the result of the collaboration before and behind the scenes –a key approach to devising, planning and development of projects. The presence within the volume of projects and case studies from virtually all types of libraries shows that KM and libraries are a combination not only possible but necessary. It encourages walking with determination on this road in the direction of a leading role of libraries in the digital era with librarians managing that process using the best and most appropriate KM tools and practices.

Acknowledgements All texts collected in this volume originate from papers presented at events organized by the IFLA Section on Knowledge Management. I want to express my thanks to all the authors for having agreed to cooperate. My gratitude goes to my three co-editors, Sally H. McCallum, Wilda Newman and Julien Sempéré, for their dedication and their commitment in getting this publication to see the light. A special thanks to Ágnes Hajdu Barát. This book owes much to the work she has done within the Standing Committee of the Section on Knowledge Management, chairing some of the events on the occasion of which the texts collected here were presented. She was also an active participant in the exchange of ideas among the co-editors for the definition of the purpose and the structure of the volume, and made suggestions for the selection of papers functional to the overview that the volume aims to offer.

Reference Hobohm, Hans-Goodman. 2004. “Knowledge Management: Libraries and Librarians Taking up the Challenge: An Overview.” In Knowledge Management: Libraries and Librarians Taking up the Challenge, edited by Hans-Goodman Hobohm, 7–10. München: K.G. Saur.

Premises

Michael Koenig

1 Knowledge Management: Where is it 1 Going? 1 Knowledge Management: Where is it Going?

Abstract: The author analyses the interest in Knowledge Management (KM) over time, showing that it remains at a high level, unlike other passing management “enthusiasm”. He puts forward various practical and practice-oriented definitions of KM, noting that not only was the advent of the internet a catalyst for KM, but also training and user education are important factors in its successful implementation. This article is based on a presentation made at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Helsinki, Finland, in August 2012.

Defining Knowledge Management (KM) Fad or New Aspect of Management? First a question that always comes up: Is KM another business fad? It is very clear now that it is not a fad. Why is it so clear? After all, Tom Wilson describing KM in 2002, said “the bandwagon lacks wheels”, a colourful metaphor that indicates this field is not going really anywhere (Wilson 2002). At almost the same time, in the very same issue of Information Research, Ponzi and Koenig said that KM was perhaps “in the process of establishing itself as a new aspect of management” (Ponzi and Koenig 2002). Which interpretation was correct? Let’s look at some trends. In 2002 the growth of the KM literature was as shown in Figure 1.1. 600 Article counts

500 400 300 200 100

Year Figure 1.1: Growth of KM article count to 2002.

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

0

18 

 Michael Koenig

In the next nine years, to 2011, the growth of articles published kept the graph climbing (Figure 1.2). 1000

Article conts

800 600 400 200

10

09

07

08

05

06

03

04

01

02

00

99

98

97

96

95

94

93

0

Figure 1.2: Growth of KM article count to 2011.

This growth may be contrasted with other business enthusiasms: Quality Circles, Total Quality Management, and Business Process Re-engineering (Figures 1.3– 1.5). 45 40 35 Record

30 25 20 15 10 5

Year Figure 1.3: Quality Circles – Life Cycle.

1987

1986

1985

1984

1983

1982

1981

1980

1979

1978

1977

0



700

575

600

503

500 Record

 19

1 Knowledge Management: Where is it Going? 

400

497

337

302

300

100

207

158

200

197

161

140

60

121

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

0

Year

Figure 1.4: Total Quality Management – Life Cycle. 1200 1053

1000

902

818

600

426 270

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1992

154 1994

6

12 1993

1 1991

1990

200 0

542

445

400

1995

Record

800

Year

Figure 1.5: Business Process Re-engineering – Life Cycle.

These graphs indicate that KM has remained a useful part of management infrastructures while other business enthusiasms have not.

Back to Definitions Returning to: what is KM? The problem is not finding a good definition of KM. There is in fact no dearth of definitions of KM. Professor Michael Sutton reported

20 

 Michael Koenig

in 2010 (pers. comm.) that he has compiled a library of more than one hundred of them. And many of those definitions of KM are very useful ones. The problem is finding one very good and all-purpose definition of KM. That seems to be an elusive target. While there are numerous useful definitions of KM, perhaps the most often quoted was developed by the Gartner Group: “A discipline that promotes an integrated approach to identifying, capturing, evaluating, retrieving, and sharing all of an enterprise’s information assets” (Duhon 1998). This definition, from 1998, is now a bit dated. Scovetta and Ellis have more recently suggested that KM “... is the effective and accurate management of knowledge (acquisition, creation, storage, sharing, and use) used to promote and support organizational changes that enhance an organization’s ability to effectively compete” (Scovetta and Ellis 2013, 11). This concept of KM includes and emphasises access to external information, the traditional domain of the library. Rather than being simply about “an enterprise’s information assets”, KM is now seen as about information relevant to an enterprise, whether internal or external. The best solution, this author believes, is to examine some of the most useful ways of explaining and defining KM. One of those ways is to think of KM as the movement to create in the business environment at large, an environment known to be conducive to successful research. The reasoning behind this notion is very logical. Increasingly business is composed of knowledge workers. The quintessential knowledge workers are researchers. There has been substantial work concerning what environment, particularly what information environment is conducive to successful research. What then is characteristic of the information environment in successful Research and Development (R&D)? It is rich, deep, and open communication. A dramatic example of this is found in a study (Koenig 1990) of the research winners and losers among two dozen major pharmaceutical companies. The single best correlation with research success was that researchers in the most successful companies perceived their own organization as placing less emphasis on confidentiality and the protection of proprietary information than did other companies in the industry. Another very useful way of thinking about KM is conveyed by the metaphor of the forest and the trees, as in “one can’t see the forest for the trees”. This concept derives from the observation that there have been a great number of management enthusiasms and fads in the last several decades (Roberts 2005), particularly toward the end of the twentieth century. And that what most of those fads have in common is that they centred around the management of information, or knowledge flow in organizations, or the management of information technology. Below is a list of those management fads, enthusiasms, and topics that meet those criteria



1 Knowledge Management: Where is it Going? 

 21

(in rough chronological order, most recent first), many of which are discussed in an analysis by Koenig (1998): –– Big Data / Cloud Computing; –– Enterprise Content Management; –– Supply Chain Management; –– Customer Relationship Management; –– E-Business; –– Enterprise Resource Planning; –– Information Driven Marketing; –– Knowledge Management; –– Intellectual Capital; –– Data Warehousing / Data Mining; –– Core Competencies; –– Business Process Re-Engineering; –– Hierarchies to Markets; –– Competitive Intelligence; –– TQM (Total Quality Management) and Bench Marking; –– IT and Organizational Structure; –– Information Resource Management; –– Enterprise-Wide Information Analysis; –– MIS (Management Information Systems) to DSS (Decision Support Systems) and External Information; –– IT as Competitive Advantage; –– Managing the Archipelago of Information Services; –– Information Systems Stage Hypotheses; –– Decision Analysis; –– Data Driven Systems Design; –– IT and Productivity; –– Minimization of Unallocated Cost. The observation that jumps out is that the list of topics is a phenomenon in its own right. The conclusion is that the topics above are, using the metaphor mentioned above, the trees in a forest, a forest of information and knowledge (small ‘k’) management. One can argue that we have not yet fully appreciated the scope and importance of that forest. Furthermore one can posit that KM has graduated from being just one of many names on that list, to now becoming in effect the name for that forest of all the trees of information and knowledge (small ‘k’) management. KM has thereby morphed and expanded in scope to be the name of that forest. The forest of course is not static, new topics are emerging: “Big Data”, for example.

22 

 Michael Koenig

We have always had trouble defining KM, and now here is another definition, but a very useful definition, via metaphor: KM is the name for that newly recognized forest of all the trees of information and knowledge (small ‘k’) management. It is the name for the forest of all the information and information management trees (fads) of the last several decades.

History of KM Another way of understanding and defining KM is to look at the history of KM, how it developed and what new thinking and new concepts were brought into KM as it developed. When the internet emerged, consulting firms quickly realized the potential impact of the intranet flavour of the internet for linking together geographically dispersed knowledge-based organizations such as their own. Then, having developed techniques to employ the internet in their own operations, they soon realized that the expertise they had gained was in fact a product that could be sold to other organizations. But a product needs a name, and the name chosen was Knowledge Management. The history of KM was first reprised by Prusak, one of the pioneers, who pointed out that the emphasis of the consulting firms upon KM was organic, not just a result of looking about for a new product to sell (Prusak 1999). More recently, the history of KM has been recounted by Koenig and Neveroski (2008). The development and the history of KM can be seen rather clearly as a series of stages. These stages are: –– the Technology Stage: –– (by the Internet out of Intellectual Capital, an equestrian metaphor that suggests that KM was sired by the internet from the background provided by the then comparatively recent enthusiasm for the recognition of the importance of intellectual capital, i.e., knowledge); –– the emphasis in this stage was upon “lessons learned” or “best practices”; –– the Human Relations (HR) Stage: –– design it well, and make it easy to use; –– the emphasis was upon the design of the portal or the dash board; –– the Library Stage: –– they have to be able to find it – build good taxonomies (classification structures); –– this stage was about structuring content and assigning descriptors, (index terms); –– the key terms are metadata, content management, and taxonomies;



1 Knowledge Management: Where is it Going? 

 23

–– KM and understanding context: –– relate it to your organization’s needs; –– one clear aspect of this emphasis upon context is the recognition that KM extends to knowledge beyond and outside the organization. KM traditionally almost entirely emphasised just an organization’s internal knowledge. The classic one-line illustration of what is addressed by KM has been the mantra of “if only Texas Instruments knew what Texas Instruments knew”. Another dimension of this emphasis is the realization of the necessity to understand the context of the user and the potential user. Yet another dimension is the understanding that for the user to have confidence in the information or knowledge provided, the user must also be made aware of the context of the source of the information. These stages are discussed in some detail by Koenig and Neveroski (2008).

The Human Factor in KM It is now common to observe that although KM and the recognition of its importance was precipitated by the appearance of the internet and its brethren, intranets and extranets, that fundamentally KM is more about people and corporate culture than it is about technology. There is a “case study” told in business schools in the 1960s. It concerns Ed Land, inventor of instant photography, President of Polaroid Corporation, and the second most prolific holder of patents in the United States (number one was Thomas Edison). Polaroid was challenged by the tax authorities on how it treated its assets for tax purposes. Ed Land left a meeting with the tax officials muttering “those guys in there don’t have the slightest idea what an asset is – ninety percent of our assets get in their cars and drive home at night”.1 An important aspect of that human resource side of KM that is far too often not adequately recognized, however, is the need for user support and user education and training to make KM work effectively and to be successful. In 2000, a well-known KPMG study, one of the largest studies ever done on the implementation of KM systems, covering more than 400 firms, provides fascinating and compelling documentation in regard to this problem. They

1 The author has mentioned the Ed Land anecdote to several prominent KM figures, Larry Prusak for example, and while we are all familiar with the story, none of us has a reference to cite for it. If any of the readers of this chapter can supply such a reference, we would be very grateful.

24 

 Michael Koenig

reported that of the 288 firms that had KM systems in place or were setting up such a system, there were 137 cases, nearly half, where the benefits failed to meet expectations (KPMG Consulting 2000, 46). The breakdown of why, from the company’s perspective, the benefits failed to meet expectations is shown in Figure 1.6, p. 24). What is striking however, and striking on two levels, is that three reasons: –– lack of user uptake due to insufficient communication; –– lack of time to learn/ system too complicated; and –– lack of training, are all fundamentally the same reason – inadequate training and user education. With that recognized, Figure 1.6 can be recast in a much more informative fashion (Figure 1.7, p. 24). 1. Lack of user uptake due to insufficient communication

20% 19%

2. Everyday use did not integrate into normal working practice

18%

3. Lack of time to learn/system too complicated

15%

4. Lack of training

13%

5. User could not see personal benefits

7%

6. Senior management was not behind it

7% 0%

10%

20%

30%

Base: all where benefits fail to meet expectations (137) Note these percentages add to 99% due to rounding error; there is no overlap Figure 1.6: Percent failing to meet expectations. 53%

1. Inadequate training and user education 19%

2. Everyday use did not integrate into working practice

13 5. User could not see personal benefits

0%

10%

Figure 1.7: Percent failing to meet expectations, revised.

20%

30%

40%

50%



1 Knowledge Management: Where is it Going? 

 25

It is also quite likely that some component of reason 5) in Figure 1.6, “Users could not see personal benefits”, is also reflective of inadequate training and user education, so that the 53% may in fact be an underestimate. What then jumps out is that inadequate training and user education is by far the most prominent reason for why benefits failed to meet expectations, accounting for the majority of failures, exceeding all other reasons combined. One small caveat is that as Davenport and Prusak observe, sometimes lack of training may take the blame when the real culprit is a combination of naïve expectation and a failure to adequately address the corporate cultural changes needed (Davenport and Prusak 1998, 26). Even with this factored in, however, the predominance of the training and user education factor is striking. Second and very surprising as well as striking, is that the KPMG report fundamentally fails to pick up on this rather dramatic finding. To their credit, KPMG does observe that “These responses confirm the fundamental flaw in viewing KM as a technology issue: it is not the technology that is holding organizations back but a lack of strategy and a failure to build KM in the organization’s day-to-day operations and its culture in order to encourage end-user buy-in”, but that is as far as they get toward a recognition of what is in fact the most central and dramatic finding of their study. An interesting comparison is that in KPMG’s data the percent corresponding to “inadequate training and user education” is 53%; while the figure for “senior management was not behind it” as the principal problem for failure is only 7%. It is of course not the case that senior management support is not important, but consider and contrast the proportion of the KM literature that emphasises the key importance of getting senior management support with the proportion of the KM literature that emphasises the key importance of setting up adequate and extensive support for user education and training, and one immediately gets a feel for the extent of the Achilles’ heel problem. The culture of KM is clearly nowhere near adequately aware of the importance of training and user education, and the KPMG report illustrates and illuminates the problem in a wonderfully compelling fashion, ironically enough, precisely because it does not recognize it. The importance of training and user education is probably the most under-appreciated key to the success of KM implementations.

26 

 Michael Koenig

Definition of KM Revisited Another way to define KM is to simply ask the question: What does a KM system typically consist of? KM systems typically consist of: –– access to internal and external information; –– communities of practice; –– best practices and lessons learned databases; –– expertise locating systems (e.g., Yellow Pages). There is not time in this paper to address these topics at any length. A good discussion of these topics is however contained in McInerney and Koenig’s contribution to the Synthesis Lecture Series on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services (McInerney and Koenig 2011).

Conclusion So what is KM; Knowledge Management is really librarianship expanded, which of course illustrates that the recognition of the importance of information is hardly new. What is new is that KM expands and extends well beyond the scope of traditional librarianship. It expands into the organization of, the management of, and the culture of the parent organization. So where is KM going? It is not going anywhere, it is here for good.

References Davenport, Thomas H. and Lawrence Prusak 1998. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press. Duhon, Bryant. 1998. “It’s All in our Heads.” Inform 12 (8): 8–13. Koenig, Michael E. D. 1990. “Information Services and Downstream Productivity.” In The Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, edited by Martha E. Williams, 25, 55–86. New York: Elsevier. Koenig, Michael E. D. 2006. “KM: the Forest for All the Trees.” KMWorld 15 (4): 1–30. Koenig, Michael E. D. with the assistance of M. MacIntosh. 1998. Information Driven Management, Concepts and Themes: A Toolkit for Librarians. IFLA publication 86. Munich, K.G. Saur. Koenig, Michael E. D. and Ken Neveroski. 2008 “The Origins and Development of Knowledge Management.” Journal of Information and Knowledge Management 7 (4): 243–254. KPMG Consulting. 2000. Knowledge Management Research Report 2000. New York: KPMG Consulting.



1 Knowledge Management: Where is it Going? 

 27

McInerney, Claire M. and Michael E. D. Koenig. 2011. Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations: Theoretical Foundations and Practices. San Rafael: Morgan and Claypool. Ponzi, Leonard J. and Michael Koenig. 2002. “Knowledge Management: Another Management Fad?” Information Research 8(1). http://www.informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper145.html. Accessed on 20 August 2015. Prusak, Larry. 1999. “Where did Knowledge Management Come From?” Knowledge Directions: The Journal of the (Berman) Institute for Knowledge Management 1 (1): 90–96. Roberts, Joanne. 2005. “Management and Myths: Challenging Business Fads, Fallacies and Fashions.” The International Journal of Public Sector Management 18 (1): 96–97. Scovetta, Vincent and Timothy J. Ellis. 2013. “Defining Leadership as an Influence on KM Success.” Paper presented at the 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Maui, Hawaii, USA, 7–10 January 2013. Wilson, Thomas. D. 2002. “The Nonsense of Knowledge Management.” Information Research, 8(1). http://www.informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html. Accessed on 20 August 2015.

Olivier Serrat

2 Toward a Library Renaissance Abstract: The author addresses the plight of today’s libraries with the internet and search engines replacing traditional finding and information services of libraries. He identifies a major task of libraries: the curation of knowledge in an information-overloaded internet environment. Trends and scenarios lead into an explanation of “Future Search” conferencing that can give a library direction and a framework for skills that are important for librarians in the future. Tips on the need for organizational resilience and branding conclude the paper. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2014 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Lyon, France.

Introduction For centuries, librarians have tried to safeguard information, sometimes in the face of destruction. Think of the great Library of Alexandria,1 the burning of which symbolizes the irretrievable loss of knowledge. Think also of Umberto Eco’s novel, The Name of the Rose, and the (fictitious) 14th-century story about the search for a “lost” volume of Aristotle that no one is allowed to read – but yet must be preserved – because it might reveal that Jesus could and did laugh, contrary to the death-obsessed Zeitgeist of the time. Fast-forward to the age of the internet, when some fear libraries are again being destroyed2 and many ask: “Who wants libraries when you have Google?”3 This is not an easy question to

1 Founded by Ptolemy I Soter (367–283 BC), this library was said to have amassed an estimated 400,000 manuscripts. With collections of works, lecture halls, meeting rooms, and gardens, it was considered the leading intellectual metropolis of the Hellenistic world. 2 For sure, the internet is not the only driver of change. Indubitably, the logarithmic growth of the internet has given libraries a rival as a provider of information and leisure; but, certainly in the West, many libraries have also become geographically isolated from urban centres, while a changing cultural landscape has fashioned different user profiles and expectations. All the while, budgetary cuts compel libraries to challenge, compare, consult, and compete, to use the 4Cs of commitment to “Best Value” that, from the late 1990s, government policy in the United Kingdom stipulated for provision of public services. 3 An apple should not be faulted for not being an orange. In the “Age of Knowledge”, libraries are too easily judged by the standards of (highly innovative) companies such as Amazon, Apple, and Google.



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

 29

address but one need not yield to pessimism.4 This paper argues that identifiable trends direct to a promising future: in light of these, one should be able to circumscribe plausible scenarios. Approaches to strategic planning that count on ownership should make a big difference and point to desirable skills for librarians. If they also invest in resilience and give unequivocal attention to branding, libraries can enjoy a renaissance.5

Wanted: Information Overload – Better, Knowledge Management – Specialists From our contemporary vantage point, it is well nigh impossible to imagine how we could exist without the internet: we can – and are wont to – work, study, shop, and play from a laptop or smartphone. On the other hand, since freelancing “seeders” proactively generate and share data and information, we are now awash in it. Google, for one, has greatly helped organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful, its mission statement. Information is ubiquitous because producing, manipulating, and disseminating it has become cheap and easy. The digital world provides a myriad of means: distance no longer matters. We generate (create), collect (capture), store (record), process (manage), transmit (share), use (consume), recycle (discard), and plan 4 A majority of libraries operate from a distinctive – sometimes wondrous – physical infrastructure based on a particular “theory of the business”. Then again, the media, music, and publishing industries too face disintermediation, meaning the elimination of intermediaries in transactions between parties. To this list some would add universities: instead of attending lectures on campus and after that heading off to work on assignments students will first scrutinize online material and then gather in hybrid learning spaces to explore a subject in rich conversations (or laboratory exercises) with professors and fellow students. Proponents of blended learning reckon that the Flipped Classroom model may even enhance critical thinking. (Paradoxically, since economic reasons determine much in higher education, traditional but exclusive face-toface tuition may become the privilege of a few while demand for global standardization in some fields may lower the level in many cases. In reality, consolidation and diversification are not mutually exclusive.) 5 The Renaissance was a cultural movement that spanned the 14th–17th centuries, spreading across Europe from its birthplace in Italy, especially Florence, in the Late Middle Ages. A time of great cultural and social change, the period was characterized by astonishing creativity and innovation in the fields of art and architecture, literature, philosophy, and science. Propelled by bustling trade, humanism and renewed interest in Classical learning and values led to seismic realization after the “Dark Ages” – viz., the entire period after the decline of the Roman Empire in the 4th–5th centuries – that things might be different.

30 

 Olivier Serrat

(identify) information throughout the day. By means of the internet, electronic mail remains the communication channel of choice but instant messaging and social media are two technologies that increasingly challenge its pre-eminence. Data smog, infobesity, intoxication, and – more frequently – information glut are fitting metaphors that describe the deluge of information we are experiencing. Information overload occurs when the amount of input to a system exceeds its processing capacity. Where content abounds, cognitive and perceptual factors constrain consumption; Thomas Davenport and John Beck define attention as focused mental engagement on a particular item of information (Davenport and Beck 2001). They coin the term “attention economy” to describe an environment where the scarcest resource is not ideas or even talent but attention itself. In the attention economy, channels of information constantly compete to attract the largest share of attention, leading to information overload. According to Herbert Simon, “In a knowledge-rich world, progress does not lie in the direction of reading and writing information faster or storing more of it. Progress lies in the direction of extracting and exploiting the patterns of the world so that far less information needs to be read, written, or stored” (Simon 1971). In the 21st century, exploring the distinction between information and knowledge is a primary area of inquiry. Lest we forget, the time-honoured function of librarians was precisely that: to curate6 knowledge, which entails pulling together, sifting through, selecting, and interpreting content. Today, by filtering the wealth of information into meaningful insights, they can find the signal in the noise and both energize and synchronize communities and networks of interest and practice. Working across content, structures, and stakeholders, librarians can turn disruptive chaos into creative clusters. To maximize outreach, librarians must in the “Age of Knowledge” consider what transformations challenge the value of libraries to clients, audiences, and partners and recognize opportunities to engage with design thinking7 in new forms and functions of “knowledge work”.8 Storage aside, what are the most valuable products and services that they can deliver? (Figure 2.1)

6 It ought not surprise that this verb derives from Medieval Latin curatus, from cura meaning ”care”, with first known use also in the 14th century. A curate was, and however archaically remains, any ecclesiastic entrusted with the care or cure of souls, such as a parish priest. 7 That is a human-centred, prototype-driven process for the exploration of new ideas that can be applied to operations, products, services, strategies, and even management. 8 Exhaustively, the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions classifies a dozen different types: more prosaic typologies refer to academic libraries, public libraries, school libraries, and special libraries.



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

 31

Empathy and Deep User Understanding (a deep dive with a broad lens) Concept Visualization (ideation, prototyping, and user evaluation)

Strategic Business Design (activity system design and evaluation)

Figure 2.1: The gears of business design. Source: Fraser 2009.

Key Trends Affecting Libraries Doubtlessly, many librarians would welcome a vision of the future that foresees a growing need for libraries because of recent advances in social media, mobile computing, and open data. But, there is danger in counting on such trends if libraries fail in any case to demonstrate the value of the products and services they must now provide in both physical and virtual9 settings and in a variety of formats. Thomas Frey of the DaVinci Institute identifies 10 trends (Frey 2015a). Paraphrasing and reordering: –– Trend No. 1 – The demand for information is growing very rapidly; –– Trend No. 2 – The stage is being set for global cultural, economic, political, social, and technological systems; –– Trend No. 3 – Information and communications technology is constantly shaping the way people tap information; 9 For many people, a library remains a bricks-and-mortar building that stocks paper books. But a library does not have to be a physical entity: at a more intellectual level, it is a repository of information in various formats. As likely as not, Wikipedia too is a library. This does not imply that the library of the future is inevitably digital: what with nearly half of the world’s population – more than 3 billion people – living on less than $2.50 a day, there is no need to explain that not everybody can afford a laptop and home connection to the internet.

32 

 Olivier Serrat

–– Trend No. 4 – We have not reached the smallest particle for storage capacity but may soon; –– Trend No. 5 – Search technology is becoming increasingly complex; –– Trend No. 6 – Busyness is driving the lifestyles of library users; –– Trend No. 7 – We are transitioning to a verbal society, less reliant on the keyboard; –– Trend No. 8 – We are shifting from product- to experience-based lifestyles; –– Trend No. 9 – Many libraries are morphing into centres of culture; –– Trend No. 10 – The information and communications technology we currently depend on will ineluctably become obsolete.

Pure Scenarios for Future Libraries Libraries are fundamental to teaching and learning: one might think that this is enough to endear them to us. However, the world is and will continue to be an ever-changing place. Based on a horizon scan and a political, economic, social, technological, legal, and environmental (PESTLE) analysis of the environment for higher education and libraries, the Academic Libraries of the Future project10 fleshed out three (somewhat exaggerated) scenarios for libraries, positioned along open-closed and market-state axes: –– the Wild West scenario – Under this scenario, private providers compete with one another and with governments to offer consumers information services and learning material. The power lies in the hands of the consumers, who are able to pick and choose from materials to create a personal experience; –– the Beehive scenario – Under this scenario, for instance in the education sector, governments remain the primary funder and controller of information services and learning material. The overarching goal is to produce a skilled workforce, created mostly by largely homogenous higher education systems for the masses

10 The Academic Libraries of the Future project spanned 2010–2011. In the United Kingdom, it aimed to generate scenarios of how libraries might by 2050 have evolved in light of long-term uncertainties. The uncertainties included how higher education will be funded and operated; how information will be created, discovered, accessed, and managed; how learning, teaching, and research will evolve to take best advantage of improvements in information and communications technology; and what will be the information needs of users for learning, teaching, and research, the knowledge economy, and students and researchers as “consumers”. The project was sponsored by the British Library, the Joint Information Systems Committee, the Research Information Network, Research Libraries UK, and the Society of College, National, and University Libraries. Its final report is dated 18 May 2011.



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

 33

while allowing elites to attend private institutions. A limited market is used to provide competition in higher education and drive up quality; –– the Walled Garden scenario – Under this scenario, for instance in the education sector, the closed nature of society makes higher education systems insular and inward-looking, isolated from other institutions by competing value systems. Here, the provision of information services is as much concerned with protecting own materials as it is with enabling access.

Enter Future Search Conferencing Fatigue pervades organizations that cannot learn to change. Tell-tale signs are (i) senior management and change sponsors do not attend progress reviews; (ii) there is reluctance to share, perhaps even comment on, information about the change effort; (iii) resources are given over to other strategic initiatives; (iv) clients, audiences, and partners demonstrate impatience with the duration of the change effort or increasingly question its objectives; and (v) managers, champions, and agents are stressed out and the change team considers leaving. We should not forget that organizations are human institutions, not machines: people must understand and buy into the need for change if any meaningful progress toward a desired future is to be made at all. It is difficult and ultimately pointless to make people do what they do not want to do. Futurists deal with probable, possible, preferable, and prospective futures.11 Trend analysis, one of their tools, is valuable because moving with trends, not against them, is a logical undertaking. However, the patterns that trend analysis identifies can lead to organizational lock-in of the either/or, black-and-white variety the three outright scenarios may conduce; conversely, they may open too many unrealizable vistas. Trend analysis works best when accompanied by other techniques. Future Search conferencing has emerged as a system-wide strategic planning tool that enables diverse and potentially conflicting groups to find common ground for constructive action. After all, it stands to reason that, where the stakes are communal, people should work as a group to bring common sense to bear on organizational change.

11 These futures are all subject to cultural, psychological, and sociological influences but cannot be explored in the same way: the first (one future) entails trend analysis; the second (many futures) calls for imagination and flexibility; the third (an “other” future) springs from value positions, both critical and ideological; the fourth (futuring) hinges on preparedness to act, rooted in self-reliance and solidarity. The research methods associated with each orientation differ too.

34 

 Olivier Serrat

Future Search conferencing was conceptualized to help organizations create shared visions and plot organizational directions linked to results over a 5–20 year horizon.12 It is a 3-day event structured to: –– represent the system in one room; –– explore the whole in context before seeking to act on parts, focusing on common ground and desired futures and treating problems as information; and –– self-manage work and take responsibility for action. Future Search conferencing links inputs, activities, and outputs to result in a vision built on: –– appreciation of an organization’s history; –– acknowledgment of present-day strengths and weaknesses; and –– considered opinion about major opportunities in the future.

Figure 2.2: A typical Future Search agenda. Source: Author.

Not a free-floating brainstorming exercise, Future Search conferencing is a carefully designed methodology linking inputs, activities, and outputs. In four or

12 Not all topics invite the same time span. The maximum horizon should lie beyond the normal planning vista, but not stretch so far away as to seem irrelevant; one should still be able to make an impression with today’s decisions. The factors that help define the perspective of a Future Search exercise are (i) the inertia or volatility of the system; (ii) the schedule of decisions to be made, the authority to make them, and the means to be used; and (iii) the degree of rigidity or motivation of participants. The horizon an organization selects has a serious effect on results – a narrow timeframe lowers the net present value of an endeavour by overlooking future benefits; an unduly long vista overestimates them. Organizations should plump for a horizon that encompasses all conceivable benefits and costs likely to ensue from an endeavour, but they must also consider how far they can reasonably predict effects.



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

 35

five sessions each lasting half a day, participants keep to the following in small groups or plenary sessions:13 –– Focus on the Past: Highlights and Milestones – In the first half day, preferably after a warm-up allowing participants to converse with one another, the Future Search gets under way with a look at the past. The small groups contribute historical information and compose timelines of key events in the world, their personal lives, and the history of the Future Search topic. The groups tell stories about each timeline and what implications the stories have for the work they have come to do. No items are too trivial and no individual dominates: forbearance on the beliefs and positions of others deepens comprehension and acceptance. This process creates a shared, global context for the Future Search; –– Focus on the Present: External Trends – Later, the entire assembly draws a mind map, ranks ongoing trends affecting the system the participants operate or exist in, and identifies which are most important in relation to the topic. This process clarifies what is impacting the organization; –– Focus on the Present: Responses to Trends – In the morning of the second day, the small groups describe what they are doing about the key trends identified and explain what they plan to do in the future. This process helps assess current actions; –– Focus on the Present: Owning Actions – Later, the groups report on what they are proud of and sorry about in the way they are dealing with the Future Search topic. This process surfaces strengths and weaknesses in the organization and affords psychological safety for admission of errors; –– Focus on the Future: Ideal Scenarios – In the afternoon of the second day, the groups project themselves into the future and describe their preferred vision of the future as though it had already come about. This process generates a clear and powerful image of a healthy organization – and its values – through which the participants would like to advance their joint purpose, to be made real over the selected horizon; –– Discover Common Ground – Later, the groups post themes they believe hold common – but not necessarily easy – ground for all participants. Disagreements are acknowledged without auxiliary discussion. This process enables participants to locate springboards for action, having elucidated what

13 In the United States, libraries that report having used Future Search conferencing include, for instance, Drexel University Libraries, Durham County Library, Monroe County Public Library, and Nebraska Library Services. For an informative account of the experience of Drexel University Libraries see Nitecki et al. 2013.

36 

 Olivier Serrat

assumptions – e.g., the nature of society, the means of social change, and the attributes and roles of knowledge – underpin each; –– Confirm Common Ground – In the morning of the third day, the entire assembly dialogues to agree on common ground. This process helps participants conceptualize behaviours for cooperative ventures; –– Plan Actions – In the afternoon of the third day, champions throughout the organization sign up to implement action plans. Of course, authority, resources, and arrangements for action are confirmed by reality checks. Participants walk out of the assembly room committed and ready to accomplish the envisioned future based on a more cogent framework that connects values and actions in new relationships and real time. This process formulates mutually supportive, practicable sets of rapid undertakings for individuals, groups, and the organization they are members of, close follow-up on which will determine whether change has occurred. Here too, Thomas Frey’s recommendations for libraries deserve mention, if only because many of them have to do with the sort of conversations that Future Search conferencing engenders. Paraphrasing and expanding, he advises them to: –– Evaluate the Library Experience – Libraries can survey the opinions and suggestions of clients, audiences, and partners to grasp what matters most to them. The patrons are the community at large and the people who walk through the library doors; –– Embrace New Information and Communications Technology – Information and communications technology is being introduced on a daily basis and most people are at a loss when it comes to deciding what to use or what to stay away from. Because no organization has taken the lead in helping the general public understand new technology there are opportunities for libraries to become centres of digital learning and points of reference – culture (including recreation), research, innovation, etc. – for local communities: they can, for instance, create technology advisory boards; enrol technology-savvy members of the community to hold monthly discussions that the community at large would be invited to join; and organize guest lecture series on technology – this is quite converse to the idea that the internet will make them superfluous or irrelevant;14 14 As early as 1999, Stuart Basefsky envisioned libraries as agents of change. Beyond collecting, organizing, and assisting, he made the case they needed to (i) inform patrons about the material being collected, presumably on their behalf; (ii) discuss the issues that the curated material was to provide background and enlightenment on; (iii) solicit end-user buy-in through extensive demonstration programmes of how to best use the information collected,



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

 37

–– Preserve the Memories of Their Own Communities – The historical memories of a community amount to much, much more than a few documents: they embody many forms that should not disappear and libraries have a quintessential role to play;15 –– Experiment with Creative Spaces so the Future Role of the Library Can Define Itself – Because the role of libraries 20 years hence will have changed and will likely embrace multiple new forms and functions, libraries can design creative spaces to enable clients, audiences, and partners, not forgetting staff, to experiment and determine what ideas draw attention and get traction. With social innovation, possible uses for creative spaces include art studios; band practice rooms; blogger stations; cybercafés; daycare facilities; drama studios; exercise bicycles and treadmills; gamer stations; imagination rooms; mini-theatres; podcast studios; recording studios; video studios; and virtual world stations. Since they juxtapose also the Wild West, Beehive, and Walled Garden scenarios described earlier, it is relevant to note Thomas Frey’s three configurations for libraries. He calls them the “Time Capsule Room” (Frey 2015b), the “Search Command Center” (Frey 2015c) and the “Electronic Outpost” (Frey 2015d). Not an “official story”, the Time Capsule Room would preserve and make accessible sensory information about the essence of community in audio, video, and image forms. (Over time, new technologies may capture frequencies, pressures, smells, tastes, textures, vibrations, and other situational attributes.) To establish a library as a centre of gravity for exploration, the Search Command Center would draw attention to databases, specialized search engines, and other available resources; provide expert, hands-on assistance in finding and using databases; and teach patrons how to access information remotely. To extend the digital world to efficiently-run community gathering places, the Electronic Outpost would in different shapes and sizes, and for varying purposes, serve as the satellite branch of a central library; some outposts would offer selections of digital tablets and book and for what purposes; (iv) ascribe key individuals in libraries to special services so they might convey the value of the information to patrons; (v) team with management in libraries to bring the perspectives of knowledge and information providers (librarians) to the table; and (vi) stretch the job description of librarians or the organizational role of libraries to better fit the needs of the organizations they serve. Toward these, he argued they had to act as facilitators, consultants, trainers, and journalists/reporters (Basefsky 1999). 15 For example, the role of Library and Archives Canada, established in 2004, is to preserve Canada’s documentary heritage and make it accessible. Its products comprise databases, digitized microforms, an electronic collection, open data, research aids, thematic guides, and virtual exhibitions.

38 

 Olivier Serrat

readers; others would feature daycare centres, gamer stations, mini-theatres, working studios, etc., perhaps also a Search Command Center.

A Skills Framework for Librarians Creating a shared vision and plotting organizational directions is one thing but delivering the dream is another. At a time when increasingly advanced skills are required for success in life and work, all libraries must retool. Competence is the state or quality of being adequately or well qualified to deliver a specific task, action, or function successfully. It is also a specific range of knowledge, skills, or behaviours utilized to improve performance. Today, sustainable competitive advantage derives from strenuous efforts to identify, cultivate, and exploit an organization’s core competencies, the tangible fruits of which are products and services that anticipate and meet demand. (Yesteryear, instead of strengthening the roots of competitiveness, the accent was placed on business units. Innately, given their defining characteristics, business units under-invest in core competencies, incarcerate resources, and bind innovation – when they do not stifle it.) Core competencies are integrated and harmonized abilities that provide potential access to markets; create and deliver value to audiences, clients, and partners there; and are difficult for competitors to imitate. They depend on relentless design of strategic architecture, deployment of competence carriers, and commitment to collaborate across silos. They are the product of collective learning. The Five Competencies Framework against which the Knowledge Solutions (ADB 2015) are framed aims to build strengths in the areas of strategy development, management techniques, collaboration mechanisms, knowledge sharing and learning, and knowledge capture and storage. Over the medium to long term, libraries may need to build competencies in the first two areas, and unremittingly strengthen abilities in the other three. More immediately, citing the Institute of Museum and Library Services, (IMLS 2009)16 a skills framework (particularized to the configuration of each library) would likely comprise: 16 With attention to institutional assets (human capital, physical infrastructure, information technology, collections, programs), leadership and management (vision and planning, access, resource allocation and sustainability), partnering (business partners, community partners, education partners), and accountability (goal setting, metric development, continuous improvement), the Institute of Museum and Library Services also provides a self-assessment tool to helps libraries (and museums) scan the organization and focus planning efforts around core areas of operations.



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

 39

–– learning and innovation skills, e.g., critical thinking and problem solving; creativity and innovation; communication and collaboration; visual literacy; scientific and numerical literacy; cross-disciplinary thinking; and basic literacy; –– information, media, and technology skills, e.g., information literacy; media literacy; and information, communications, and technology literacy; –– life and career skills, e.g., flexibility and adaptability; initiative and self-direction; social and cross-cultural skills; productivity and accountability; and leadership and responsibility; –– 21st-century themes, e.g., global awareness; financial, economic, business, and entrepreneurial literacy; civic literacy; health literacy; and environmental literacy.

Toward Resilience, not just Sustainability Organizations must be resilient if they are to survive and thrive in turbulent times: it is no longer sufficient to throw efforts at strategy, structure, and systems, parameters that lie mainly within an organization’s boundaries. In today’s dynamic and complex environment, enduring success requires organizational agility across boundaries. In the century of complexity, organizations must be “in the making” and the locus of attention must become purpose, processes, and people, the vital factors that Future Search conferencing investigates. Libraries must accommodate environmental turbulence and effectively manage disruptive change and its pace to engage, adapt, and recover; to capture or realize opportunity; and in some cases to actually morph to become stronger on account of the experience. With new-found purpose from Future Search conferencing, investments in three areas would assuredly move libraries from passivity to action:17 –– leadership and culture – which define the adaptive capacity of the organization; –– networks – which amount to the internal and external relationships fostered and developed for the organization to leverage when needed; –– change readiness – which signifies the planning undertaken and direction established to enable the organization to be change-ready. 17 Work in this area owes much to Resilient Organizations. On top, Resilient Organizations has devised a resilience benchmark tool and associated questionnaire to gauge the resilience of an organization, monitor progress over time, and compare resilience strengths and weaknesses against other organizations in the sector of interest or of a similar size. (Resilient Organizations 2014)

40 

 Olivier Serrat

Investments in leadership and culture relate to leadership, staff engagement, situation awareness, decision making, and creativity and innovation. Investments in networks relate to effective partnerships, leveraging knowledge, breaking silos, and internal resources. Investments in change readiness relate to unity of purpose, proactive posture, planning strategies, and stress-testing plans.

A Postscript on Branding Irrespective of configuration, libraries must in addition do more about branding. Branding is a means to identify an organization’s products or services, differentiate them from others, and create and maintain an image that encourages confidence among clients, audiences, and partners. Until the mid-1990s, brand management – based on the 4Ps of product (or service), place, price, and promotion – aimed to engineer additional value from single brands. The idea of organizational branding has since matured to embrace relational capital, with implications for behaviour, and is making inroads in the public sector too. Marketers have come to agree that the parties to a transaction are in fact exchanging one behaviour with another as individuals or communities: they do not just “transact”. And so, if relationships – in other words, supply chains – are crucial to marketing and marketing is not an act but a habit, libraries should do the following: –– Think in terms of social capital and relationships, which requires that they plan for the long-term and build brand equity accordingly. –– Consider what deep-seated values relate to the behaviours of targeted end users and ascertain better what value and motivational attributes products and services have from the perspective of end users. –– Focus, simplify, and organize products and services by emphasizing and facilitating understanding of unique selling propositions, which demands that for all products and services they look at the why, what, how, when, where, and who of end-user behaviours. –– Bring more and different partners together to initiate and deploy synergies. –– Constantly monitor and evaluate efforts by surveying the perceptions of end users. –– Visualize marketing as change management, the success of which hinges on explicit consideration of relevant determinants of intra-organizational behaviours throughout marketing activities, institutions, and processes. –– Accept that organizational behaviour is central to marketing and branding: it is a management philosophy for organizational practice; a strategy that relates to end users; an organizational tool for structuring and infusing



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

 41

teams; a tactic with which to drive inputs; and a measurement of the relevance, efficiency, efficacy, impact, and sustainability of activities, outputs, and outcomes. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank, or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. In 2010 Olivier Serrat published two books, Learning in Development and a compendium of Knowledge Solutions, available at www.adb.org/publications/learning-development and www.adb.org/publications/compendium-knowledge-solutions, respectively.18 All articles in the Knowledge Solutions series he launched in 2008 are at http://www.adb.org/knowledgesolutions. Malgorzata (Gosia) Stergios, Communications Director, Digital Arts and Humanities at Harvard University, reviewed this paper and shared valuable insights.

References ADB (Asian Development Bank). 2015. “Knowledge Solutions.” http://www.adb.org/ publications/series/knowledge-solutions. Accessed on 18 October 2015. Basefsky, Stuart. 1999. “The Library as an Agent of Change: Pushing the Client Institution Forward.” Information Outlook 3 (8): 37–40. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/ articles/189/. Accessed on 28 September 2015. Davenport, Thomas and John Beck. 2001. The Attention Economy: Understanding the New Currency of Business. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press. Frey, Thomas. 2015a. “The Future of Libraries: Beginning the Great Transformation.” http:// www.davinciinstitute.com/papers/the-future-of-libraries/. Accessed on 28 September 2015. Frey, Thomas. 2015b. “The Future of the Library Series: Part 1 – The Time Capsule Room.” http:// www.davinciinstitute.com/papers/the-library-of-the-future-series-part-1-%E2%80%93the-time-capsule-room-by-futurist-thomas-frey/. Accessed on 28 September 2015. Frey, Thomas. 2015c. ”The Future of the Library Series: Part 2 – The Search Command Center.” http://www.davinciinstitute.com/papers/the-library-of-the-future-series-part-2-thesearch-command-center-by-futurist-thomas-frey/. Accessed on 28 September 2015. Frey, Thomas. 2015d. ”The Future of the Library Series: Part 3 – The Electronic Outpost.” http:// www.davinciinstitute.com/papers/the-library-of-the-future-series-part-3-the-electronicoutpost-by-thomas-frey/. Accessed on 28 September 2015. Fraser, Heather. 2009. “Designing Business: New Models for Success.” Design Management Review 20 (2): 55–65.

18 Websites accessed on 28 September 2015.

42 

 Olivier Serrat

IMLS (Institute of Museum and Library Services). 2009. Museums, Libraries, and 21st Century Skills. http://imls.gov/sites/default/files/publications/documents/21stcenturyskills.pdf. Accessed on 7 August 2015. Nitecki, Danuta, Jennifer Livingston, Gerry Gorelick and Suzanne Noll. 2013. “Evaluating a Future Search Conference for an Academic Library’s Strategic Planning.” Library Leadership & Management 27 (3): 1–21. https://journals.tdl.org/llm/index.php/llm/ article/view/7021. Accessed on 15 September 2015. Resilient Organizations. 2014. http://www.resorgs.org.nz/. Accessed on 16 September 2015. Simon, Herbert A. 1971. “Designing Organizations for an Information-Rich World.” In Computers, Communications, and the Public Interest, edited by Martin Greenberger, 37–72. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

Related ADB Documents Asian Development Bank. “Harnessing Creativity and Innovation in the Workplace.” 2009. http://www.adb.org/publications/harnessing-creativity-and-innovation-workplace. ——. “New-Age Branding and the Public Sector.” 2010. http://www.adb.org/publications/ new-age-branding-and-public-sector. ——. “Sparking Innovations in Management.” 2010. http://www.adb.org/publications/sparkinginnovations-management. ——. “Design Thinking.” 2010. http://www.adb.org/publications/design-thinking. ——. “Sparking Social Innovations.” 2010. http://www.adb.org/publications/sparking-socialinnovations. ——.“Forestalling Change Fatigue.” 2010. http://www.adb.org/publications/forestallingchange-fatigue. ——.“E-Learning and the Workplace.” 2010. http://www.adb.org/publications/e-learning-andworkplace. ——. “Business Model Innovation.” 2012. http://www.adb.org/publications/business-modelinnovation. ——. “Innovation in the Public Sector.” 2012. http://www.adb.org/publications/innovationpublic-sector. ——. “On Knowledge Behaviors.” 2012. http://www.adb.org/publications/knowledge-behaviors. ——. “Future Search Conferencing.” 2012. http://www.adb.org/publications/future-searchconferencing. ——. “Learning in a Flash.” 2013. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/intl/267/. ——. “On Resilient Organizations.” 2013. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/intl/270/. All the above accessed on 16 September 2015.



2 Toward a Library Renaissance 

Related ADB Videos Asian Development Bank. “The Role of Information Coordinators.” 2011. http://vimeo. com/91394025. ——. “The New ADB Library.” 2011. http://vimeo.com/91394026. ——. “Record Management in ADB.” 2011. http://vimeo.com/91394027. ——. “K-Hub: A Knowledge Space.” 2011. 2015. http://vimeo.com/91394029. ——. “Libraries of the Future.” 2014. http://vimeo.com/94506659. ——. “The Future of Libraries Worldwide.” 2014. http://vimeo.com/94626000. ——. “Resilience Capabilities for Organizations of the Future.” 2014. http://vimeo. com/94626001. All the above accessed on 16 September 2015.

 43

Part 1: Knowledge Management for Library Users

Klaus Ceynowa

3 Information in the Digital Knowledge 3 Ecosystem – Challenges for the Library 3 of the Future 3 Information in the Digital Knowledge Ecosystem

Abstract: In the digital society the processes of knowledge generation, dissemination, and use are changing dramatically. The distinct knowledge item in the form of the publication is replaced by the boundless, in principle infinite knowledge space of dynamically networked data stocks. The knowledge management of this data space is the future task of the library, simultaneously requiring a new definition of its role as the steward of the memory of the digital knowledge society. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2014 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Lyon, France.

Research – Publication – Knowledge Research generates knowledge and knowledge in turn provokes new research. Knowledge – defined as a realization that is regarded as guaranteed and proven at a certain point in time – is expanded, made obsolete, dismissed by research, superseded by new realizations. Sometimes knowledge formations representing the unchallenged research horizon of an entire epoch are completely invalidated by a change of paradigm. Traditionally, the publication plays a central role in this fundamentally infinite process of knowledge generation by research. Firstly, it provides publicity for the results of the realization process by fixating and disseminating the state of research and knowledge reached at the time, usually in textual form. The findings obtained in the laboratory, the results of a field study, the insights of interpretations in the field of humanities – all this remains limited to a small circle of those people immediately involved until its publication. Publicity is generated and the process of knowledge distribution and appropriation is started only upon the dissemination in the form of a monograph or a journal article – be it in printed or electronic form. In the cycle of knowledge generation, knowledge dissemination, and (productive) knowledge reception, the publication represents the linchpin connecting the research process as the pre-publication phase with the process of its appropriation, scrutiny and becoming part of new research as the post-publication phase. The library as knowledge centre and storehouse of knowledge traditionally represents the entity in which published knowledge is preserved, catalogued, and

48 

 Klaus Ceynowa

provided, regardless of the form this knowledge takes: a handwritten parchment, a printed article, an electronic journal or a hosted digital object. The library as an information agent consequently provides constant momentum to the process of knowledge generation, dissemination and use by the regulative and preservative curatorship of the published knowledge, in accordance with the well-known dictum “research turns into library, library turns into research”. The metaphorical description of the library as the “heart of the university” puts this concept of the library in a nutshell.

The Digital Age Dissolves the Boundaries of Spaces of Knowledge So far, so good. However, are we not dealing with a model which, due to the comprehensive digitization of our entire world of knowledge and living environment, is disintegrating as we speak, which has in fact already become a thing of the past in numerous respects? In the digital world the notion of the publication as carrier of knowledge and material field of activity of the library as storehouse of knowledge has indeed changed fundamentally. The reason is that the pre-publication phase, i.e. the research process, the post-publication process, i.e. the reception process of the research results, and the publication itself have become completely digital and consequently technically identical, as sequences of bits and bytes. This in turn is the requirement for the classical publication, defined as a self-contained, static and consistent entity, to “open up” to the production phase and the reception phase of the research process alike. Digital material creates seamless linkage with research data and further research results through the integration of interactive tables, graphics, maps and simulations, videos of laboratory experiments, and finally through networks with blogs and virtual research environments. These linkages turn the reported results into the object of further research, contributing to the formation of a continuously evolving ecosystem of contextualized and networked data stocks. In this system, the publication, defined as a discretely addressable unit of a distinct object, now only represents a documentary snapshot in a networked, dynamic space of knowledge. The concept of liquid documents or enhanced publication integrates digital data stocks and data objects from the generation and reception phases of the research project into the actual document. Thus they simultaneously become permeable to both of these phases. This outlines already today the shape of a knowledge landscape in which the traditional notion of the



3 Information in the Digital Knowledge Ecosystem 

 49

publication becomes increasingly opaque.1 Long-term, the future concept of knowledge that is adequate to the digital world will become a linked open-data space. It will be determined by the specific research object and linked with the adjoining research fields on its edges, thus defining in its entirety the current state of our knowledge.

The Library: Curator of Linked Open-data Worlds of Knowledge To the same extent as the traditional process chain of research/publication/reception is gradually superseded by the simultaneousness of contextualized, networked data stocks in the digital age, the traditional concept of the library’s role as information agent is also on trial. As long as one can assume a clear distinction of the process steps of generating, publishing, disseminating and using knowledge – whether in the analogue or in the digital world – the familiar function of the library as an intermediary will remain intact. The library will connect the phase of knowledge generation with the phase of knowledge reception through collecting, providing and preserving all things published. However, the more the sequentiality of the pre-publication phase, the publication, and the post-publication phase merge in favour of contextualized, linked, dynamic data stocks, the more the core mission of the library will also change. Such a merger will surely take place at substantial time offsets in the different cultures of research and knowledge of the humanities and the sciences. Instead of being responsible for only one part of the value chain of knowledge, the library must now support the complete network, the complete flow of knowledge. In short, the future mission of the library as research infrastructure is the curatorship of the fundamentally infinite linked open-data space as it is described above. Or even more succinctly, the field of action of the library is knowledge streams instead of knowledge items. It is a service which is determined primarily technologically. This service must provide collaboration and communication tools in the form of virtual research environments, digital long-term archiving, and long-term availability of complex, multimedia-based data stocks. It must support processing of digital mass data for quantitative analyses (“big data”) with semantic structuring, linking, and visualization of the knowledge networks with the goal of making them navigable 1 See http://www.ub.hu-berlin.de/fu-push on the DFG project “Future Publications in the Humanities”. Accessed on 30 September 2015.

50 

 Klaus Ceynowa

comfortably – all of which is an exercise which is literally never-ending in view of the high dynamics of modern research processes. In this scenario, an essential category of librarian work will probably lose much of its importance. It is the classical notion of collection, understood as a systematically arranged body of knowledge with a subject- or topic-oriented structure. Aside from access limitations due to copyright and licensing, all available data stocks, materials and documents are simply there in the digital space. Using intelligent search algorithms, the user himself structures this data space as desired, arranging his collection secondarily and continually anew. Particularly for large, universally-oriented libraries, this situation is almost paradox: With the digitization of each work from their rich and frequently unique collections, they pull this work out from its original collection context, releasing it for user-determined re-contextualization within the digital knowledge space.

Knowledge Design: Mobile, Situational, Natural The use of this digital knowledge space, encompassing all forms of handling digital data stocks and information, will be increasingly determined in the future by mobile usage scenarios. This represents a further challenge for the library of the future. The current rapidly accelerating transition from the stationary to the mobile internet is more than a mere technology change regarding the utilization of digital information. It marks the transition to the omnipresent internet which permeates the entire living environment and is wholly integrated in our everyday actions. Digital knowledge is no longer something that is retrieved by the user at an Internet workstation, but surrounds the user wherever he goes and is available everywhere. The internet will become as individual as the life of its users, being their constant companion. Twenty-five percent of all US teenagers already refer to themselves as “cell mostly” internet users: They use the internet primarily via mobile devices, such as smart phones and tablets, hardly using desktop PCs or laptops any longer (Madden et al. 2013, 2). The relevant criterion according to which information and data stocks in the mobile internet are structured, filtered and processed is their situational adaptation. Digital knowledge is designed to be adapted as exactly as possible to the situation in which I am as a user, and with reference to the specific interest of utilization that I have in my current situation. Concise examples of such applications are location-dependent services and augmented-reality apps which make available information with reference to the respective current location of the user. In the case of augmented reality the location is directly integrated into the camera



3 Information in the Digital Knowledge Ecosystem 

 51

image of the real world. The change in handling the information is determined by the type of device employed. The mobile technologies require a new paradigm of digital knowledge structuring, dissemination and use: personalized, situation-focused, on the spot. The processing of digital knowledge is strictly oriented on the paradigm of mobile devices that can be operated completely by means of touch screens and gesture-based navigation. The conventional graphic user interfaces are replaced by natural user interfaces, designing the behaviour of digital knowledge objects in reaction to language, gesture and touch (cf. Henseler 2013). Libraries can play a future-oriented role in the realization of the vision of the mobile internet – the ability to use digital contents and services at any time, in any place, in a situation adapted to the individual situation and user – only if they detach themselves at least somewhat from the web as primary digital place of action. Already today, internet users in the United States spend 70 minutes daily on the web, but also 127 minutes using apps on mobile devices. “With unlimited information”, writes Jeff Stibel, “there is a greater need to filter out irrelevant information and go directly to what you need, download the app, and never search again. ... As tablets and phones replace computers, the web will be relegated to a position no higher than that of a ‘super app’” (Stibel 2013a).2 The more firmly this trend takes hold, the more the libraries will have to design their infrastructure services in the form of personalized and specialized applications adapted to specific situations to meet their users’ expectations. Individualized provision of the desired information in the respective current use scenario, for example with a focus on specific research situations, will become equally important as the semantic structuring of comprehensive search spaces and highly aggregated content clusters. An essential requirement for this, among other things, is to achieve an as comprehensive as possible georeferencing of the knowledge stocks curated by libraries. This development is almost inevitably accompanied by the loss in importance of the large internet portals and institutional websites oriented towards “full service”. They will likely be replaced by applications that are custom-tailored for specific purposes and services and adapt to the diverse, heterogeneous use environments of mobile digital knowledge spaces with an individual focus. This will also have far-reaching consequences for the large (meta)data aggregators of digital objects, such as the Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek and Europeana. They will only be able to play a successful role forming part of future research infrastructures if they act as platforms rather than as portals for display windows of digital objects. As platforms, they prepare digital data stocks for use, interlink them, enrich them (in the sense of the knowledge stream described above), and

2 Also see Stibel 2013b.

52 

 Klaus Ceynowa

make them available via open interfaces for use and processing in external work environments and applications.

Competency in Digital Knowledge Spaces The dynamic digital knowledge spaces as fields of action of the future library simultaneously demand new forms of knowledge work, in particular within the framework of study, teaching, and learning. It can be predicted that the fast, associative comprehension of networked structures, the agile handling of multimedia-enriched, multiply linked data stocks, as well as the ability to consciously limit oneself to what is, pragmatically speaking, necessary to know in the light of a fundamental endlessly networked knowledge space, will all become more important. Conversely, it is possible that the dissolution of the classical notion of publication in the sense of the self-contained, primarily textually determined knowledge item also puts the existential importance of classical cultural techniques into perspective, such as the concentrated, linear reception of sequential argumentation structures: “The essential skills,” writes Jonathan Grudin, “will be those of rapidly searching, browsing, assessing quality, and synthesizing the vast quantities of information. In contrast, the ability to read one thing and think hard about it for hours will not be of no consequence, but it will be of far less consequence for most people” (Grudin cited in Anderson and Rainie 2012, 4). The cultural philosopher Michel Serres takes this even a step further in his new book Petite Poucette (English title: Thumbelina: The Culture and Technology of Millennials) by interpreting the omni-availability of knowledge that is possible in the digital world as an indication of a change of the forms of perception and awareness themselves: “We do not have an urgent necessity for concepts. We can dwell on the narratives, the examples and singularities, on the things themselves, as long as we need. Practically as well as theoretically, this renewal retrieves the honour of those philosophers of knowledge who are committed to description and committed to the individual” (Serres 2013, 44). 3 These considerations offer a great variety of possible approaches to libraries to redefine the teachings of information literacy. This field, which is currently very strongly technically determined as the conveyance of skills of researching, selecting and evaluating information, could remain important for the library work in the future. It should be interpreted somewhat more broadly as the conveyance of “knowledge literacy” 3 Translated into English from the German translation.



3 Information in the Digital Knowledge Ecosystem 

 53

in the sense of successful knowledge work in data spaces whose boundaries have been dissolved by the digital age.

Libraries: an Open Future The considerations of this article admittedly depict a still rather unfamiliar scenario of a completely digitally composed knowledge landscape in which the libraries, too, must stake out their future. The dissolution of the traditional notion of publication (knowledge item) in favour of the concept of a boundless, continually newly networking and dynamically evolving knowledge stream requires that many of the currently discussed questions of a research-adequate design of information infrastructures must be asked differently and anew. For example, the current open-access discussion and its essential components (green versus golden road, subscription model versus article processing charges, secondary publication right versus publication “obligation”, etc.) are almost inextricably connected with the traditional concept of a monolithic, textual electronic publication. Those factors will probably become a question of the degrees of openness of linked-data knowledge spaces in the new world, as will the innovative business models that involve the interplay between authors, publishers, libraries and commercial IT providers. Given the speed of change and innovation in the digital society, statements about the future profile of the library as research infrastructure must necessarily remain vague. In particular, it must remain open whether the new structures will complement the current knowledge landscape, or whether they will transform and finally replace it. The Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, for example, adds around 130,000 printed volumes (i.e. “real books”) to its collections every year, with this practice even following an upward trend. Technologically, the future scenarios described here can already be almost fully implemented. In contrast, the question to what extent the transition of our understanding of knowledge towards a liquid, networked data stream represents a desirable target perspective is a matter of the cultural self-conception of the digital society. The question of whether this flow must be “stopped” at certain points at all, and made the subject of a closed publication, fixating a state of knowledge, can be answered plausibly in the digital realm only with a view to the traditional role of the library as a steward of memory. In terms of fixating a certain state of knowledge, we publish what we wish to preserve permanently, what we consider to be sufficiently important to keep available long term – even if superseded by new findings in the near future. Finally, the question arises to what

54 

 Klaus Ceynowa

extent a society with a notion of knowledge as a data network that is infinitely connected and reconnected, reinventing itself, still needs the safe ground of assurance in the form of handed-down knowledge stocks that can be called upon at all times (even if rarely made use of in practice). The answer to this question would clarify at the same time whether and to what extent the library is in fact more than an institution of the information infrastructure.

References Anderson, Janna and Lee Rainie. 2012. “Millenials will Benefit and Suffer due to their Hyperconnected Lives. Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project.” http:// www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media//Files/Reports/2012/PIP_Future_of_Internet_2012_ Young_brains_PDF.pdf. Accessed on 23 February 2015. Henseler, Wolfgang. 2013. “Natural User Interfaces – Die Kunst, Nutzung intuitiv zu gestalten.” https://webmagazin.de/allgemein/natural-user-interfaces-die-kunst-nutzung-intuitiv-zugestalten-4095000. Accessed on 23 February 2015. Madden, Mary, Amanda Lenhart, Maeve Duggan and Sandra Gasser. 2013. “Teens and technology 2013.” http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media//Files/Reports/2013/ PIP_TeensandTechnology2013.pdf. Accessed on 23 February 2015. Serres, Michel. 2013. Erfindet euch neu! Eine Liebeserklärung an die vernetzte Generation. Translated by Stefan Lorenzer. Berlin: Suhrkamp. 2013 Stibel, Jeff. 2013a. “The Web is Dead – and the App (Thankfully) Killed it.” Wired September. http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/archive/2013/09/ideas-bank/the-web-is-dead-andthe-app-thankfully-killed-it. Accessed on 23 February 2015. Stibel, Jeff. 2013b. Breakpoint: Why the Web will Implode, Search will be Obsolete, and Everything Else You Need to Know about Technology is in your Brain. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 2013.

Andreas Degkwitz

4 “Yes, We Can”, If We Take over 4 Future Tasks! 4 “Yes, We Can”, If We Take over Future Tasks!

Abstract: Knowledge management is closely connected with the publication of research results, which are the resources for the circulation of knowledge further on. But the linear, item-oriented features of printed materials or electronic emulations of printed publications like PDFs are completely different from the rather “liquid”, digital objects and the networked “flows” we are observing now. In research environments, which exploit the potential of digital media more frequently than researchers did before, the tasks of knowledge management are faced with completely new challenges. Scholarly communication is changing fundamentally and quite rapidly with the new media and the new tools, which are intensively used in the web-based collaboration and working environments of many disciplines. What causes or constitutes these changes and what are the new roles of the libraries as an essential part of the academic support? How do libraries and information providers meet the new requirements of knowledge management? New approaches to knowledge management will be outlined considering the recent results of the project “Future Publications in the Humanities” (Fu-PusH), which is granted by the German Research Society (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft). This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2014 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Lyon, France.

Lost in Traditions From our everyday experiences the impact of libraries is decreasing significantly. What we are facing is a complete change of the information behaviour since people have their own – iPhone or iPad. With these or other devices you have access to the knowledge of the world in your vest pocket. People are constantly online, searching any kind of content, reading books or newspapers, looking at movies and pictures, joining social networks, and writing in blogs, chats, social media, and wikis. We are consuming and sharing knowledge and any kind of materials and we are so called “multiple pro-sumers”, who use, read, annotate, complete, generate and share articles, books, messages, music, movies and whatever you can imagine. To sum it up: all the potential, that digital facilities might have, is being exploited by billions of users every day. But where are the librar-

56 

 Andreas Degkwitz

ies in our days, claiming to be the gateways for information and for the memory of all the universal knowledge? Do libraries play any role in our search-engine driven era, in the so called information or knowledge society? What about the domains of knowledge management librarians have been designated and skilled at managing for many centuries? Are they vanished or are they losing their entire awareness? Many of us might think, perhaps, or are even convinced, that the impact of the digital age is completely different in academia. There the diligent and serious approaches of scientific work are still appreciated and existing further on without all the fancy overload of the digital knowledge chunks. From a librarian’s view there might be assumed, or even hoped, that the current patterns of research communication will not go beyond “PDF” – which is nothing more or less than a useful emulation of printed texts. Therefore with “PDF” the tradition of all the familiar features of scholarly communication will not change at all and will be carried on for longer. But how are researchers and teachers actually working? Is there a significant gap between the use of digital in day to day life and the approaches to digital means and tools for education and research? We watch the increase of technology and data driven research in many disciplines. Scholars are using all the available mobile devices for communication as well as for producing and sharing knowledge. Virtual research environments and networked publishing is getting more and more relevant. Courseware and learning platforms are part of most curricula and are established educational resources. We can observe the ongoing development of so many blogs and wikis and social media, which seem to overburden the tasks of knowledge management for which the academic libraries are responsible. Mostly the current publications and their life cycles, which libraries are managing and providing from their long tradition, are what are left finally in the basket. In other words, are all the traditional activities around acquisition, cataloguing and long term access of digital publications also the key tasks of knowledge management in future? Of course these activities are often completed and enhanced by additional services which are carried out well in many libraries, such as support for open access publishing, digitization of items of the cultural heritage, information literacy, and licensing of e-books and e-journals! But do all these activities really change the traditional paradigm of librarianship towards an academic support that is appropriate to the upcoming features of data driven research and to the digital day to day life in science and research worldwide? Are the traditional tasks around publications the main issue of knowledge management by libraries in future?



4 “Yes, We Can”, If We Take over Future Tasks! 

 57

Changing Challenges What is going on in our universities? On the one hand, we have the many fields of natural science like biology, chemistry, engineering, informatics, life and earth sciences, medicine, and physics. These disciplines have in common dealing with data for their empirical and experimental work. Information technology has been deployed there for many years in order to produce, process, evaluate, and aggregate the findings of these disciplines. Considering the number of existing authoring and publishing tools that are available, researchers of the mentioned fields do not have any problems to upload the publications of their research results as PDF on an open-access server. The missing links might be the metadata of the publications and the management of references, which libraries are able to support, if they do not work by default. In case of journal publications the authors deliver their manuscripts to the publisher who is recommended in regard to journal ranking and impact. If the articles or even the monographs are licensed, the publications are available based on the contracts with the libraries. However these tasks of libraries will not improve their awareness significantly. But now new kinds and patterns of publications are emerging, which will change the entire publishing process with new procedures and new tasks for the infrastructure. Before we go into more detail about the new process we turn the view to the developments in the humanities and the social sciences. In the empirical and in the experimental sciences the data which are produced and evaluated during the research project have to be aggregated and visualized by software tools. Otherwise the data cannot be read or understood – software turns the generated data to readable objects. What happens in the so-called “Digital Humanities”, which offer new and technology-driven methods to analyse and to enrich text-oriented materials, but also pictures and photographs? As opposed to data, “non-structured text” is neither interoperable nor machine processible. But if you want to process and evaluate textual materials with digital tools you have to prepare or to transform the material to machinereadable data and that means to structured texts, e.g., XML or RDF. With audio files, digitized material, movies, pictures and photographs you can proceed in similar ways. In other words, picture- and text-based material has to be transformed to machine-readable data, which cannot or can hardly be read by human readers anymore. What opportunities are given or offered by these approaches of the “Digital Humanities”? Basically we can observe the enabling of annotating, enriching, linking, mining, processing, and searching of textual or pictorial materials, which are either produced for this purpose or are already available for any usage,

58 

 Andreas Degkwitz

like collections of digitized books or pictures. Here are some explicit examples for disciplines of the humanities: –– to mine and to search corpora of texts and/or pictures, for example in the field of archaeology, in historical linguistics or in art science; –– to annotate or to comment on textual material in literary studies of classical philology or of the letters in modern times; –– to enrich and to link documents with additional materials from different media and in history, in the editorial science or in lexicographical studies. There are many more examples, in the various projects of the “digital humanists” worldwide concerning nearly all subjects of the “library-affine” humanities and of the social sciences too. From that background we can observe a development of data-driven research in fields where you find mainly text-oriented research before. What has been read and evaluated as “texts” until now will be processed and analysed as data sets. By this the understanding of knowledge is going to be changed into a data-based empiricism. This pushes the text-based approach of even those disciplines whose performance has so far been rather theoretically or hermeneutically oriented into the background. Therefore the new approaches of the “Digital Humanities” establish the empiricism which is obtained from data as new, contemporary paradigm of knowledge in humanities research.

Enhanced Publications Now we come back to the matter of publications, which are affected and influenced by these developments. The usual shapes of texts are not enough in order to publish or to represent the findings of data driven research. Against that background we observe the development of so-called “enhanced publications”, that are covering these additional needs. The data, which researchers produce and work with in their projects, become part of the research results, so that the data will be part of the published results as well. Examples of “enhanced publication” in scholarly communication are now available. Some quite characteristic examples of publications are the following: –– “Adventures in Semantic Publishing: Exemplar Semantic Enhancements of a Research Article”, by David Shotton, Katie Portwin, Graham Klyne, and Alistair Miles. http://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/ journal.pcbi.1000361; –– Journal of Visualized Experiments. http://www.jove.com/;



4 “Yes, We Can”, If We Take over Future Tasks! 

 59

–– “Self-Organizing Properties of Mouse Pluripotent Cells Initiate Morphogenesis upon Implantation”, by Ivan Bedzhov and Magdalena Zernicka-Goetz. http://www.cell.com/fulltext/S0092-8674%2814%2900075-0#Summary and http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2014.01.023; –– VECTORS: Journal of Culture and Technology in a Dynamic Vernacular. http://vectors.usc.edu/journal/index.php?page=Introduction and http:// vectors.usc.edu/projects/index.php?project=99.1 Obviously many different shapes of “enhanced publications” can be seen in the various disciplines. Even so their basic patterns can be classified as the following: –– Enriched: Digital publications, which can be classified as enriched publications, include, beyond the text or the textual components, different data sets from various resources, which are worked on or used by researchers or by research groups. These resources may be animations, audios, digitized pictures or texts, images, measured data, photographs, movies, simulations, and even software tools. All these materials or components are aggregated in one “document” and can be stored as a digital “object”; –– Social: If we discuss digital publications or if we ask questions for understanding of single passages or words directly in the document, we communicate and/or interact with tools, which are known from Web 2.0 or from the “social networks”. From this point of view digital documents or objects become “social”. This can be made by annotations, chats, comments, or any other kinds of “likes” and “dislikes”. Social aspects of publications may concern the discussion during the pre-phase of a publication, but the post-phase as well. Mostly we observe annotations and comments after the research results were published. However “social facilities” might also be used in the peer reviewing process; –– Processible: Materials which are based on machine-readable data or have been converted or transformed to machine-readable data sets, can be exploited or processed for many purposes such as data or text mining or searching materials and resources. Therefore enhanced publications have to be structured in order to become processible and searchable. This includes the semantic possibilities of structuring too. Based on RDF structured data and texts, completely new opportunities of combining and linking of data will even be opened up under the aspects of “enhanced publication”; –– Linked: In former times people said that everything is unpublished which does not hold an ISBN or an ISSN. For what the registration of standard book or serial numbers meant for printed publications, in the digital paradigm is 1 Websites accessed on 30 September 2015.

60 

 Andreas Degkwitz

the web: nothing exists outside the web! Digital publication must be accessible and available on the web – with other words as “enhanced publications” – and their individual components must be properly formatted for and delivered to various links and/or platforms. The classification above is closely connected to the procedures of the publication process, which will be transformed into a networked process now. The new and interactive shape of the publication process will renew the relationships and roles between the players of the value chain. The traditional players such as publishers, booksellers, and libraries will develop either new strategies in the market of scientific information or they will lose their previous position in the value chain. New players such as media and computer centres and commercial IT providers (e.g., software developers, search engine providers) will be added. It is also necessary to design a number of new features within the value chain of publishing, which is not a “chain” any more, but rather a network for publishing research results.

Future Knowledge Management The focal point for Knowledge Management in the future will be the new challenges for the libraries, in cooperation with the media and the computer centres of the universities. In the years 2011 and 2012, the German Research Society and the German Research Council published their recommendations for the further development of academic infrastructures to improve research conditions for digital research environments in the current decade until 2020. (German Research Society 2012, German Research Council 2012) The general topics of these papers are national licences, hosting and long-term archiving of materials, open access publishing and repositories, digitization of cultural heritage items, research data management, virtual research environments, e-competence, and e-literacy. All these measures have an immediate effect on the research activities and the research results and on the publications themselves. They are necessary for the research processes as well as for the publication of the research results. In other words, if they are neglected in the publication of research results, all of the potentials of the information infrastructures will be wasted. This leads us to the conclusion that we will implicitly have to integrate the different means of information infrastructures into all phases of research work and finally into the “enhanced” publication of the research results. But what are the specific challenges of knowledge management in the future? What do we face,



4 “Yes, We Can”, If We Take over Future Tasks! 

 61

if libraries deal with publications that are aggregations of data and text sets and not only textual materials anymore? It might be surprising but their future tasks bring libraries back to their roots as archives for the record of human knowledge. However compared with former times it is extremely different now! Considering the change of paradigm from texts towards data we are in the situation to redesign our tasks in depth and to align them to the digital paradigm of data driven research. Therefore we have to care for long term archiving of the many different texts and data types and to record these materials with persistent identifiers and by various metadata forms. Otherwise they will not be searchable on the web and will be lost. We have to prepare the materials for further use cases and to provide the necessary requirements to link, to process, and to share all of it. We have to cooperate with each other and with the researchers to manage these new challenges, because none of us is able to do this work alone. As a result we have to build up networked collections of data and texts as web-based hubs or platforms for all the materials our researchers create and publish. The following issues are part of the project “Future Publications in the Humanities” and will find out the demands and needs of knowledge management in depth. –– Patterns of research work today: The representatives of selected disciplines of the humanities will be surveyed via expert interviews. The questions of these interviews concern in particular the usage of research resources in research projects, the approaches and methods which are used primarily for dealing with project-related data sets, and the inclusion of data and texts in the publication of the research results. –– Future roles of the information infrastructure: The representatives of institutions of the information infrastructures (bookseller, libraries, media, and computer centres, as well as publishers and commercial IT providers) will be consulted in expert interviews also. The interviews should identify the new tasks and roles that will arise from enhanced publications like the preparation, navigation, structuring, and visualization of data and contents, including enrichments, annotations, and options for their re-use. In addition, it has to be determined how the academic support processes of libraries, media, and computer centres must be aligned to carry out the new tasks such as digitization, research data management, hosting, long-term archiving, open-access publishing, repositories, editing, and structuring of data; –– New demands for knowledge management: On the results of the both surveys a future model for knowledge management will be found, which covers the creation, the use, and the long-term availability of “enhanced publications”. From that the organizational and technical interdependencies can be identi-

62 

 Andreas Degkwitz

fied. The intended model is based on the following three components which interact with each other: (1) preparation and navigation of data and contents as results and/or processes (editing, design, and visualization) ; (2) service and support, which the players of the publication process and/or the institutions of the academic information infrastructures provide, referring to technical formats, uniform identifiers, and interoperability ; (3) business and exploitation models, including the legal protection of access and re-use of data and contents. This means a decisive change in the library service portfolios. The traditional range of tasks, which was merely confined to collecting, indexing, and providing publications on a long-term basis, is significantly extended by added-value services in order to support the research process as a whole. This is probably the most crucial change that is brought about by the transition from the traditional to the digital libraries. Unlike those services which are in their structure geared to printed contents and texts, data and their handling are gaining centre stage in digital libraries. Data and data stocks – even from our familiar materials like digital or printed books and journals – have to be collected, processed, contextualized, structured, linked, hosted, archived, and, last but not least, prepared for retrieval and re-use. This development is a great chance and a big challenge for the libraries and they will have to accept them. Their service portfolios will have to cater for research processes and research findings that do not focus on the text paradigm but mainly on data, with their particular structured information. At the same time, the generation, distribution, and use of data-based knowledge and the necessary infrastructure will not be seen as two different worlds anymore but as interconnected parts.

Outlook If libraries continue along the traditional paths, they will further lose awareness, because the knowledge management concerning printed books and licensed journals will not increase their impact. Platforms like Elsevier’s SciVerse or Springer Link might be even better than anything that libraries will offer one day. What about Google and the Google Apps? Are we ready to compete with Google and to win this battle? Libraries should better focus on the unique selling point of providing digital data and materials, which are owned by their users or by the research institutions libraries belong to. We started already with open-access



4 “Yes, We Can”, If We Take over Future Tasks! 

 63

publishing and we should carry on this way, but a broader scale. That is a big step, but it is our future task so we must agree upon: “Yes, we can …! “

Further reading Association of Research Libraries. 2008. “Current Models of Digital Scholarly Communication: Results of an Investigation Conducted by Ithaka for the Association of Research Libraries.” http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/current-models-report.pdf. Accessed on 18 May 2015. Borgman, Christine L. 2008. “Data, Disciplines, and Scholarly Publishing.” Learn 21: 29–38. Büttner, Stephan, Hans-Christof Hobohm and Lars Müller. 2011. Handbuch Forschungsdatenmanagement. Bad Honnef: Bock + Herchen. http://opus.kobv.de/fhpotsdam/ volltexte/2011/227/pdf/. Accessed on 18 May 2015. Degkwitz, Andreas. 2013. “What will Future Publications be like?” In Informationswissenschaft zwischen virtueller Infrastruktur und materiellen Lebenswelten: Proceedings des 13. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2013), Potsdam, 19. bis 22. März 2013, edited by Hans-Christoph Hobohm, 81–92. Glückstadt: Hülsbusch, 2013. http://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-fhpotsdam/frontdoor/index/index/docId/399. Accessed on 18 May 2015. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Society). 2012. Die digitale Transformation weiter gestalten: Der Beitrag der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft zu einer innovativen Informationsinfrastruktur für die Forschung. Bonn: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. http://www.dfg.de/download/pdf/foerderung/programme/lis/ positionspapier_digitale_transformation.pdf. Accessed on 30 September 2015. Dudek, Sarah. 2012. “Die Zukunft der Buchstaben in der alphanumerischen Gesellschaft. Text und Dokument unter digitalen Bedingungen.” Bibliothek, Forschung und Praxis 36: 189–199. Fournier, Johannes. 2012. “Zugang, Nachnutzung und Reproduzierbarkeit. Anmerkungen zur künftigen Ausrichtung einer wissenschaftsadäquaten Informationsinfrastruktur.” Bibliothek Forschung und Praxis 36: 180–188. Füssel, Stephan. 2012. Medienkonvergenz – Transdisziplinär. Berlin: de Gruyter. Gradmann, Stefan and Jan Christoph Meister. 2008. “Digital Document and Interpretation: Re-Thinking ‘Text’ and Scholarship in Electronic Settings.” Poiesis & Praxis 5(2): 139–153. Groth, Paul, Andrew Gibson and Jan Velterop. 2010. “The Anatomy of a Nanopublication.” Information Services and Use 30: 51–56. http://iospress.metapress.com/content/ ftkh21q50t521wm2/. Accessed on 18 May 2015. Hogenaar, Arjan, Heiko Tjalsma and Mike Priddy. 2011. “Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Chapter E.” In Studies on Subject-specific Requirements for Open Access Infrastructure, edited by Christian Meier zu Verl and Wolfram Horstmann, 165–214. Bielefeld: Universitätsbibliothek. Lynch, Clifford. 2007. “The Shape of the Scientific Article in the Developing Cyberinfrastructure.” CT-Watch Quarterly 3 (3) http://www.ctwatch.org/quarterly/articles/2007/08/the-shape-of-the-scientific-articlein-the-developing-cyberinfrastructure/. Accessed on 18 May 2015.

64 

 Andreas Degkwitz

Lyon, Liz, Chris Rusbridge, Colin Neilson and Angus Whyte. 2010. DCC SCARP: Disciplinary Approaches to Sharing, Curation, Reuse and Preservation. JISC Final Report. JISC; Digital Curation Centre (DCC). http://www.dcc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/scarp/SCARP-FinalReportFinalSENT.pdf. Accessed on 18 May 2015. Mittler, Elmar. 2012. “Wissenschaftliche Forschung und Publikation im Netz.” In Medienkonvergenz – Transdisziplinär, edited by Stephan Füssel, 32–80. Berlin: de Gruyter. Neuroth, Heike, Stefan Strathmann, Achim Oßwald, Regine Scheffel, Jens Klump, and Jens Ludwig (eds.). 2012. Langzeitarchivierung von Forschungsdaten: Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Boizenburg. Göttingen: Hülsbusch; Univ.-Verl. Göttingen. http://www.nestor.sub. unigoettingen.de/bestandsaufnahme/nestor_lza_forschungsdaten_bestandsaufnahme. pdf. Accessed on 18 May 2015. Purdy, James P. 2010. “The Changing Space of Research: Web 2.0 and the Integration of Research and Writing Environments.” Computers and Composition 27: 48–58. Seadle, Michael. 2010. “Archiving in the Networked World. Interoperability.” Library Hi Tech 28: 189 – 194. Verhaar, Peter. 2008. Report on Object Models and Functionalities. DRIVER, Digital Repository Infrastructure Vision for European Research II. Leiden, 2008. Accessed on 18 May 2015. http://www.driver-reposi-try.eu/component/option,com_jdownloads/Itemid,83/ task,summary/cid,54/catid,8/. Wissenschaftsrat (German Research Council). 2012. Empfehlungen zur Weiterentwicklung der wissenschaftlichen Informationsinfrastrukturen in Deutschland bis 2020. Berlin: Wissenschaftsrat. http://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/archiv/2359-12.pdf. Accessed on 30 September 2015. Woutersen-Windhouwer, Saskia and Renze Brandsma. 2009. “Enhanced Publications: State of the Art.” In Enhanced Publications: Linking Publications and Research Data in Digital Repositories, edited by Marjan Vernooy-Gerritsen, 19–87. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. http://dare.uva.nl/cgi/arno/show.cgi?fid=150723. Accessed on 16 October 2015.

Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju

5 Open Access 5 Open Access A New Dawn for Knowledge Management Abstract: The transformation into a knowledge society (or an information society) is dependent on the capacity to provide and sustain knowledge citizens and knowledge workers. There are three core concepts that will be teased out: Knowledge Management, Open Access, and Knowledge Economics. The authors weave a thread that will pull the different concepts together in identifying benefits of their collusion for an informed society. The ultimate goal is to share information and knowledge for a better society – for the growth and development of society. The central concept of this paper is knowledge – knowledge has become the most important factor determining the standard of living. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management Section programme of the 2013 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Singapore.

Introduction The transformation into a knowledge society (or an information society) is dependent on the capacity to provide and sustain knowledge citizens and knowledge workers. The critical element here is knowledge and the pendulum needs to swing away from the control of knowledge towards its openness. This openness to knowledge will provide the impetus for the accelerated growth of knowledge societies. This transformation process hinges on the free flow of information, which is fundamental to bridging the knowledge gaps between privileged and underprivileged communities. Social inclusion and economic empowerment are only achievable in a society where the citizens have unhindered access to information and knowledge. Implicit in the title, open access being a new dawn for knowledge management is the attempt to find synergy between open access and knowledge management. However, up to now, both the concepts have been mutually exclusive. Historically, knowledge management has been confined to an organization for its holistic information and knowledge management – it is viewed and practised as a process for the capturing, distributing, and effective use of knowledge within the organization. On the other hand, the fundamental principle of open access is the

66 

 Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju

distribution of information and knowledge to the widest possible audience with absolute minimum financial hurdles.

The Point of Departure The point of departure between open access and knowledge management is that open access is much more universal and expansive, while knowledge management is organization-based and very confined. The authors contest that open access provides opportunities for knowledge management to break free of its cocoon status. The strides that open access has made provide opportunities to make a mark in the sand for the collaboration between open access and knowledge management. The authors go on to propose that the dawn is breaking for this collaboration. This “de-cocooning” of information and knowledge will add significant propulsion for the growth of knowledge societies: to add impetus to the growth of the global knowledge economy. The collusion of open access and knowledge management will lead down the road to a knowledge economy and an informed society which in itself leads down the road to innovation and development. Irrespective of the philosophical underpinnings of open access, the ultimate goal is to share information and knowledge for a better society – for the growth and development of society. This paper explores, albeit very briefly, three core concepts, that is, knowledge management, open access and knowledge economies. The authors will then attempt to weave a thread that will pull the different concepts together in identifying benefits of their collusion for an informed society.

Knowledge Management The central concept of this paper is knowledge. There is little contestation to the assertion by Sheeja who points out that “Knowledge is imperative for development; everything we do depends on it”. Sheeja goes on to state that “the role of knowledge in advancing economic and social well-being, with the realization that economies are built not merely through the accumulation of physical capital and human skill, but also on a foundation of information, learning and adaptation. Knowledge has become perhaps the most important factor determining the standard of living” (Sheeja 2012, 418). Knowledge management is defined as the systematic acquisition, creation, and diffusion of knowledge of all kinds, and its application to all fields of human



5 Open Access 

 67

activity have become the fundamental pursuit of every society. The IFLA Knowledge Management Section’s working definition is more focused, stating that knowledge management, namely the process of creating, storing, sharing, applying and re-using organizational knowledge to enable an organization to achieve its goals and objectives, coupled with the objective of providing an international platform for knowledge sharing, can be manipulated to create an opening for collaboration between open access and knowledge management. The Knowledge Management Section is extending the concept of “knowledge” beyond existing concepts like “memory”, “storage”, and “information”. This working definition will be interrogated to identify synergies with open access. The ultimate purpose is to find synergies that will facilitate the free flow of information for the growth of a global knowledge economy. Be that as it may, knowledge management is viewed as a range of strategies and practices that are used in an organization to identify, create, preserve and distribute insights and experiences. These insights and experiences are converted into information and knowledge, and are very often an important component of organization’s business strategy. The key principle here is sharing information and knowledge within the confines of the organization. Interestingly, if one has to examine the more contemporary practice of knowledge management, there is sufficient evidence to indicate that the concept is driven by the capacity of the internet. The potential of the intranet and the internet to link geographically dispersed knowledge-based organizations gave weight to the exploration of new avenues to facilitate the sharing and management of information and knowledge: it is the connectivity or connectedness that makes the management of the information and knowledge a reality. However, its Achilles’ heel is that the enthusiasm for intellectual capital is in conflict with the growing recognition that information and knowledge are essential assets for any organization – hence the exponential growth of knowledge management was smothered. The insulation or cocooning of the organization’s information and knowledge curtails any possibilities for openly sharing of that information and knowledge. The current corporate interest in knowledge is based on a realization that emerging economic imperatives, coupled with social and industrial restructuring, demand a more rigorous approach to the exploitation of knowledge as an organizational resource. Organizational knowledge is inclusive of the knowledge of products, processes and successes. In terms of a hierarchy, knowledge is the top of the data–information–knowledge hierarchy where information is meaningful, processed data and knowledge is actionable information, separating knowledge from information or data. In

68 

 Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju

alignment with this hierarchy is the view that actionable information is resident in the individual and is defined as tacit knowledge. This tacit knowledge is intuitive and cannot be written or verbalized. If such intuitive knowledge is written or verbalized it gets converted into explicit knowledge, which essentially is that which is set out in tangible form. It is this explicit knowledge or information that is deemed important for the growth of new information (or knowledge) and innovation which in itself (innovation) is critical for the growth of knowledge societies (Fricke 2009). In this context of the nature of information and knowledge, it is debatable as to whether organizational knowledge can be managed, given the nature of knowledge in the traditional sense. It is unrealistic to make the assumption that all relevant knowledge, including tacit knowledge can be extracted from knowledge workers and stored through well-established institutional processes in well-designed knowledge repositories. Often, employees hoard their knowledge because their contributions do not benefit their careers. Be that as it may, it is important to aspire to convert knowledge, especially tacit knowledge, into information to be manipulated by the widest possible audience for the growth of global knowledge economies. The most convenient conduit for the sharing of this information and knowledge is a forum where there are very limited barriers to access – open access.

Open Access Before engaging in discussion of open access and its possible synergies with knowledge management, the authors would like to examine all three components or segments of open access, namely, the open distribution of scholarly content, open source software and open education resources. Collectively and collaboratively, these three components of information will lead to stronger and knowledgeable societies. It is the contention of the authors that these information components will be the “yellow brick road” to a knowledge society where information and knowledge is the currency for democracy, social inclusion, economic growth and decent “poverty-free and disease-free” lifestyles. In less than a decade, open access has become a movement, linked to the broader “open knowledge” philosophy that emphasises maximizing the potential use and re-use of information and knowledge, by making it freely and openly available via the internet. As part of the “open knowledge” philosophy, open access to scholarly content started out in response to the ever increasing cost of information to the end user (libraries). This was fuelled by the accusation of



5 Open Access 

 69

double dipping, that is, institutions paying authors to develop the content and then buying back that content from the publishers. When open access to scholarly content got out of the starting block, there was very little doubt that there would be conflict with the publishers. However, publishers have responded exceptionally well with the development of alternative business models, which addressed the issue of costs to the end user. Further, the outcome of the implementation of these alternative models have improved access to content and ultimately improved visibility of the content. On the other hand, “open source” refers to software code that is available to the general public for use and/or modification from its original design. The source code is typically created as a collaborative effort in which programmers improve upon the code and share the changes within the community. Open source sprouted in the technological community as a response to proprietary software being exorbitantly expensive. Open-source software lowers initial and ongoing costs, eliminates vendor lock-in, and allows for greater flexibility. The third component is open educational resources. Open educational resources (OERs) are teaching, learning or research materials that are in the public domain or released with an intellectual property licence that allows for free use, adaptation, and distribution. Essentially, OERs facilitate universal access to high-quality education content. They provide a strategic opportunity to improve the quality of education as well as facilitate policy dialogue, knowledge sharing and capacity building. It has been argued that OERs, through strengthening education, are key to building peace, sustainable social and economic development and intercultural dialogue. OERs are underpinned by the ethos that they facilitate the free and open access of digital education publications of high quality. These publications include lectures, related reading materials, snapshots of discussions, assignments, evaluations, etc. More often than not, OERs use open source software to share education content – emphasising the need for the open access component to work in unison. In recent years, open educational resource materials have been prepared in an open standard format and are becoming more and more interactive in nature. The collusion of open sources and OERs ensures that content is offered freely and openly for educators, students and self-learners to use and re-use for teaching, learning and research. By all accounts, 2012 was a watershed year for open access and the entire open-access movement, including legislative debates, a researcher-led boycott of major academic publishers, new policies by major research funders, and increased interest in open access from the general public and mainstream media. The movement is continuing to gain momentum in developed countries, which

70 

 Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju

already have the necessary information infrastructure. The emerging economies amongst the developing countries are not far behind in building up necessary information infrastructure, essential for sustainable economic development. These emerging countries have further challenges to bridging the digital divide within their societies in that they have to address the issue of the co-existence of marginalized and privileged communities. These developing countries are exploiting the advancements in information and communication technologies, and by building up necessary information infrastructure, to become active contributors to global knowledge production. Before engaging in discussion on the concept of knowledge economy, it is deemed important to do an initial test of the synergy between knowledge management and open access.

Knowledge Management versus Open Access Clobridge (2014) says that “at first glance, knowledge management and open access may appear to be quite different from each other. But in many ways, they represent the two different sides of knowledge sharing.” Central to knowledge management is the maximization of the application and re-use of knowledge, within a particular organization or a subset of an organization. As indicated earlier, for many organizations the emphasis is on internal knowledge, which is the capturing, organizing, sharing, and promoting the re-use and application of internally-generated knowledge for the growth and development of the organization. As indicated earlier and supported by the assertion of Clobridge, open access is the inverse of this process, that is, knowledge produced is for external usage. The key to open access is to ensure that materials are discoverable via search engines and through standards-compliant repositories. Within the open access movement, the focus was initially on research-related knowledge captured via peer-reviewed, scholarly articles. However, that definition has been broadening over the past decade, and many organizations involved in promoting open access push for various types of research products (datasets, grey literature, white papers, case studies, databases, etc.) to be made openly accessible. Given that both the authors are in higher education libraries, their bias to the contribution of universities to knowledge production for public good becomes apparent, especially as it relates to the distribution of knowledge to the widest reading audience.



5 Open Access 

 71

Knowledge Economy The third concept that is teased out is that of the knowledge economy. With the exception of agricultural intensive economies and labour intensive economies, the global economy is in transition to a “knowledge economy”. In a knowledge economy, knowledge is used to generate economic benefits including job creation. Therefore, it is imperative that knowledge becomes easily available to ensure that economic growth. At the epicentre of economic benefits and job creation is the concept of innovation – change can only become a reality when there is innovation. It is beyond dispute that innovation is dependent on access to information. This cyclic process, that is, access to information leading to innovation and innovation leading to the generation of new information, becomes the core of a knowledge economy (OECD 1996). The transition into a knowledge economy emphasises the need for interconnectedness and the globalization of the economy where knowledge resources such as know-how and expertise are as critical as other economic resources. An imperative in this knowledge-based economy is education, given that education is fundamental in knowledge production – hence the importance of OERs. Education is considered both an economic resource for nations and the means for individuals to advance in the context of this knowledge economy. This approach is in keeping with the appreciation that education belongs to the service sector and can be legitimately tapped by the market. However, this thinking is at odds with the more accepted principle that education that belongs in the public sector and is a public good that should not be privatized. Access to these educational resources radically breaks down barriers to quality education and facilitates access to course material that is prepared and evaluated by experts. In fact, it radically improves the quality of education and the more equitable distribution of good education in preparation for a greater contribution to a knowledge society. The globalization of education inadvertently leads to the globalisation of economies. Through greater collaboration between higher educational institutions around the world and enhanced reuse of learning materials, both in their original form or translated or otherwise adapted, the phenomenon of OER contributes to the globalization of higher education. At the same time it increases competition between institutions by making teaching content and processes within individual institutions visible to a potentially worldwide audience. It is easy to weave the thread pulling together a knowledge economy and access to quality of education using the open-access conduit. As indicated, open source and OERs collude to improve access to education for the betterment of society – for the growth of an informed society – for the growth of a knowledge

72 

 Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju

society. What about knowledge management – how do we weave the thread to pull that concept into the fold?

A New Dawn for Knowledge Management In the endeavour to pull together the three core concepts, namely knowledge management, open access and knowledge economy, it is important to identify common ground. It is this common ground that will provide the necessary evidence to indicate that open access will facilitate a new dawn for knowledge management. It is accepted that not all information can be shared. However, it is crucial that we look at going beyond knowledgeable organizations – there is a drive to create knowledgeable societies. Using Petrides and Nodine’s definition of knowledge management as a set of practices that helps improve the use and sharing of data and information in decision-making, we would like to look at possible synergies between knowledge management and OERs. Petrides and Nodine also state that educational institutions are implementing knowledge management to improve information sharing (Petrides and Nodine 2003, 4). They also make the assertion that knowledge is the key asset in the education process and many educational institutions are seeking better ways to transform that knowledge into effective decision-making and action. Therefore, the sharing of the educator’s “key assets” (knowledge) opens possibilities for weaving that thread to pull knowledge management into the open access fold. The ecosystem of educational institutions grows and revitalize themselves through knowledge they create and passing on that knowledge to others, who build on the strengths of that knowledge, eliminating weaknesses en route to a good educational system. This ecosystem serves as the kernel of an open educational system. The preparedness to share, the processes of sharing, and the processes of building a strong educational system allude to synergy between open access and knowledge management. This is the first semblance of synergies between knowledge management and open access. As indicated earlier, open access and knowledge management are dependent on the internet and connectivity to share information and knowledge with their respective “communities”. The unprecedented development of the internet, the transfer of intellectual property and knowledge, have had profound influence on the training of the next generation of scientists and skilled specialists. The breaking down of geographical barriers has encouraged developed countries to



5 Open Access 

 73

forge ahead with the search and recruitment of “intellectual resources” around the world, especially intellectual resources from the developing world. This harvesting of intellectual resources entrenches the control and regularization of the production, distribution, and use of global scientific knowledge by institutions and corporations from developed countries. The corporatization and privatization of knowledge is being engrained in the corporatized economy, in which there is a presence of corporate power instead of market competition. This exclusivity is exacerbated as any research that is done outside the so-called “mainstream” is considered marginal and its results are ignored. The end result of this marginalization is that research results that promise benefits upon commercialization in the future are removed from the open scientific revolution. Moskovkin quotes Kovriga as referring to this as “knowledge encapsulation” (Moskovkin 2011). Drahos and Braithwaite stretch the negativism of “knowledge encapsulation” when they examine the de-democratization of information and knowledge. Drahos and Braithwaite bring to the fore the concept of “knowledge feudalism”. They make the assertion that knowledge feudalism “makes democratic citizens trespassers on knowledge that should be the common heritage of humankind, their educational birth right. Ironically, information feudalism, by dismantling the ‘publicness’ of knowledge, will eventually rob the knowledge economy of much of its productivity” (Drahos and Braithwaite 2002, 219). This feudalism drives the self-interest of developed countries and their multinational corporations. It is argued that the supply of knowledge as a public good is negated at a time when people around the world are becoming more and more dependent on knowledge goods. The encapsulation or feudalization of knowledge has to be dismantled and the twain have to meet to reinforce the conviction for a knowledge democracy. Institutions such as universities should not give businesses the majority-right control over their inventions and henceforth monitor commercialization and distribution of their inventions. Further, it is imperative that strong university networks are developed, since individually universities in a globalizing world cannot generate finite competitive knowledge for the new technological wave.

Universities and Knowledge Production The knowledge produced through research at universities is a major part of the total knowledge base of any nation. Universities and institutions of higher education all over the world have adapted to their changing role in a knowledge-based

74 

 Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju

society. Given that the production of knowledge is the core business of universities and institutions of higher learning, these institutions (that is, universities and other institutions of higher learning) are the most significant consumers and supplier of knowledge. The production of new knowledge is dependent on access to historical knowledge. This assertion is affirmed by SPARC, who point out that only shared research can enable new research to build upon the earlier findings (CARL-ABRC and SPARC 2008). SPARC goes on to claim that research is more valuable when it’s shared. Promoting the principle of sharing research is the fact that, more often than not, knowledge that is produced by universities is funded by the public. Hence, the public has a right to access that knowledge thus opening the door to open access. Cain, Branin and Sherman (2008) allude to knowledge management and open access coming together. Using the knowledge production activities of universities, they state that many universities seek creative and innovative ways to enhance their nimbleness in knowledge translation, access, and usability. Successful universities embrace these challenges creatively, including revisiting and repurposing the roles of their libraries. Cain, Branin and Sherman go on to point out that knowledge found in the activities, talent, and expertise of university employees are the greatest assets of the university. “Understanding, codifying, and mapping where knowledge and expertise exist within an organization is a cardinal tenet of knowledge management (Cain, Branin and Sherman 2008, 27). Libraries, taking on this new responsibility, are mandated, via the open access movement, to collect, organize and disseminate the institution’s knowledge to the widest reading audience. Libraries are going even further by making raw data collected by scholars available. It is this raw data that is converted into new knowledge through documentation, interpretation, and manipulation. This new knowledge grows through further refinement as the university’s most valuable asset (its staff) continually shapes the knowledge. And, the libraries are now making this knowledge available via open-access forums.

Examples of Synergies between Knowledge Management and Open Access The authors present two examples that illustrate the synergy between knowledge management and open access.



5 Open Access 

 75

The World Bank The World Bank has been a leader among United Nations agencies in supporting openness and in supporting the open sharing of research output. In 2012, The World Bank launched an Open Knowledge Repository in which all the bank’s publications are deposited and licensed with a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) licence. All these programmes are designed to make the organization more transparent and accountable. As of September 2015, the Open Knowledge Repository had over 19,000 reports, books, and other types of publications; the Open Data portal provided download access to more than 8,000 indicators from World Bank datasets. While the World Bank has been a leader in this area, other UN organizations are following suit, particularly in regards to open data. The International Aid Transparency Initiative, signed by several UN agencies and the European Commission, requires signatories to publicly disclose “regular, detailed and timely information on volume, allocation and results of development expenditure” (IATI 2008).

Open Source and Social Media The notion of creative collaborative work is not new, especially for the opensource software development movement. The open-source movement (OSM) began with experimenting with software democracy that crossed institutional and geographical boundaries. It has achieved momentum in motivating people to work together in self-organized groups on common projects and making them available on the internet for use or modification. The OSM is fulfilling the original promise of the internet and promotes the internet culture where people can work together in an environment that supports access to information. Already, it has inspired the emergence of an ecosystem of other projects such as Creative Commons sharing media resources (Pfaff and Hasan 2007). New conversational technologies such as email, discussion forums, chatrooms, weblogs and wikis are now connecting and supporting liberated knowledge exchanges. Interconnected networked structures of social interaction and creative activity are emerging as a part of the civil digital culture and, less rapidly, in the knowledge work of organizations. Conversational technologies are seen as tools to support work units and the individual knowledge worker. The purpose of social collaborative technologies is to create, share and manage knowledge in the form that will persist over time, while the participants may change. The core activity (objective), for which a corporate wiki is used,

76 

 Ellen Tise and Reggie Raju

is not knowledge management per se but knowledge work. There is a dialectic relationship between knowledge and work, expressed by the continuous cycle of co-creating work-related knowledge in a form that is meaningful for knowledge workers to access as needed, through which learning occurs, resulting in more knowledgeable doing, and so on (Pfaff and Hasan 2007). The open-source movement has had significant influence in the growth of open access. The development of software and standards for the sharing of OERs, the development of software for the creation of repositories, the creation of software for the publication of content directly in open forums are but a few examples of the significant role that open source has played in the distribution of knowledge – the same could apply to knowledge management.

Conclusion Conversations about open access are no longer about whether it is a good idea; rather, the focus is on best practices, sustainability, and maximizing OA’s impact. The fundamental objective of knowledge generation is the promotion of innovation which is critical for the growth of society. The chasm between knowledge management and open access has to be traversed to ensure that knowledge as a commodity is there as a public good. There is sufficient evidence to show that the chasm may be a mirage. The three components that collude to promoting open access have grown exponentially. By the same token, knowledge management is using the same principles with the only point of departure being the communities that it is accessible to. Open access is available to any person that has access to the internet: on the other hand knowledge management is historically used for the organization. There is sufficient evidence to show that we are at a watershed point where knowledge management is no longer mutually exclusive to open access. We are seeing open access as the dawn for a new knowledge management process.

References Cain, Timothy, Joseph Branin, and Michael Sherman. 2008. “Knowledge management and the academy.” Educause quarterly 4: 26–33. http://er.educause.edu/~/media/files/articledownloads/eqm0845.pdf. Accessed on 30 September 2015. CARL–ABRC and SPARC (Canadian Association of Research Libraries and Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition). 2008. Greater Reach for your Research. Ottawa:



5 Open Access 

 77

CARL-ABRC; Washington, DC: SPARC. http://www.sparc.arl.org/sites/default/files/ greaterreach_pages.pdf. Accessed on 19 October 2015. Clobridge, Abby. 2014. “Knowledge Management and Open Access.” Clobridge Consulting. http://clobridgeconsulting.com/knowledge-management-and-open-access/. Accessed on 30 September 2015. Drahos, Peter and John Braithwaite. 2002. Information Feudalism: Who Owns the Knowledge Economy? London: Earthscan. Fricke, Martin. 2009. “The Knowledge Pyramid: A Critique of the DIKW Hierarchy.” Journal of Information Science 35: 131–142. IATI (International Aid Transparency Initiative). 2008. “Accra Statement.” http://www. aidtransparency.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/iati-accra-statement-p1.pdf. Accessed on 19 October 2015. Moskovkin, Vladimir M. 2011. “Open Access to Scientific Knowledge and Feudalism Knowledge: Is there a Connection?” Webology 8 (1). http://www.webology.org/2011/v8n1/a83.html. Accessed on 30 September 2015. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 1996. The Knowledge-based Economy. Paris: OCDE. Petrides, Lisa and Thad Nodine. 2003. Knowledge Management in Education: Defining the Landscape. California: Institute for the Study of Knowledge Management in Education. Pfaff, Charmaine and Helen Hasan. “Can Knowledge Management be Open Source?” IFIP: the International Federation for Information Processing 234: 59–70. Sheeja, N.K. 2012. “Knowledge Management and Open Access E-theses: Indian Initiatives.” Library Review 61 (6): 418–427. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/ 00242531211284339. Accessed on 30 September 2015.

Alex Byrne

6 Endless Invention, Endless Experiment, 6 Knowledge 6 Endless Invention, Endless Experiment, Knowledge

Abstract: Digital transformation, two words which are spelling the end of many industries and major change for all others. As governments and business grapple with strategies to maximize the benefits and manage the consequences of the transformation, citizens wonder about their futures and those for their children. We libraries and librarians find ourselves working across society to assist the process of digital transformation while experiencing and driving our own transformation. We are acting outwards as we act inwards, committed to our ethos of transmitting knowledge and embracing the changing modalities and medialities of knowledge creation and exchange. Our digital transformation has been coming for a long time but today we are at a discontinuity which we must cross to preserve our role and secure our future. It is a discontinuity that can only be crossed by transforming our institutions and our own practice. Great collecting institutions such as the State Library of New South Wales continue to maintain and expand collections of books, journals, manuscripts, photographs and many other formats while stepping through the mirror into born and made digital content. In that “looking-glass” world all is multiple, all is reproducible and authenticity and authority must be revisited. From large collecting institutions to local libraries and colleges, this poses profound challenges for the practices and priorities of all libraries and librarians. Digital dynamism joins and challenges our enduring roles and offers us new relevance in this time of digital transformation. Embracing that opportunity enables us to determine our future and to contribute to society by transmitting knowledge with endless experiment and endless invention. This paper was prepared for the Knowledge Management programme of the 2014 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Lyon, France.

Transformation The last two years have been a watershed for Australia’s car industry as all three companies that manufacture cars in Australia – Ford, General Motors and Toyota – have each announced that they will cease manufacturing by 2016/17 (Wallace and Ferguson 2014). Despite a billion Australian dollars (approximately US$900 million) in government assistance over the last decade and considerable inno-



6 Endless Invention, Endless Experiment, Knowledge 

 79

vation, they have cited a number of reasons for their decisions including lack of economies of scale, small and very competitive market, high labour costs and highly valued Australian dollar which makes exports uncompetitive internationally (Dowling 2014). Meanwhile Australia’s manufacturing sector as a whole is doing well with considerable innovation and export success including the Cochlear hearing implant (Cochlear Limited 2012), parts for the F 35 Joint Strike Fighter (Wroe 2014) and Zip Industries’ instant filtered boiling, cold and sparkling water (Zip Industries 2013), to take a few examples. Australian manufacturers’ output and exports have grown but manufactured imports have grown faster and employment in the manufacturing sector has reduced (Australia Department of Industry 2014). Similar examples can be found in many, if not most, countries as our global economy undergoes transformation, much of it enabled – if not driven – by information and communications technologies and the global freight systems they have enabled. They have challenged communities to adapt and community institutions such as libraries play a big part in assisting that adaptation. Public libraries in particular assist communities to cope with profound change and help the members of those communities to refocus their lives and careers. Libraries and the information sector face the same challenges as our sector is transformed through digital technologies. It is an ongoing process, much commented upon in the library and information literature as technological change has brought new opportunities but also forced major change in the operation of our institutions, the roles of our staff and the expectations of our clients. In that context, T.S. Eliot’s poem The Rock (Eliot 1936) is often quoted in library and information circles, especially the couplet Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?

But we should also pay attention to the preceding lines: The endless cycle of idea and action, Endless invention, endless experiment, Brings knowledge of motion, but not of stillness; Knowledge of speech, but not of silence; Knowledge of words, and ignorance of the Word.

Nearly 50 years from the creation of MARC (Avram 2003) and as we are implementing FRBR and RDA (Australian Committee on Cataloguing 2014), we must continue to pursue the “endless cycle of idea and action, endless invention, endless experiment” as we continue to renew our institutions and ourselves. But we must

80 

 Alex Byrne

also continue to hold fast to our core values, to the wisdom and knowledge that have shaped our institutions since the dawn of civilisation. It is the commitment to maintaining the record and to transmitting information across the barriers of time, space, culture and language that forms the stillness, the continuity of our profession and our institutions.

Digital Excellence Program Libraries and librarians have a fine history of embracing change while remaining true to their ethos. At the State Library of New South Wales, we are stepping through the looking glass of born and made digital content. The Library’s Digital Excellence Program is funded by the NSW State Government which is providing AUS$72 million over ten years from 2012/13 (State Library of New South Wales 2014). The Program has two principal aims: –– renewal of State Library of NSW digital infrastructure over three years; –– digitization of iconic, in-demand and at-risk heritage materials over ten years. In achieving those aims it will ensure the transformation of the State Library into a centre of digital excellence and will stimulate the digitization industry – broadly understood – in Australia and especially in the state of New South Wales. The Program builds on a decade of in-house digitization and the eRecords Project which both aimed to make the Library’s very rich collections on Australia and Oceania more readily available.

eRecords Project The eRecords Project from 2008 to 2013 created a single unified online catalogue, replacing an online catalogue commenced in 1980 and 34 earlier card catalogues and lists. The initiative expanded the coverage of the online catalogue from approximately 30% of the Library’s collection to 100%. It has opened up the collection to researchers and readers, many of whom were unaware of the existence of many items. The eRecords Project has made the collection much more accessible worldwide, exceeding its target by creating 1,249,703 records over the five years of the project at a cost of AUS$ 23.5 million. Through this project, information about the collection, previously only recorded on a variety of card catalogues and finding aids, has been incorporated into the comprehensive online catalogue, offering unprecedented in-depth access



6 Endless Invention, Endless Experiment, Knowledge 

 81

to the history of Australia because of the depth and breadth of the State Library’s collections. One task remains: analytics added to the Mitchell Printed Books Catalogue until the 1970s include some valuable information for which we must imagine and create an online equivalent. The project has delivered many benefits to the State Library and its clients. eRecords are a key enabler for digitization. eRequesting has been implemented to enhance both operational efficiency and client convenience. A nearly complete online catalogue has allowed annual stocktakes to be undertaken efficiently and successfully since 2009, while the last previous major stocktake had occurred in 1982. In addition, the eRecords Project exposed staff to a number of work packages and training programmes that significantly expanded their skills in areas such as cataloguing, arrangement and description, business analysis, project management and team work. And it has enabled a major reduction in staffing of the Library Services Division to meet budget reductions, from 222 to 145. The collections prioritized in the eRecords Project were: 1. Unique & significant manuscripts, pictures, maps and print material; 2. Early English books from 1473 to 1800; 3. Books: published Australiana heritage and rare book collections; 4. Research and reference books published pre-1980; 5. Manuscript collections in pre 1945–1967 files; 6. Large unprocessed collections including oral history tapes; 7. Maps and charts including atlases and rare and hand drawn maps; 8. Map and chart series; 9. Pictorial items and collections, including paintings, drawings, architectural plans, photographs, objects.

Newspapers These categories, with the addition of newspapers and primary documents on microfilm, also form the primary targets for digitization through the Digital Excellence Program. Because of the urgency of establishing the Program following the Government’s announcement in June 2012 that it had been funded from July 2012, the initial focus was on opportunities for mass digitization. Large scale digitization of newspapers across the state of New South Wales was initiated in collaboration with the National Library of Australia from November 2012. During the first 17 months, to March 2014, this activity delivered 4.6 million newspaper pages which are being added to Trove, the national portal operated by the National Library of Australia, as well as the State Library’s catalogue. The newspaper issues are scanned from microfilm, transcribed to text by optical character recog-

82 

 Alex Byrne

nition, quality assured, indexed and uploaded. Nearly 13 million pages consisting of over 125 million articles are currently available on Trove (National Library of Australia 2015).Then, in an inspired initiative, the transcription is verified and corrected through crowd sourcing, by volunteers who have collectively amended over 110 million lines of text over the five years since the National Library created the facility – with one individual volunteer correcting over 2.5 million lines!

Other Digital Excellence pilots During its first two years, the Digital Excellence Program has also initiated a number of pilot projects to digitize valuable and at-risk material while at the same time developing procedures, adopting appropriate standards, and testing the capabilities of the industry. Pilots to date have delivered over 1,600 hours of oral history including irreplaceable testimony by Holocaust survivors, 1.3 million pages from over 4,300 of the 40,000 David Scott Mitchell books (a foundation collection of Australiana), and 18,000 pages of First World War diaries (including some digitized prior to the Digital Excellence Program).

Challenges Australian Digitization Industry We have learnt much over these two years. Overall, the digitization industry in Australasia is immature with low capacity and lack of systematization. We have had to engage with industry development experts in government to try to assist the industry to develop its capabilities so that it will be able to deliver the throughput and quality we expect at acceptable prices. In doing this, we have been very conscious of the need to maintain probity and to apply clear and fair contracts to ensure the development of a robust and competitive digitization industry. This is necessary for our ongoing work, and that of other libraries, archives and cultural institutions, but is also an outcome expected by Government in return for funding the Program.



6 Endless Invention, Endless Experiment, Knowledge 

 83

Selection and Workflow The Program has presented many challenges to the State Library as well. We have had to refine our procedures for the selection and preparation of items for digitization because we do not have the capacity to individualize each decision, especially as we have been simultaneously reducing the Library’s overall staffing by 22%, from 400 to 312. This “routinization” of our work aims to optimize efficiency while maintaining secure and sensitive handling of unique, and often fragile, collection items. Digitization of such important items has been undertaken by contracting companies on site so as to ensure the security of the items. This has required us to develop efficient workflows from selection to retrieval, digitization, holding during quality assurance and finally the return of the items to the stacks. This has involved continual experimentation and innovation.

Quality Control The routinization of the handling of the collection items has been paralleled by the development of our approach to handling the “made digital” content. As archival masters are delivered by contractors, they need to be quality assured and then approved for the generation of co-masters, transcription and the creation of the various derivatives which make them useable, including PDFs and ePubs. Initial experience with undertaking quality assurance in house of a sample of the scanned materials established the pragmatic application of standards but proved to be both unwieldy and excessively costly. We have now moved to a certification system which requires our contracts to attest to the quality of the digitized files they deliver against the appropriate standards.

Preservation We are also expanding our capacity to ingest, preserve and make available digital content including the made digital content and the born digital content we are acquiring via voluntary deposit, purchase and capturing social media. Through the infrastructure development aspect of the Digital Excellence Program, we have strengthened our server and network capacities and have signed a contract to implement a replacement integrated library management system from Ex Libris in partnership with Axiell to better encompass the very varied materials in our collections. We are committed to building the capabilities for digital preservation which is vital to our role as a memory institution. We are working with our col-

84 

 Alex Byrne

leagues in National and State Libraries Australasia and international partners to collaboratively develop the necessary tools to enable long term preservation of digital content. The State Library initiated the Program as a separate project in order to get it established quickly and to be able to maintain tight control. However, maintaining the Program separately for ten years would have a distorting effect on the State Library so we are currently bringing it into the Library’s structure. We must not forget that we need to report annually against the funding, nor that it will expire in 2022, but for the present at least large scale digitization is normal business as the State Library of NSW.

A Transformed Collection Through the Digital Excellence Program and the previous eRecords Project, we now have a different understanding of our collection and of how it is presented to the world. The State Library of NSW is a major collecting institution, which has been collecting for nearly two centuries, and which continues to collect publications, manuscripts, photographs, artworks, maps and plans, and many other materials in physical formats as well as creating and acquiring made digital content and capturing born digital content. Our collecting over the last three years, for example, has encompassed Australian watercolours from the 1790s, early printed works, the memorials of navigator Ferdinand de Queirós, First World War materials as well as contemporary publications, tweets and other social media. Proliferation and change in formats is evident. While, conceptually, short messages and images sent via Flickr, Facebook and Twitter are analogous to the postcards, telegrams and diaries of a century ago, their capture and management require different methods, skills and infrastructure. Technological obsolescence and physical deterioration is a major imperative for the digitization of oral history, film, photographic negatives and microforms and reformatting and restoring earlier digital formats. This diversity must be recognized and fully supported in our holistic, lifecycle approach to collection management from acquisition or capture to delivery, preservation and – sometimes – de-acquisition.



6 Endless Invention, Endless Experiment, Knowledge 

 85

Endless Experiment and Endless Invention But the challenges do not stop at that point. Our collections continue to grow as our digital content is delivered through multiple channels, used and re-used, and transformed. To explore one example: thanks to our eRecords Project, our manuscript collections are better described than ever before. Our catalogue records have been extended by the inclusion of contents lists and enhanced through indexes. Direct access to images of manuscript pages and other content is being provided through linking digitised versions. Transcriptions also are linked and make the manuscripts fully searchable. That content is pushed out through our catalogue, search engines and portals such as Trove. It is presented, used and re-used via social media including Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, HistoryPin, Tumblr, Wikimedia and so on. It is accessed and used via apps and mobile devices and with APIs. It is enhanced and extended through crowd-sourced content and metadata including geo-tagging. It is transformed by users and recaptured for the collection. And, via linked data it becomes part of a larger corpus of which we curate just a little. The same processes are evident throughout the State Library’s collections of books, journals, art works, photographs and many other formats and in other great and smaller collecting institutions as we step through the mirror into born and made digital content. In that “looking-glass” world all is multiple, all is reproducible and authenticity and authority must be revisited. This poses profound challenges for the practices and priorities of all libraries and librarians. We find ourselves working across society to assist the process of digital transformation while experiencing and driving our own transformation. We are acting outwards as we act inwards, committed to our ethos of transmitting knowledge and embracing the changing modalities and medialities of knowledge creation and exchange. Our digital transformation has been coming for a long time but today we are at a discontinuity which we must cross – and are crossing – to preserve our role and secure our future. It is a discontinuity that can only be crossed by transforming our institutions and our own practice. Digital dynamism joins and challenges our enduring roles and offers us new relevance in this time of transformation. Embracing that opportunity enables us to determine our future as we contribute to society by transmitting knowledge with endless experiment and endless invention.

86 

 Alex Byrne

References Australia Department of Industry. 2014. “Manufacturing Data Card March Quarter 2014”. http:// www.innovation.gov.au/industry/manufacturing/Pages/ManufacturingDataCard.aspx. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Australian Committee on Cataloguing. 2015. “Resource Description and Access.” http://www. nla.gov.au/acoc/resource-description-and-access-rda-in-australia. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Avram, Henriette D. 2003. “Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) Program.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, edited by Miriam A. Drake. New York: Marcel Dekker. http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/gleazer/260_readings/avram.pdf. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Cochlear Ltd. 2012. “Cochlear Celebrates 30 Years of Hearing Revolution.” http://www.cochlear. com/wps/wcm/connect/au/about/cochlear-30-anniversary/cochlear-30-anniversary. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Dowling, Joshua. 2014. “Why Australia’s Car Manufacturers – Toyota, Holden and Ford – all Conked out,” Courier Mail 14 February. http://www.couriermail.com.au/ news/why-australias-car-manufacturers-toyota-holden-and-ford-all-conked-out/ story-fnk1378p-1226827493012. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Eliot, T.S. 1936. “The Rock.” In Collected poems, 1909–1935. London: Faber & Faber. National Library of Australia. 2015. “About Digitised Newspapers and More.” http://trove.nla. gov.au/ndp/del/about. Accessed on 10 September 2015. State Library of New South Wales. 2014. “Digital Excellence Program.” http://www.sl.nsw.gov. au/about/projects/digital_excellence/index.html. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Wallace, Rick, and John Ferguson. 2014. “Toyota to Stop Making Cars in Australia, Follows Ford and Holden.” The Australian 10 February 10. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/ news/toyota-to-stop-making-cars-in-australia-follows-ford-and-holden/story-e6frg9061226822823246. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Wroe, David. 2014. “Joint Strike Fighter Commitment a Boost for High-tech Manufacturers,” Sydney Morning Herald 26 April 26. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/ political-news/joint-strike-fighter-commitment-a-boost-for-hightech-manufacturers20140425-379on.html. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Zip Industries. 2013. “The History of Zip: Changing the Way the World Boils Water.” http://www. zipindustries.com/about-us. Accessed on 10 September 2015.

Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge The NLB journey Abstract: To realize their national patrimony functions, libraries and archives collect and provide access to digital resources of significant national, cultural and heritage values. Their collections are painstakingly curated, described and made accessible. The National Library Board of Singapore (NLB) adopted a holistic digital strategy that involves the digitization of uniquely Singapore content, findability enhancement via search engine optimization, and multi-screen delivery. The next leap is to link the digitized content into a network to enable contextual discovery. NLB has successfully created high-quality associations amongst its digital resources. Text analytics technologies were used to automatically sieve through millions of items, and cluster related resources together. The result is a massively inter-connected network of knowledge. The users are now able to view and explore related resources within and across collections and media formats. Information is no longer viewed in isolation, but seen as a part of the larger context. The information seekers can spend less time gathering the pieces, and focus on digesting and analysing the dossier of relevant information to derive new insights. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2014 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Lyon, France.

Introduction The National Library Board of Singapore (NLB) oversees the National Library, the Public Libraries and the National Archives. The NLB’s mission is to provide a trusted, accessible and globally connected library and information service through the National Library and a comprehensive network of public libraries. Through its innovative use of technology and collaboration with strategic partners, NLB ensures that library users have access to a rich array of information services and resources that are convenient, accessible and relevant. A key function of NLB is to connect people to the country, by connecting the past to the present. As the key memory institution in Singapore, NLB collects and provides access to digital resources of significant national, cultural and heritage

88 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

values. Akin to the corporate memories of enterprises, the NLB collection constitutes a major portion of the national memory of Singapore.

The NLB Digital Strategy A seismic shift in information-seeking behaviour has taken shape. With the ever-expanding reach of the internet, users are accustomed to quick and easy access to content, and are expecting an online experience that is rich and instant. This is a generation that is always connected, through multiple devices. NLB saw great opportunities to ride on the confluence of technological advances and the connected lifestyle to bring relevant information to the users. Its digital strategy involves: –– digitizing uniquely Singapore content; –– making NLB content findable through the popular search engines; –– delivering content on all devices through responsive web design. Content is king in the internet era. NLB is in the privileged position to acquire and digitise uniquely Singapore content, through its statutory standing and through the extensive network of partners of content owners. Significant resources have been invested in the curation and digitization of valuable content, and the efforts continue unabated. More details can be found in the section NLB Digital Collections of this paper. Most users go to the popular search engines (e.g., Google, Bing) as their first port of call to search for information. Leveraging on this behaviour, NLB embarked on sustained search-engine optimization (SEO) efforts to ensure that its digitized resources are easily findable via the popular search engines. SEO and the user-friendly content sites resulted in a wider reach and higher usage of these valuable digital resources. An oft-cited example is the increased usage of the Infopedia1 service from 400 to 150,000 page views a month after the trial (Chellapandi, Chow and Tay 2010). The average monthly page views in 2013 is 270,000. NLB has also adopted the Responsive Web Design framework since 2011, and implemented device-aware online viewing and streaming capabilities to ensure that the user experience on any device will be optimal.

1 http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/. Accessed on 1 October 2015.



7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge 

 89

The NLB Digital Collections Over the years, NLB has built up a huge collection of content to meet the diverse needs of its patrons. When the National Archives of Singapore (NAS) joined the NLB family in November 2012, it brought with it a huge and highly valuable collection of primary and unique materials on Singapore’s history. Aggressive digitization continues unabated to preserve as well as give wider access through more platforms. The digitized contents from NAS and NLB constitute a valuable repository of the memories of the nation. Figure 7.1 shows the collections available for online and onsite access.

Figure 7.1: The NLB collections.

Contextual discovery Riding on the success of the digital strategy, NLB looked for the next “big thing”. Every year, NLB users collectively contribute to tens of millions of e-retrievals. We

90 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

see every single one of these interactions as a golden opportunity to “push” relevant content to the user. The success of the “customers who bought this item also bought” recommendation feature at Amazon is a clear testament of the power of pushing relevant recommendations. However, to effectively connect people to knowledge, we need to connect knowledge to knowledge first. Figure 7.2 shows a subset of the related content within NLB’s collections on the Cenotaph monument as described in the Cenotaph Infopedia article2 highlighted in a box.

Figure 7.2: Contextual discovery through the recommendations of related content.

To identify all these (and more) related resources would have required many searches to be performed with various search keywords and sieving through hundreds if not thousands in the search result lists. This is very time-consuming. Given the current “good enough” information-seeking behaviour, it is unlikely that the typical users will be willing to spend the efforts needed to get to such a comprehensive set. It would be such a pity as they would be missing many treasures in the trove of digital resources available. If we can “push” the kind of relevant and related resources as illustrated in Figure 7.2 for each and every piece of digital resources in our collection, the users

2 http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_10_2004-12-17.html. Accessed on 1 October 2015.



7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge 

 91

will have easy access to a comprehensive set of resources that provides a more complete 360 degree perspective of a topic. Moreover, the Cenotaph article that the user is viewing (as a result of a search or browse action that the user just performed) provides a clear context of the user intent, which increases significantly the likelihood that the user will click through the recommendations, and discover many more resources in our collections. We call this “contextual discovery”, and believe strongly that it will be critical to the next generation of digital libraries. A user typically begins the information-seeking process for two key purposes: to complete a specific task, or to explore and expand on a topic of interest. Contextual discovery will be very useful in meeting these needs. This expands the NLB Digital Strategy, described above, by connecting the resources within and across collections, formats and languages to provide a rich contextual discovery experience.

Using text analytics to identify related content The foundation to contextual discovery is the associations between the digital resources. Each association established a link between the resources, and together, a network of the resources is formed. The value of the resources increases with the number of links, according to the “network effect” phenomenon. With a total collection size that goes into tens of millions, it will not be cost-effective to identify the associations manually. Text-analytics technologies have been identified to be suitable and scalable to perform this task (Lim and Chinnasamy 2013).

The proof-of-concept To test the feasibility of the use of text analytics to accurately identify related content, a proof-of-concept (PoC) was conducted. The open-source machine-learning software Mahout3 from the Apache Software Foundation4 was selected for the PoC. Newspaper articles for the year of 1989 from The Straits Times totalling over 50,000 were used. Figure 7.3 shows the steps involved in the text-analytics processing. 3 http://mahout.apache.org. Accessed on 1 October 2015. 4 http://www.apache.org. Accessed on 1 October 2015.

92 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

Figure 7.3: Text-analytics PoC using Mahout.

The text-analytics processing generated a set of the most “similar” newspaper articles for each of the 50,000 newspaper articles used in the PoC. The similarity between two articles is measured by a value from 0 to 1, with 1 being a perfect match. Take the article “Goldsmith group to re-launch takeover plan” in Figure 7.4. The top recommendations from the text-analytics software are clearly about the takeover event at the British American Tobacco (BAT). When the articles are organized in a chronological order (following the arrows), the event unfolds. Algorithms implemented in Mahout, such as Term Frequency/Inverse Document Frequency (TF/IDF), a statistic that reflects the importance of a word in a corpus, and Cosine Similarity for text-based vector similarity are well established in the domain of information retrieval. The PoC confirmed that the use of text-analytics algorithms can automatically, efficiently and accurately identify similar articles.



7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge 

 93

Figure 7.4: Similar newspaper articles identified via text analytics.

The deployment With the success of the PoC, NLB proceeded to implement the concept for its collections. We decided to start with the Infopedia collection given the smaller size of the collection (of around 1,800 articles) and the well written and fairly long text available. The text-analytics processing was completed within an hour. The recommendations were checked rigorously by the librarians on the staging Infopedia site. We went “live” in June 2013 after the go-ahead was given (see Figure 7.5, p. 92). Thereafter, we extended the feature to other NLB digital collections, including PictureSG5 and Singapore Memory Portal.6 At the onset of selecting the text analytics software for the PoC, one of the criteria is the ability to scale to handle large data sets that go into millions. Most of the algorithms supported by Mahout have been developed to operate in an Apache Hadoop7 cluster. Hadoop is a popular open-source software framework

5 http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/pictures/. Accessed on 1 October 2015. 6 http://www.singaporememory.sg/. Accessed on 1 October 2015. 7 http://hadoop.apache.org. Accessed on 1 October 2015.

94 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

Figure 7.5: Infopedia recommendations via text analytics.

for distributed storage and large-scale processing of data sets on a cluster of commodity hardware. As we progress to process collections that are much larger, we have started to implement a Hadoop cluster. The current Hadoop cluster comprises 13 virtual servers implemented in the NLB private cloud. This allows NLB to scale and re-configure the cluster quickly depending on the resource requirement of the analytics to be performed. This is critical as analytics algorithms are generally very resource intensive.

Handling large data sets The 13-node Hadoop cluster proved to be unable to process collections that go beyond hundreds of thousands of items. While technically feasible, it is not practical to continue to add nodes and storage to the Hadoop cluster. It is in fact not necessary to compare every pair of resources as the bulk of the records in a huge data set will bear little similarity with one another (i.e., a sparse matrix). A better approach would be to automatically break the large data set into smaller clusters of related content that can then be efficiently processed.



7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge 

 95

The good news is that Mahout also comes with the necessary clustering algorithms. With this, we went ahead to process the key English newspapers (6.7 million articles) and Chinese newspapers (2.3 million articles) in NewspaperSG8 and the NAS Archives Online9 collections (1 million records). Table 7.1 shows the top 50 terms within example clusters for the English newspaper articles alongside the size of the clusters. The clustering certainly worked well. Note that stemming was done during the clustering process. Table 7.1: Top 50 stemmed terms of example clusters from English newspapers. Size of cluster

Top 50 terms

52,678

exhibit, art, artist, paint, museum, singapor, work, displai, galleri, open, mr, year, organis, centr, chines, cultur, held, on, nation, world, pictur, photograph, collect, hall, colour, includ, first, time, featur, sculptur, design, dai, peopl, piec, two, societi, part, visitor, fair, intern, painter, life, school, prize, old, show, road, book, trade, today

86,881

olymp, athlet, game, sport, medal, event, team, gold, championship, record, world, singapor, metr, swim, won, year, champion, win, nation, women, time, coach, asian, meet, competit, train, swimmer, two, second, race, compet, first, amateur, bronz, intern, associ, best, finish, yesterdai, silver, old, on, relai, men, set, track, medallist, mark, south, run

142,289

school, student, educ, teacher, univers, secondari, singapor, children, year, primari, studi, pupil, parent, mr, teach, colleg, cours, ministri, english, languag, chines, on, institut, examin, time, learn, princip, train, programm, work, graduat, help, nation, class, two, govern, girl, scienc, boi, first, level, malai, centr, make, dr, academ, dai, organis, scholarship, junior

125,629

polic, arrest, offic, suspect, two, men, yesterdai, man, investig, report, found, mr, gang, road, raid, on, station, crime, detain, year, night, arm, robberi, car, believ, peopl, forc, charg, singapor, robber, hous, todai, told, stolen, seiz, spokesman, old, held, four, escap, murder, reuter, chines, detect, member, street, made, drug, dai, home

The clustering algorithms worked well on resources in the Chinese and Malay languages too. The 13-node Hadoop cluster in NLB could process clusters of these sizes very efficiently. Over 1 billion associations have been identified via text analytics and made available to the users at the various NLB content services.

8 http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/. Accessed on 1 October 2015. 9 http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline. Accessed on 1 October 2015.

96 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

Benefits With the use of text analytics, many high-quality recommendations can be identified. Before this was implemented, associations were manually identified for some of the collections. However, due to the manual efforts required, the number of recommendations is necessarily limited. Now, the users have access to over a billion quality associations, while the librarians need not spend time identifying them manually. While NLB is progressively introducing and enhancing the contextual discovery capability to more of its collections, the evidence so far has indicated a significantly higher usage of the digital collections after the contextual discovery implementations. A good case in point is the cross-collection recommendations to related pictures in PictureSG at the Infopedia articles (box in Figure 7.6). The recommendations within the PictureSG collection were implemented in September 2013, while the cross-collection recommendations from Infopedia to PictureSG were launched in November 2013. Table 7.2 shows some of the web statistics for PictureSG before and after the implementations. Within four months, over 10% of the traffic came through Infopedia! The usage and the page views per visit for PictureSG have also increased significantly. This is certainly very encouraging, and we are very confident that the implementation of the contextual discovery capability across all our collections will provide a significant boost to the already high usage of the collections. It is also interesting to note that although the average lengths of the textual information available differs significantly between the Infopedia and PictureSG collections, it did not prevent the use of text analytics to identify the associations. The average amount of textual data used for the text analytics for the Infopedia collection was 1,054 words, while that for PictureSG was 47. Similarly, the presence of OCR errors in the NewspaperSG newspaper articles has not been an issue too. There is therefore a fair amount of resilience built into the text analytics algorithms to deal with them.



7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge 

 97

Figure 7.6: Cross-collection recommendations. Table 7.2: PictureSG web statistics. Month

Total referrals

# from Infopedia

Page views

Page views per visit

–

–

–

37,841 (average)

3.64 (average)

Sep-13

58,376

84

0.14

 65,036

4.00

Oct-13

21,088

93

0.44

 41,969

3.34

Nov-13

30,684

1,421

4.63

 62,018

5.27

Dec-13

27,628

1,554

5.62

 55,605

5.07

Jan-14

28,149

2,424

8.61

 70,313

5.73

Apr-13 to Aug-13

%

98 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

Table 7.2 (continued) Month

Total referrals

# from Infopedia

Feb-14

29,871

3,181

Mar-14

31,832

3,560

%

Page views

Page views per visit

10.65

 84,341

6.41

11.18

 96,626

6.53

Lessons learnt The implementation of text analytics to enable the contextual discovery of millions of digital resources is not a walk in the park, more like a walk in the dark. We were able to overcome many challenges along the way. In retrospect, several key factors helped us tremendously in this journey: –– an established service development methodology that encourages innovation; –– strong internal technical competencies; –– a “dare to try” corporate culture, and –– close collaboration amongst project members. These factors were clearly manifested in the learning points detailed below. Interestingly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the technology aspects turned out to be more straightforward, given the text-analytics software is well established and readily available.

Start with a Proof-of-concept (PoC) To encourage experimentation, and at the same time managing the risks of such experimentations, NLB’s service development methodology includes a PoC stage. When required, PoCs are performed to assess technical feasibility, service viability, and/or operational impacts. NLB decided to perform a PoC to determine the feasibility of the use of text analytics for contextual discovery. This has allowed us to start small and quickly. The PoC results also helped us to communicate the possibilities to the stakeholders. As importantly, the PoC has enabled us to develop a better understanding of capabilities of the technologies and tools, and build up internal competency in this domain. This is especially critical in the long run given the shortage of actual hands-on knowledge in this domain locally and in the region.



7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge 

 99

Strong technical competency to overcome the steep learning curve There is a substantial skill gap in text analytics, Mahout and Hadoop internally, in Singapore and in the region. Actual implementations of projects of this nature are few and far between. Adoption of Hadoop is still at a nascent stage in Asia Pacific. However, NLB’s technical staff picked up the necessary skills in text analytics, Mahout and Hadoop quickly through the PoCs. The documentation, books, online resources and forums, and online courses at Coursera10 are good sources that help the team with the implementation. NLB believes that a strong technical team is critical in its ability to deliver innovative services that delight its users. NLB has been able to quickly leverage on new technological developments as they become established and affordable. Libraries and archives are also able to tap on the technical competency of its technology partners.

Dare-to-try culture Over the years, NLB has advocated and celebrated innovations, and provided many opportunities for experimentation in order to develop an innovation culture across the entire organization. This mind set has encouraged staff to be on a constant look out for ideas that will bring values to NLB and its users. Venturing into text analytics was akin to a “leap of faith”, hoping that the complex algorithms involved would work as promised. Nevertheless, it is also something that NLB has been accustomed to. In its constant pursue of customer and innovation excellence, it is in fact in the DNA of NLB to try new ideas. To the authors’ mind, this culture has been a critical success factor for this initiative.

Close collaboration Applying text analytics to identify similar content to provide a content-rich contextual discovery experience requires the content owners and the technologists to work closely together. It is very different from other projects as it involves complex algorithms that even the technologists find hard to understand. The business

10 https://www.coursera.org/. Accessed on 1 October 2015.

100 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

users can either be sceptical, or veer towards the other extreme of expecting magic to happen due to the hype around text analytics. To obtain buy-in from the content owners, significant efforts were spent by the technical team in understanding the underlying algorithms and analysing the results of the PoCs. It turned out to be a good decision, as the technical team were able to fine-tune the parameters of the algorithms to achieve better results. As mentioned earlier in The Deployment above, the librarians checked the recommendations generated by the text analytics rigorously before they gave the go-ahead to go live. From our experience, the use of text analytics would typically involve several iterations to achieve acceptable results. The close collaboration and a high level of trust between the librarians and the technologists were certainly important elements throughout the iterative process.

Established and affordable software in text analytics are available We selected Mahout as the software for the PoC as it was the most established open-source machine-learning and data-mining software that met our requirements. That the algorithms were implemented on top of the Apache Hadoop framework provided us comfort in terms of scalability. There were good documentation, including several well written books on Mahout, which helped us tremendously in our PoC, and subsequent deployments.

Do not simply add more Hadoop nodes when hitting performance issues With the Hadoop platform, it is tempting to simply add more computer and storage resources whenever we hit a performance issue. After we expanded the Hadoop cluster to 13 nodes, we decided that we should stop adding more nodes, but instead look for alternative solutions. As a result, we started exploring the clustering capabilities of Mahout, conducted more PoCs, and adopted the use of clustering to handle large data sets.



7 Inter-connected Network of Knowledge 

 101

Next steps NLB is currently extending the contextual discovery capability with the use of text analytics to all the NLB digital collections. At the same time, we are exploring several possibilities to bring contextual discovery to the next level: –– Cross-institution: With NAS coming under NLB, we now have an expanded collection of digital resources on Singapore. We will be working on recommendations across NAS and the National Library; –– Cross-language: There are four official languages in Singapore: English, Chinese, Malay and Tamil. We are considering the use of machine translation to provide cross-language recommendations. –– Content analytics: Describing the digital content is a very labour-intensive process. There is currently a large portion of the digital content that has not been described. As a result, they remain “unsearchable” and text analytics cannot be applied to make them discoverable. We are exploring the use of content analytics software to extract information from the “raw” content. One example is the use of voice-to-text technologies for oral history and audio visual recordings. Another possibility is to perform feature extraction on images to identify similar images.

Conclusions The text-analytics approach provides a quantitative measure of the degree of similarity between two resources. This similarity value is based on established information retrieval models and best practices. It provides us the mean to identify the best recommendations, and also the cut-off point for our recommendations. Libraries and archives play a key role in cultivating an informed society in a knowledge intensive economy like Singapore. Contextual discovery, with the ease it provides to users to explore and deepen their understanding and insights, enables NLB to connect people to knowledge and to the nation. It makes knowledge come alive, sparks imagination and creates possibilities.

102 

 Siang Hock Kia, Yi Chin Liau and Ian Ong

References Chellapandi, Sharmini, Chow Wun Han and Tay Chiew Boon. 2010. “The National Library of Singapore Experience: Harnessing Technology to Deliver Content and Broaden Access.” Interlending & Document Supply 38:40–48. Lim, Chee Kiam and Balakumar Chinnasamy. 2013. “Connecting Library Content Using Data Mining and Text Analytics on Structured and Unstructured Data.” Paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress 2013, Singapore. http://library.ifla.org/id/ eprint/131. Accessed on 1 October 2015.

Rebecca Hope Renard

8 Youth202

An Experiment in Teen-driven Knowledge Management Abstract: Youth202 is Washington, DC’s first centralized, teen-driven digital space for information and resources for DC1 teens. Local youth, mostly from economically disadvantaged neighbourhoods, learn radio production, web writing, and research skills at DC Public Library, to create and maintain a website (youth202. org), a Twitter feed (@Youth202), and a radio programme. Youth202 fills a huge, teen-identified information gap, fully exploiting the power and potential of digital and social media as knowledge management tools. This paper describes the Youth202 programme, pedagogy, and process, and then discusses it within a unique, urban community knowledge management context. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2012 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Helsinki, Finland.

Introduction Youth202 is Washington DC’s first central repository for news, information, and entertainment for teens. It is named for the age-group it serves and the telephone area code of the city where it is based. Consisting of a digital radio programme, a website, and Twitter feed created by and for teens, Youth202 not only fills a huge gap in the information needs of teens and those who serve them, but does so in an innovative way, by training teens in a bi-weekly afterschool setting, to research, write, and share the information themselves, building teens’ skills, while capitalizing on the highly popular, widely accessible, and technologically dynamic social and digital media tools of Twitter, open source content management, and digital radio/podcasting. By pairing youth with adult library and community media professionals who are skilled in working with teens and who are experts in the information and media fields, Youth202 supports teens’ youth development needs, while developing their twenty-first century literacy skills. With our community partner, Radio

1 Washington DC is the capital of the United States which is in the state of District of Columbia (DC). Since DC and Washington are one and the same, this paper uses the common acronym DC to reference Washington.

104 

 Rebecca Hope Renard

Rootz, a non-profit organization specializing in youth radio, teens are trained in research, information analysis, digital audio production, interviewing, online writing, cyber-marketing, and a host of other skills, while working collaboratively to create content that they share with their peers. Youth202 not only develops the skills of the teens directly served in the programme, but it also increases the awareness of DC’s general teen population about the issues, programmes, events, and resources available to them, sharing that information through the technology that teens most often access. @Youth202 is Youth202’s Twitter presence. In our timeline of tweets, teens can find information about jobs, scholarships, one-time events, after school programmes, articles about teen life, local resources for teen health and wellness, and a whole host of other positive youth-centred material, all gathered from searching the vast Twittersphere. Youth202.org2 is our fixed web presence. It is accessible on desktop computers, and it has a modified mobile version, so teens can access it using their “third appendage”, their mobile phones. On Youth202.org, teens can find: –– a calendar of events, all colour-coded based on categories the Youth202 teens identified (music, sports, education, film, etc.); –– sorted lists of opportunities (jobs, volunteer opportunities, after school programs, and internships); –– a link to online homework help and research databases that DC Public Library subscribes to (offered free to library card holders); –– reviews of books, music, movies, and games, all written by teens from around the city; –– links to local and online resources to help them with problems or issues they may have (sexuality and dating, health, family, financial, etc.); –– a teen-written advice column; –– a search bar and tag cloud for easy visual searching. Youth202 Radio is co-produced by Radio Rootz. In each episode, teens can find youth-produced segments about informative and entertaining topics as well as youth-produced music.

2 Website accessed on 1 October 2015.



8 Youth202 

 105

History and Context of Youth202 The idea for Youth202 was born in the summer of 2010. Teens in DC Public Library’s summer and year-round youth employment programmes mentioned that they wished they had a space to go to find out about all of the things happening in the city for them. They wanted to be able to find out about things on their own, in the same way that adults can pick up a newspaper, tune into a radio programme, or visit a website to get information. There is no lack of opportunities and events for teens in Washington, DC. The city is replete with community-based organizations, youth advocacy organizations and policy institutes. It is home to 25 public neighbourhood libraries; hundreds of public and private schools; the world-renowned Smithsonian Institute, with its network of 19 museums offering programmes free of charge; the Library of Congress; National Archives; hundreds of churches with deep community roots and ample ministries to tend to the communities’ needs... All of these resources and opportunities exist for youth in the city, but there are gaps in the channels of communication between those resources and their target audiences. Teens bemoaned the fact that there were not any easy mechanisms for them to find out about things happening around the city for them. They did not know where to look to find out about jobs and volunteer opportunities, scholarships, after-school programmes, and cool things to do with their friends. They complained that they have to rely on their parents, teachers, or other adults to share information with them; and they said if they find out about things on their own, it is usually right before the event happens (and therefore too late for them to get permission or arrange transportation to go), or they only learn about things after the event or opportunity has already passed. If they find out about things themselves, it is only through word of mouth (which requires them to know the people “in the know”), or by making a concerted effort to seek the information. In research conducted on urban teen information-seeking behaviours, Agosto and Hughes-Hassell (2006) found that as with most adults, teens generally rely on people they trust to get their information. Relationships and social networks are, therefore, key. Youth202 was created to fill this huge information gap, bringing the city’s vast resources to teens in a way that honours the teens’ desire to be self-sufficient in the discovery of information, that is grounded in the research about their information-seeking behaviours, and that capitalizes on the tools, platforms, and technology they already use.

106 

 Rebecca Hope Renard

Knowledge, Media, Power, and participatory Culture of Urban Teens Knowledge is the sum of what we know, information contextualized and understood through the filters of our lived experience. Knowledge is developed through a continuous feedback process of experiencing, dialoguing, listening, and reading. This sense-making is a highly contextual, highly social phenomenon. Teens have no lack of knowledge. Though young, they experience and sensemake just as adults do. They have no shortage of opinions and thoughts, and because of their developmental stage, they are “playing around with” ideas, and are “trying on” ideas for size. Through this process they are at the same time shaping their identities. Media are an essential portal for our human knowledge development. There are plenty of media portals for adults, whether they be traditional mass-media portals (major newspapers, broadcast news shows, documentaries, radio shows, etc.), or participatory media portals (popular blogs, commentaries and letters to the editor). These are spaces for adults to learn, see their thoughts and ideas represented, share their ideas with each other, and make sense of their worlds. The same space does not exist on any broad scale for youth. Though a 2005 study by the Pew Foundation (Jenkins 2006) found that 57% of teens have engaged in some form of media creation (posting original photos or videos online, commenting on online media, etc.), opportunities for young people to be part of the mainstream media dialogue are largely absent. As well, though much emphasis is given, especially in libraries, to closing the digital divide by providing free wi-fi and public access computers, there is still a digital participation divide, with working-class youth and families being less able to not only access technology, but also less likely to learn the essential skills to be able to participate fully in the new media culture (Jenkins 2006). Youth generally, and low-income youth specifically, are bystanders and observers to a predominantly adult dialogue. Therefore, a tremendous amount of latent knowledge remains untapped. Teens are being robbed of the chance to learn from each other, and the adult community is losing the valuable opportunity to learn from the teens. The field of youth media has evolved over the course of the last 15–20 years to address this. One leader in the field, Ingrid Dahl, notes that youth media supports the process, products, and impact of authentic youth voice and create[s] opportunities for young people whose power and value is often overlooked. As Keith Hefner of Youth Communications, NY, explains, ‘We began doing this work because we saw that young people’s ideas were systematically excluded from the marketplace, to their detriment and to the det-



8 Youth202 

 107

riment of the institutions that served them and the larger society. Worse, not only did young people not have a voice, they were ignored and/or caricatured in the mainstream media – or treated simply as consumers. Most people who went into youth media also felt youth audiences deserved media that accurately reflected their lives and concerns.’ (Dahl 2009, 4)

Youth media is not only about shifting power dynamics and bringing marginalized voices into the centre. It is also about recognizing, documenting, culling, and sharing the knowledge of the youth community with others both within and outside of their communities. Furthermore, in the Youth202 context, it is also about developing young people’s 21st-century literacy skills, to be able to master the conventions, language, and nuances of media; become responsible users of it; and create media with the explicit purpose of connecting and engaging their communities.

How Youth202 Works: the Process There are many “moving parts” to the Youth202 programme. In order to successfully share relevant, credible information and knowledge, there are information literacy, media production, and writing concepts that the teens have to first develop. I will focus mainly on the information literacy and initial stages of the production process here.

Twitter Feed As with everything on the open web, the lack of an editorial body or authority control means that knowledge and information sharing is more democratic and potentially more reflective of a larger swathe of voices. It also means, however, that sometimes material of dubious veracity finds its way to others, and those without the ability to judge that information can be led to believing untruths. On Twitter, this problem is infinitely compounded. With the 140-character limit, not much context can be given to things, which can lead to misunderstandings. Also, the character limit oftentimes necessitates the use of URL links to lead the person to more information. With the retweet button offering the convenience of immediate “as-is” sharing, information gets blasted across communities of followers within seconds. If a link is dead, links to misinformation, links to an advertisement or pornography, or is in some other way not useful, it is much harder to retract the retweet and share the real or correct information.

108 

 Rebecca Hope Renard

To help the Youth202 teens find accurate, relevant information to tweet, they were taught some basic information literacy concepts. I introduced the acronym RADCAB, created by educator Karen Christensson in 2005 (Christensson 2014). Teens must analyse: –– Relevance: Is the information relevant to them and their target audience? –– Authority: Who wrote it, and what makes that person qualified to write it? –– Detail: Is it too much information, or too little information? –– Currency: Is the information up-to-date, or is it outdated? –– Appropriateness: Does it fit the criteria for the kinds of things Youth202 tweets about? –– Bias: Is it trying to sell something, or is it just information for information’s sake? Beyond that, there is a protocol that they must follow. The events and opportunities they tweet about must: –– be for young people between the ages of 12–19 in DC; –– be accessible by public transportation, so the teens can get there without needing to rely on their parents; –– be either free of charge or low cost (which the teens defined as $10 or less), so the teens can afford it, and so we are not excluding low-income teens. And the tweet itself, or information the tweet links to must: –– be current, versus being about an event that has already passed –– link to the original information about the event or opportunity, rather than leading to a continuous chain of links or leading to information from a third party –– be understandable, interesting, and targeted towards teens, versus being targeted towards adults who serve or parent teens The teens are also instructed to, where possible, create new text to accompany a link. They must add their own context to it, rather than simply retweeting what someone else wrote. Adding this additional step makes it more likely that they will follow the protocol, and it helps them really think about why this opportunity is relevant and worthy of sharing with their peers. In order to start their search into the vast Twittersphere, the teens type keywords such as: “youth dc”, “teens dc”, “students dc”, “scholarships dc”, etc. They then look at the timeline of most recent tweets by the people we follow. Then they go directly onto the pages of the “usual suspects”, a list that they compiled of organizations and people who regularly tweet relevant information. Then they go onto the pages of other organizations and people we follow, who may not



8 Youth202 

 109

tweet quite as regularly. This ensures that we locate great information that may still be timely, but that may have been swept away in the ever-flowing tsunami of tweets. Whenever they find something worthy of sharing, they mention the original tweeter’s Twitter handle, so that person or organization knows we are sharing their information, and so our Youth202 followers can find the original source. In order to better manage the flow of tweets, we set restrictions on who we follow. We follow local youth-serving organizations, museums and educational institutions, a few local musicians and artists, national youth news services, and some local individuals who are connected to youth-serving organizations. As a general rule, Youth202 does not follow people or organizations simply because they follow us. This is a sacrilege in the teen Twitter world, where a person’s status is measured by how many followers or friends they have.3 But it is the only way to ensure that the information that appears on our timeline is as relevant as possible, making it easier for us to find the “gold”.

Digital Radio Programme In order to create the radio pieces, there is a three-stage process involved: pre-production, production, and post-production. Pre-production includes selecting a topic, determining the essential questions, and conducting research. Production includes the actual recording of the audio. And post-production includes logging audio footage, writing scripts, and editing the final piece on a digital editing system. This is typically not a linear process, however. For example, narration has to be recorded to bring to life the text in the script, and sometimes new research has to be done or new interview footage has to be recorded, to fill in gaps in a narrative. At all phases of the process, teens’ knowledge is being tapped, shared, and re-created. In the Youth202 programme we use a constructivist, student-centred teaching approach, based in critical literacy pedagogy. In this pedagogy, “the students’ learning is driven by their own questions about their lived experiences; the social, cultural, and historical conditions that shape those experiences; and the media’s 3 Jessen and Jorgensen (2012) discuss the concept of “aggregated trustworthiness” in the online environment. Someone is deemed credible to the extent that she has social capital (if a lot of people follow and re-tweet her), she is connected to other people that a person knows (if a person’s friends follow her, she is more likely to be trusted), and she is connected to an institution or organization traditionally deemed authoritative (such as a good school, a major newspaper, a library, etc.). In that sense, gaining followers is a key component of the trinity of online credibility and importance, so teens want to be followed; and the idea of reciprocal following is a critical piece of that.

110 

 Rebecca Hope Renard

representations of those conditions and experiences.” (Goodman, Renard and Mendoza 2008, 157) To begin, the entire group engages in a brainstorming session to identify all the different topics they’re interested in. This includes serious topics (like current events, politics, problems and issues, etc.) and more light-hearted topics (like horoscopes, music reviews, and advice). Once all the ideas are on the board, we look at the list and cross off all the topics that are either too broad, too hackneyed, too abstract, or too “boring”. Once that list is narrowed, each teen picks the one they like the most. Sometimes an eliminated topic finds its way back to the list, as the teen justifies why she thinks she can do a better or different job with the topic than has been done with it before. After each teen has her topic, they create a graphic web to explore all the known aspects of the topic, the relationships between those aspects, and the things they don’t know about the topic. This helps the teens zero in on what exactly they want to focus on in their piece. Then we create questions around those areas. They do research to learn more about the topic and answer some of their questions. And they then identify all the people in the community they might have to talk to, in order to get a fuller picture of the story. The following is an example of how this process looks. CeeCee, a 15-year-old young woman, selected the topic of single parenthood for her first radio piece. As she mapped out her story, she decided she wanted to look at what life was like for children of single parents. What kinds of common experiences did children of single parent’s experience? Was there any difference between the experiences of children growing up with only their fathers versus with only their mothers? Are children of single parents more at a disadvantage than those who grow up with both parents? CeeCee is herself a daughter of a single mom. She had both firsthand knowledge, and a real motivation to find answers to her questions. To start her research, she decided that she would need some statistics about the prevalence of single parenthood, so a librarian helped her find the census bureau’s website. She also began mapping out what kinds of people she needed to interview: a single mom, a single dad, a child raised with a single mom, a child raised by a single dad, a psychologist, etc. Then she began identifying who she already knew in each of those categories, and she created a set of questions for each person. When she realized that she did not know a psychologist, she queried another teen who she knew had interviewed a psychologist for his story on teen depression. CeeCee tapped her own knowledge, then the knowledge of a peer to help determine her story strategy. In summary, the Youth202 radio programme provides enticing opportunities for teen expression while teaching them organizational, writing, and speaking techniques.



8 Youth202 

 111

Youth202 as a Community Knowledge Management System Dalkir defines knowledge management as “a deliberate and systematic approach to ensure the full utilization of the [community’s] knowledge base, coupled with the potential of individual skills, competencies, thoughts, innovations, and ideas to create a more efficient and effective [community]” (Dalkir 2005, 2). Though his original text used the word “organization” rather than “community”, the substitution of the word “community” functions well in this context. Community knowledge management is about knowing what knowledge exists within a community and making that knowledge available to the right people at the right time. It is about community members being able to recognize, access, and deploy expertise, whether that expertise is from themselves, their own peers, or other more traditionally defined experts. It is about both access to knowledge and effective use of knowledge. It is about creating and sharing new knowledge. In this context the Youth202 process and the Youth202 products are examples of community knowledge management systems (CKMS). There are several communities involved: the community of Twitter, the community of DC teens, and the community of Youth202 programme members. The community of Twitter is vast, and its knowledge base infinite. Information is accessed as immediately as it is shared; and information is immediately dated. Much of the information is useless in a knowledge-management sense. But some of it is “gold”. It is the gold that we are interested in Youth202. We are miners of golden information nuggets that would otherwise be buried in a rapidly piling timeline of tweets in just hours. Kuhlen states, “The success of electronic communication for knowledge management depends highly on effective coordination mechanisms (the moderators of forums are extremely important) and on incentives for the members to participate actively in the exchange of knowledge, namely to share one’s own knowledge with others” (Kuhlen 2003, 11). In this sense, Youth202 acts as a moderator of the perpetual “conversation” of tweets. Our practice of mentioning (or “shouting out”) the people and organizations whose information we share is an incentive for them to keep us in the loop. The @Youth202 Twitter feed becomes a stream of useful information, all targeted to the specific audience of 12–19-year-old DC residents. It is the first stage of managing the flow of knowledge from the Twitter community. In the second stage, the teens take those information nuggets, as well as information nuggets they find elsewhere (in their schools, churches, after school programs, etc.) and further sort them to post onto our digital “home base”, Youth202.org.

112 

 Rebecca Hope Renard

In the first semester of the programme in the Fall of 2011, participating teens designed the Youth202.org logo and look, identified the kinds of information they would want to see on such a site, categorized that information and assigned headings for major sections, and identified sub categories for each section. Now, whenever they find information to post, they simply select the kind of information they want to post (event, opportunity, review, etc.), and they use the tagging feature of our content management system, Drupal, to assign terms that they think their peers might use to search for that information. The Drupal system then posts the information in its appropriate place on the site. In this way, the information is organized to facilitate efficient search and retrieval, so teens can easily scan and find things of interest. Youth202 brings both access to knowledge, and facilitates efficient use of it, for the community of teens in Washington, DC. Through the information shared, the city’s youth learn more about the resources and opportunities available to them, and those youth, in turn, share that information with others. Sometimes this works too well. Ngozi, a 15-year-old teen in the programme, learned from a friend about a science-based high-school internship offered at the Smithsonian Institute. According to her, she posted the opportunity on Youth202, and the post was re-tweeted by lots of followers – so much so that many of her friends applied, and she did not get accepted. Of course, there could have been other factors involved in the programme’s decision not to accept her, but Ngozi faults the efficiency of Youth202! In another example, an arts-based after-school programme has benefited immensely from Youth202’s information sharing. Many of our former teen “regulars” have abandoned our library, preferring to hang out at the art programme, instead. On one recent visit to the programme, I spotted a crew of teens who used to always be at our central branch after school. They said they found out about the programme from Youth202, decided to visit, told all their friends, and now that was their new hang-out. Another way that Youth202 acts as a community knowledge management system is with the radio podcasts. Through their process of producing podcasts, the Youth202 teens make new discoveries and create new knowledge to share with their peers. UNESCO (Rawsthorne 2006, 15) says this about youth media production’s relationship to knowledge management: This involvement [in media production] is not a singular act: rather an active and collective process of learning. Within these social settings, young people create and develop their own perspectives and knowledge. Participation provides young people a context and community to explore imaginations and ideas. This process of learning, situating educational activity in the lived experience of young people, is dialogical and open-ended. The various media become more than facilitators and instruments; they enable and mediate learning and literacy. They become ‘social networks’ of learning.



8 Youth202 

 113

As Youth202 teens post podcasts and corresponding blog articles, other teens listen, read, and can comment on the stories, creating this dialogical and openended knowledge environment. Youth202 as a community knowledge management system (CKMS) not only applies in relationship to the outside world. It also applies internally. The Youth202 teens are learning a lot about the events, jobs, and opportunities they are sharing with their peers, and they are also learning media production, information literacy, writing, and critical inquiry skills. They are becoming experts in areas of knowledge that not many teens have. As new teens join the programme each semester, those teens who continue from previous semesters are tasked with teaching and coaching the new arrivals. This cycle of information sharing offers teens a valuable leadership opportunity, but also ensures that all the institutional knowledge is not lost when teens leave the programme. Youth202 functions as a CKMS in another surprising context, as well. Parts of knowledge management deals with the idea of helping people know what they know, recognize that their experiences and the knowledge gained through those experiences are valuable, and recognize that their knowledge and voices need to be shared with others as part of the larger dialogue. From my empowered adult perspective, I took for granted that the teens would easily accept these truths. As I quickly learned, however, there were some behaviours that the teens had to un-learn, in order to bring their voices fully to the table. As previously mentioned, one of the stipulations of the information shared on Youth202 is that it be interesting, understandable, and relevant to DC teens. While this seems like a relatively simple “given”, it actually takes some time for the teens to achieve. Young people have little power in society. They are marginalized. Young people of colour from low-income communities are even more marginalized. They are subjected to a school culture that places heavy emphasis on standardized testing and knowing “the right answer” and that does not generally reward creative and individual thinking. Adults are their typical audience, except when they are amongst their own friends in social contexts. Teens are engaged in a constant process of “code switching”, switching between their own culture and the adult culture; their youth voice and a formal, standardized voice; their own true thoughts and ideas, and those they think adults really want to hear. They have been trained to give what they think adults will think is the “right” answer. Youth202 offers a paradigm shift, however. In the Youth202 space, it is not only okay for teens to express themselves and put their voices in the centre, but it is also required. This is the essence of the Youth202 identity, but it takes a lot of time for them to believe that. For example, the teens will sometimes tweet things that are clearly for adults. When I push back and ask them to explain why they

114 

 Rebecca Hope Renard

think another 16-year-old would care about that thing, they shrug their shoulders and say, “I do not know. I thought that was what you wanted.” The teens also have a difficult time trusting their voice. One teen, Les, was notorious for this. Les is a 17-year-old African-American young man who attends a technology-centred public school in DC. Les has a strong interest in documenting local youth culture. His first radio story was on local teen music, and his second was on DC slang. These are both topics that a teen from DC is undoubtedly most qualified to speak on. Les essentially wanted to capture “indigenous knowledge”, which is at the heart of the idea of community knowledge management. (Rawsthorne 2006). However, when Les sat down to write his script on DC slang, a piece that at its core was about youth voice, he struggled to place his voice truly in it. Notice the differences between Les’ first draft and his final draft.

Draft 1 [Underlined words are slang words] DC slang. My definition would have to be: Words that are loosely used to replace common words in the everyday English language. Some people say that slang is a fun way to express yourself without being structured. Peer to peer slang usually includes words to replace their names, right? I don’t know. But, let’s see what slang words are used in certain parts in the District. Moe, son, cuz, champ, guh, oh nooo, for my life, and zaughta? I wonder what those words mean. They probably take the place of nouns, verbs, and adjectives. Hmm ... Let’s find out. Some of my friends don’t use slang, and some people use slang all of the time. Let’s see if people use slang or if they don’t use it at all. About 86% of teens in the District of Columbia use slang everyday. That means 14% of teens don’t use slang at all. Maybe the words aren’t intriguing enough for them to use, or maybe some people feel that slang is unnecessary. Well,  whether somebody calls you Son or if they call you by your government name, make sure it’s positive and respectful. This is Les signing out with Youth202 Radio!

Les sheepishly gave me this first draft to read. When I handed it back to him, I told him that I felt like his personality was completely missing from the piece. I asked him who he wrote the piece for. When he said he wrote it for his mans (“friends”), I asked him to think about how his mans would want to hear that same story. What would his mans want to learn or think about from the piece? I told him to visualize them as he re-wrote the draft. I had to keep reiterating that this story was not for adults. This was for his mans. Here is an excerpt of Les’ final draft.



8 Youth202 

 115

Final draft [Underlined words are slang words] Wassup with y’all? See, today my man tried to go smack at this shawty and she pressed him smoove out. He was like, “Ay shawty, wassup with you?” She wasn’t tryna hear none of that. Cuz was too sick. Then he tried to get mad at me cause I was sicin’ it. It ain’t my fault she ain’t want your number boy. But anyway, I was coolin’ round the way, and my man tried to say I was on nannies. I was like, “On what?” He was like, “You on nannies, fool!” Words like this get entered into the DC Slang Dictionary everyday. Let’s see what other words have made it there, too. Stamp, I use them words. Son, cuz, moe, and oh nooo are some of my favorites, though. Champ was popular in like ’07, and people over-use it now. Me? I prefer bush. Why? ’Cause it’s short and smooth. I’ve never heard of zaughta and for my life, though. They must be low-key slang words, because I’m around people that always use slang, and they’ve NEVER been used around Les. Let’s find out what they mean, because I’m real confused right now.

The final draft continues, using the general framework of moving between Standard English and slang, in order to help describe and explain the slang words native to youth in Washington DC. Les told me that when he gave me the first draft, he knew it did not truly reflect how he wanted to share his story, but he needed my permission and my prodding to be able to tell it the right way, “right” being defined here not from an adult/academic perspective, but from the perspective of the storyteller himself. The importance of using indigenous voice here cannot be overstated. In describing a similar incident that took place during a youth media workshop I co-facilitated in Soweto, South Africa with Steve Goodman and Christine Mendoza of the Educational Video Center, we noted, “Using those [indigenous] languages represents a shift in the power dynamic. Speaking and learning in their own languages validates the richness, knowledge and power of their own cultures, communities, and family histories.” (Goodman, Mendoza and Renard 2008, 158) This issue of language is not only about power, but it also enables understanding. Use of indigenous language provides an entry or access point into the conversation and helps ensure that all members of the community can partake, regardless of their command of Standard English. It ensures that no member of the community is left out of the circle of knowledge.

116 

 Rebecca Hope Renard

Conclusion On a very basic level Youth202 allows the library to provide a quality service that meets a critical information need. But Youth202 is much more than that. By putting teens in the centre of the process, it ensures a level of connection and relevancy to its target audience that would have been impossible if it were driven by adults. It also teaches them skills that they can draw on in their other activities. And more than that, Youth202 is a platform that empowers a new generation of citizens: –– Youth who are self-sufficient and proactive information seekers, no longer having to solely rely on adults for information; –– Youth who are self-determinate, learning about and taking advantage of opportunities that broaden their horizons and world views; –– Youth who share information with their community of friends, growing the circle of knowledge; –– Youth who recognize the validity of their experiences, the value of their ideas, and the power of their own voices; –– Youth who understand the conventions, language, and nuances of digital media, and who use that knowledge to enter the mainstream dialogue; –– Youth with the skills and confidence to step from the margins to the centre, to fully participate in this 21st-century global economy. Youth202 has arrived.

References Agosto, Diane and Sandra Hughes-Hassell. 2006. “Toward a Model of the Everyday Life Information Needs of Urban Teenagers, Part 2: Empirical Model.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 57: 1418–1426. Christensson, Karen. 2014. “RADCAB: Your Vehicle for Information Evaluation”. http://www. radcab.com/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Dahl, Ingrid. 2009. State of the Youth Media Field Report. Chicago: McCormick Foundation. http://www.youthmediareporter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/SOF-FINAL-Nov24.pdf. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Dalkir, Kimiz. 2005. Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice. Boston: ButterworthHeinemann. Goodman, Steve, Rebecca Renard, and Chistine Mendoza. 2008. “Drop it to the Youth: Community-based Youth Video as a Tool for Building Democratic Dialogue in South Africa.” In African media, African children, edited by Norma Pecora Enyonam Osei-Hwere, and Ulla Carlsson, 149–163. Göteborg: Nordicom, Göteborgs Universitet.



8 Youth202 

 117

Jenkins, Henry. 2006. Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the Twenty-first Century. [Chicago]: Macarthur Foundation. https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/ default/files/titles/free_download/9780262513623_Confronting_the_Challenges.pdf. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Jessen, Johan, and Anker Jorgensen. 2012. “Aggregated Trustworthiness: Redefining Online Credibility Through Social Validation”. First Monday 17 (1–2). http://firstmonday.org/ htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3731/3132. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Kuhlen, Rainer. 2003. “Change of Paradigm in Knowledge Management –Framework for the Collaborative Production and Exchange of Knowledge.” Paper presented in the Plenary Session of the World Library and Information Congress, Berlin, Germany, 3 August 2003. http://archive.ifla.org/IV/ifla69/papers/196e-Kuhlen.pdf. Accessed on 1 October 2015. Rawsthorne, Peter. 2006. “Community Knowledge Management for Development: The Creation of Community Learning Environments for Reducing the Knowledge Divide.” http://www. rawsthorne.org/docs/PeterRawsthorne.CKMS4D.pdf. Accessed on 10 September 2015.

Eva Semertzaki

9 Why Special Libraries are the Right 9 Places to Host a Knowledge Management 9 Centre 9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places

Abstract: The author shows how libraries, and especially special libraries, can remain relevant in this changing environment by embracing concepts of knowledge management and providing broader services than in the past – creating Knowledge Management Centres for their organization. Multiple reasons for their activity are given along with benefits to the organization in which the special library resides. This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Helsinki, Finland, in August 2012.

Introduction In February 2012 a Greek Sunday newspaper hosted an interview with Kevin Winkler, Deputy Director for Public Service at the New York Public Library (Kouzelis 2012). He concluded saying that we have to align our work with the people who use the Library. Times have changed and libraries which do not take steps to advance are going to die. In the current economic downturn, for the sake of their survival, libraries have to reconsider their roles and services, to adapt to and adopt new and emerging technologies. They should experiment with innovative ideas to provide services that empower patrons. According to The State of America’s Libraries 2014 the top priority of the American Library Association is transformation. Libraries pursue deep engagement with their communities. “Moving from being providers of books and information, public libraries now respond to a wide range of ongoing and emerging needs.” In 2014, people considered libraries as the most popular places to visit: 90% of the respondents in a national survey said that libraries are important to their communities, while 76% said that libraries are important to them and their families (ALA 2014, 4, 8). Two years before the above-mentioned report, according to The 2012 State of America’s Libraries, libraries continue to transform the lives of their patrons and to see circulation rise “amid the shifting winds of an economic storm” (ALA 2012, 1) The budget-cutting threatens many libraries as regards collections and work-



9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places 

 119

force. For example, the Library of Congress lost about 9% of its budget and 10% of its workforce in 2011. But at the same time new library buildings are established, libraries are renovated and library spaces are re-purposed (ALA 2015). Libraries continue their efforts to penetrate their communities. Today libraries become the anchors for economic, environmental and fair development. Special libraries though are considered as more vulnerable to closures than others. Their destiny depends on the priorities set by the parent organization and its operational and budgetary plans. A way for special libraries to defeat shrinkages, elimination of workforce or closures is to grab any chances to stay relevant in the organization. Such a chance is the transformation to a Knowledge Management Centre (KMC). Knowledge is the intellectual capital of the institution and its organization affects its advancement.

Special Libraries vs Other Types of Libraries In 1910, John C. Dana, the first President of the Special Libraries Association, described the traditional library as one that focuses its services on the reader of the polite literature while the special library is managed by experts on a topic to which the library is devoted (Dana 1910). In a simplistic definition special libraries are the ones which are not academic, nor public or school libraries (Semertzaki 2011). They are also called research, corporate, company and recently, knowledge-management centres. Special libraries appeared more than two centuries ago in parallel with the evolution of business. They arose from the necessity that business, scientific, technical, legal and statistical information was requested to assist the growth of companies. As a result of the variation of business domains, each special library is unique and not identical with any other. An early example of a special library is the Library of Congress which was inaugurated in 1800 as the library that held material necessary to support the work of the US Congress. Likewise, in 1909 the Special Libraries Association (SLA) was established at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, during the ALA annual conference, aiming to promote libraries engaged in the information services to business, industry and the government. The conclusion of research conducted by the Financial Times in conjunction with the Special Libraries Association (FT and SLA 2013, 3) is that information professionals are no longer the data gatekeepers but they “must work hard to demonstrate their value in new ways. Doing this means making a fundamental shift from isolated, technical expert to multi-skilled team member, enabling decisions and proactively integrating into the organization.” The information profes-

120 

 Eva Semertzaki

sional must communicate his value into the organization and pursue initiatives to save time for the employees. It is evident that there is a shift from information services to building the knowledge culture of the organization.

Characteristics and Services –– Special libraries adhere to the mission and goals of the parent organization; –– they are subject-oriented, i.e. they cover from one to a few related topics; –– they provide specialized and tailor-made services to fulfil the needs of the institution’s personnel. They provide the right information to the right people at the right time when there is a demand for specialized information. They apply the “just-for-you” model instead of the “one-fits-all” model other types of libraries do; –– they act as mediators and bridges which connect people together and people with information and knowledge; –– they usually employ specialized personnel who hold a degree or demonstrate experience on the subject area of the organization besides their MLS degree; –– they are considered as small-to-medium size libraries concerning their collections; –– they are hybrid libraries because of the diversity of the material they hold: documents, patents, technical papers, internally produced documents, research papers and other corporate unpublished material which comprises the institutional repository; –– they add value to their organization while conducting research on behalf of their requestors saving them precious time as time costs money; –– consequently, the competencies of librarians become increasingly demanding. Mostly, they have to be aware of the tasks and activities of their organization.

Thinking out of the Box: Knowledge Management as the Opportunity to Stay Relevant The definition of knowledge as published in the World Development Report 1998– 1999 is my favourite: “knowledge is like light: weightless and intangible, it can easily travel the world, enlightening the lives of people everywhere” (World Bank 1999, 1). Socrates, the ancient Greek philosopher, is said to have said “the only thing I know is that I know nothing.”



9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places 

 121

Professor Jim Matarazzo, expert in corporate libraries, writes in the foreword of my book: “special libraries everywhere have been closed and/or reduced in greater numbers than before” (Semertzaki 2011, xi). Special libraries have to react to strive and thrive. They have to think out of the box to be proactive and creative in order to overcome any difficulties caused in the current fluctuating times. Here is the opportunity with knowledge management. Knowledge management refers to the procedures of creating, sharing, codifying, distributing, and learning, retrieving, using and reusing knowledge to create new knowledge in a continuous cycle (Figure 9.1). It discerns from information management which is defined as the organizational methodology which is concerned with the acquisition, retrieval and use of information to produce knowledge (St Clair 2001). Simply, knowledge is know-how as compared to information which is know-what to do. Sharing practices and actions helps to making best use of organizational knowledge in libraries.

Figure 9.1: The knowledge management cycle.

According to P. Lambe quoted in White, knowledge management has four dimensions (White 2010). The author uses four Greek words to depict the values of knowledge management: –– Logos represents information management at the individual level (logos enables the logic); –– Sophos is the knowledgeable expert who represents the experience learned over time (Sophia is wisdom, the tacit knowledge hidden in the human mind);

122 

 Eva Semertzaki

–– Pathos represents personal collaboration with others about a current situation and distribution of knowledge (pathos involves the emotional dimension); –– Ethos represents the culture, history and knowledge of the organization (ethos is the human behaviour in the society as well as the oral and written culture of the individual and the society).

Competencies of Special Librarians Special librarians have to obtain more capabilities to be competitive in the parent organization. They have to be extrovert, flexible and adjustable to changes. The key factor is collaboration and partnerships. Collaboration enables people to reveal their talents and become more active in team working. Peter Drucker, the father of modern management, who also coined the phrase “knowledge worker” in the late 1950s, wrote that all organizations need the core competence of innovation (cited in Rosenstein 2012). Knowledge management is innovation. The SLA (SLA 2003) categorizes the competencies of special librarians in three sets: –– Personal competencies consist of attitudes, values, skills and ethics of the profession that enable special librarians to work effectively for the benefit of their organization, clients and profession; –– Professional competencies are associated with the knowledge of information resources, access, technology and management and the ability to use this knowledge to provide the highest quality information services; –– Core competencies emphasise the value of developing and sharing knowledge through association networks and by conducting and disseminating research at conferences, in publications and collaborative arrangements.

Reasons for a Special Library to Undertake the Knowledge Management Centre (KMC) A KMC is both a physical facility and a virtual place where the knowledge management system has been installed. It is the platform where internal knowledge is stored in a huge internal database fed by knowledge workers. The prevailing factor which distinguishes information from knowledge is people. I strongly believe that special libraries have all the potentials to be transformed to a KMC. There are many arguments to support it (Semertzaki 2011).



9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places 

 123

–– In 1916 the SLA adopted the value statement “putting knowledge to work”. It is a robust argument to advocate the idea that the special library is the pertinent place to host a KMC. Then the statement became putting our knowledge to work and these days it is turning information to knowledge. –– The management of knowledge is the modern expression of what special libraries have been doing in the course of their history: they gather, organize and distribute information and knowledge created internally. Generally, they execute traditional tasks differently with a shift to less strict hierarchical structures. Indeed, the realm of special libraries comprises information and knowledge. –– The answer to the question why the library is the place to interact with authors and content providers is that “the library may be uniquely or strongly positioned to uphold principles of cost-effective or low-barrier access. Also, libraries bring other important characteristics associated with integrity, authenticity and trust” (Pradt Lougee 2007, 323). The same applies to special libraries. Information professionals are the best qualified employees to manage knowledge. They are conventionally responsible to deliver knowledge and information services to the parent organization. –– A core activity of special libraries is to add value to the parent organization by supporting the research conducted in it and by saving the valuable time for researchers, while assisting them meeting their information demands. –– It is imperative for special libraries to adhere to the mission of the parent organization. It is a business unit which supports activities, operations, research, products, clients and personnel of the organization using the library resources. In a competitive marketplace, companies strive to be innovative. Innovation and creativity are key factors for development. Knowledge management is an innovative project and special libraries endorse novel activities. –– The remark by Ulla de Stricker (cited in Colvin 2009, 22) about the changing role of information professionals is very timely: “if we play our knowledge management cards right, there are very few areas in any organization in which we won’t have a significant contribution to make. Corporate portals, intranets, extranets, guardianship and mining of corporate memory, design and creation of new information flows, negotiation for content licenses” are some of the tasks that special librarians are capable of accomplishing. –– Librarians are keen on technologies because they use computer systems to organize the content of their collections. The KM system is built on a capable computer system which makes knowledge accessible and retrievable, though simultaneously it facilitates knowledge sharing and exchange. –– Organization of data and information is traditionally the core activity of libraries. Codification is one of the main attributes of knowledge manage-

124 

––

––

––

––

––

 Eva Semertzaki

ment. Special librarians organize and filter the plethora of information in order to present it to the requestor in an understandable manner. They have the expertise to store, maintain and make the knowledge flow accessible in the organization. Special librarians combine internal knowledge with external resources accessed at the library. The internally produced documents are kept at the library to create the knowledge repository of the organization’s intellectual capital. Internal knowledge feeds the KMC and creates new knowledge. Therefore, special librarians are the knowledge workers for the internally generated knowledge. In their book, Davenport and Prusak (1998) affirm that the most intriguing new knowledge jobs are knowledge integrators, librarians, synthesizers, reporters and editors. They also mention that knowledge administrators are responsible for capturing, storing and maintaining the knowledge that others produce. It is true that in the course of their work, special librarians behave as knowledge managers and serve as important hubs in internal communication products and tools such as the intranet. Information professionals provide informal and formal training to employees. They teach them how to use library resources and how to perform searches effectively. In the KMC informal training provides opportunities to retain organizational knowledge, especially the tacit one, which is more difficult to capture. It integrates the process of knowledge exchange and sharing. The knowledge workers require training to record their knowledge in the KM system. The training is a task that special librarians are pertinent to perform. It encourages the transformation of the library to a learning organization. The learning organization enforces corporate culture and managing people as assets. An essential task for information professionals is to share and diffuse information to the people that need it. Knowledge sharing is one of the main elements in the knowledge management cycle. Hence, in addition to sharing information, special librarians are capable of knowledge sharing. Special librarians bring people together as they broadly know the activities of the organization’s business units. They are the bridges, the mediators and connectors with peers. Likewise, people are the cornerstone of knowledge management. Thus, special librarians know how to handle and connect people together. The library acts as a meeting point. Libraries resemble the ancient Athenian agora. It was an assembly and a meeting place for political and philosophical discussions, for exchanging ideas and for selling and buying goods. Special libraries contribute to the knowledge exchange besides the information exchange.



9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places 

 125

–– As an innovative project, the KMC changes the organizational structures. Libraries are agents of change because they deal with changes particularly because of the rapid growth of technologies. –– Libraries foster partnerships. They cooperate with other business units within the organization. Moreover, they have a long tradition in networking, partnerships and cooperation with peer libraries. Similarly, the KMC underpins cooperation and networking enterprise-wide. The knowledge management team also consists of representatives from several business units. Special librarians can be the trusted partners to monitor the knowledge management hub with their experience in cooperative activities. Consequently, special libraries have been involved in knowledge activities since their existence, but now they are mature enough to undertake all activities which utilize the knowledge in the organization. There is an overlap between librarianship and knowledge management. Knowledge-based activities are analogous to the traditional library activities.

Affects to the Organization: Changing the Corporate Culture As mentioned previously, the KMC breaks strict hierarchical structures in the organization. It involves several people from various business units both in the knowledge management team and as knowledge workers regardless of their position in the hierarchy. As a change management project it affects the corporate culture. The contributors to the KMC have to change their attitude and mindset, as well as to adapt to the behaviour of sharing and exchanging. They have to be convinced that their knowledge gains more value when they share it.

Benefits for the parent organization –– The KMC as an innovative project deeply influences both the organization and the special library; –– it facilitates better decision making: the well and accurately informed decision maker has the possibility of more correct decisions; –– it exploits the existing resources and utilizes the existing computer systems; –– it encourages the free flow of ideas and knowledge which fosters insight;

126 

 Eva Semertzaki

–– it improves customer service and satisfaction and boosts revenues but also enhances the value of existing products; –– it streamlines operations and reduces costs in human labour and hours by eliminating redundant processes. Consequently, it makes better use of employees’ working time; –– it improves the collective-organization memory and knowledge sharing by recording the tacit knowledge of people who retire or leave their position.

Benefits for the special library –– The KMC promotes the profile, reputation, visibility and status of the library; –– it cultivates open and democratic exchange of ideas and makes the library the meeting point in the organization; –– it defeats the possible threat for the library to become marginalized and a candidate to close in austere economic conditions; –– it fosters a new type of library culture; –– the library becomes a trusted partner in the organization and demonstrates the value of its services. It is a value centre and not a cost centre; –– the library becomes the centre of excellence that accrues knowledge and collective wisdom of the organization; –– it modernizes its structure and sets new priorities; –– it becomes the agent of change in the organization.

Paradigms of Implementing Knowledge Management Projects Several examples, case studies and best practices of creating knowledge management centres and implementing knowledge management projects in organizations are available. Nonetheless, each of those is as unique as the parent organization. Fine-tuning the principles and characteristics of building knowledge management centres and schemes, the organization who decides to implement them focuses, develops and codifies knowledge assets differently. A few examples of organizations which have established networks for connecting and collaborating among their people containing valuable information and knowledge include: OLISnet is the extranet of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; the eBIS forum is the extranet of the Bank for International Settlements and DARWIN is the information management and knowledge system



9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places 

 127

of the European Central Bank. Bank of Canada has reshaped the library as Knowledge & Information Services. Below a few case studies related to knowledge management are presented.

Enterprise-wide Social Collaboration Platform at KPMG At KPMG International , knowledge management is a well established attitude. The organization’s vision for knowledge management is to harness the knowledge of the thousands of employees to help them create and deliver value to KPMG’s clients. For the organization, social collaboration is a channel for the creation, connection and sharing of institutional knowledge and insights. They developed an internal social collaboration platform, as a place where the KPMG people from around the world come together to connect, communicate, collaborate and create, intending to break down geographic carriers. They started small with a planned pilot in order to prove the capability and the business demand. They capture and share success stories to help others understand business benefits by hearing examples that resonate with them. The social collaboration programme adds real business value and is worth the initial investment of time. After a Request for Proposal (RfP) conducted in partnership between the Knowledge function with IT Services and the Supplier Management team of KPMG, they selected a tibbr®, a product provided by TIBCO. The name of the social collaboration platform was “Hub”, making connotations of being at the centre of the action. The project was implemented gradually at the member firms, taking into consideration agreements for security, identification of a Hub lead and subject managers. Subjects are the Communities of Practice (Hughes and Chapel 2013a). The tangible benefits of the Hub are to reduce time for collaboration and to speed the respond to the clients, e.g. by posting a request to the social collaboration platform. This helps promote an organizational culture shift and shows expertise and experience from across the international KPMG network. It is easy for leaders to push updates to broad audiences and that in turn reduces emails sent and increases staff engagements. Collaboration in client services is fast and secure. Sharing evidence of improved employee engagement via mobile services is feasible. There is coordination by the Central Global Knowledge team using toolkits for implementation, launch, awareness arising and communication with local business owners. The usage of the Hub is described with leadership engagement. Access is controlled by subjects of interest which are open to all Hub users and subjects of practice which are visible to all members in the Community of Practice.

128 

 Eva Semertzaki

The continued adoption of the Hub is a multi-year process. Delivering social collaboration into the enterprise takes time but getting it right can change the organization. Communicating the value requires consistent messaging and success requires sponsorship and advocacy to deliver the required culture and behavioural change. From the lessons learned they provide the impetus for ongoing refinement of the program with the continued adoption of the Hub and realization of the value and business benefits to be delivered (Hughes & Chapel 2013b).

Knowledge capture at Statoil Statoil, a Norwegian state oil company founded in 1972, now employs over 23,000 people worldwide (Castle 2014). For their company, access to accurate data and information is crucial to acquire new assets and develop existing ones, to produce and sell oil and gas. Global Strategy and Business Development (GSB) is a business unit at Statoil responsible for seeking board approval for new ventures and to try and understand competitors’ strategies to predict their investment actions in the marketplace. Teams within GSB work closely to share knowledge and insight in ongoing projects. They are responsible for providing accurate information to the board in order to make the right decisions. For that reason, they analyse competitors’ financial and operational performance, track industry trends and reports and use external databases to support their analyses. Consequently, the need was created to put in place effective systems for sharing information and knowledge of mutual interest. The intension was to provide interpretation and analysis that would prevent the duplication of effort. The solution was the creation of the business intelligence web (BIW) as a platform to collect data and intelligence on the core topics of Statoil where direct access to charts and reports is enabled. The BIW provided open access to the implementation of data to analysts. This attitude changed people’s perception of the value of shared information, enabling cross-departmental collaboration on projects. The structure of information though was complicated, so they used the organization’s SharePoint 2010 licence to develop a dynamic solution. The advantage was that the IT had the internal expertise to use SharePoint which was already used for the company intranet. It incorporates employee details from SAP. The move to a dedicated platform based on SharePoint encouraged people to share their internal reports, research and presentations. As a consequence, a dedicated knowledge bank was created using a full-text search functionality and security to access sensitive information. The BIW platform also includes a database of news stories related to the company.



9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places 

 129

The next step for the BIW is to become a forum of debate and interaction across the company to capture the thoughts of senior analysts. Moreover, collaboration and interaction is being developed for the individual company profile pages including internal guidelines. Community sites are also used where people are willing to share their knowledge. In this way they utilize the existing subscription and software to provide a cost-conscious solution having the advantage that it is in a format familiar to the user.

Central Bank of Malaysia Knowledge Management Centre The Central Bank of Malaysia has founded a complex called Sasana Kijang to house the Bank’s Knowledge Management Centre (KMC) and the Museum and Art Gallery. It also houses the Bank’s strategic partners, the South East Asian Central Banks (SEACEN) Research and Training Centre, the Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB) and the World Bank Centre. The complex is defined as the centre for learning, knowledge management, development of thought leadership and standard setting. It is “the centre of excellence in knowledge and learning in Central Banking and Financial Services, and allows invited participants and guests to continue engaging, exchanging thought and ideas” (Central Bank of Malaysia 2014). Sasana Kijang provides opportunities to people to network, exchange and share knowledge. The Knowledge Management Centre as a physical space within the complex is the catalyst to drive knowledge and learning in the central bank. It provides physical and online resources and is committed to promoting knowledge management and learning in the region. It promises its shareholders to think, discover and inspire. The KMC plays a key role in the development of human capital to meet global challenges (Central Bank of Malaysia 2014). It is an example of the Knowledge Management Centre as a physical facility.

The Collaboration Space at the Bank of Greece Library The Library of the Bank of Greece has created its collaboration space within SharePoint. The idea and the structure of the content were originated by the Library and the project was implemented by the IT department of the Bank. The access is controlled with read and/or write rights assigned to groups of people according to their involvement in the subject category. The library collaboration space comprises a forum of discussion (cf. a Community of Practice in a small scale) on library-related topics, such as cataloguing and the Integrated Library System, where policies and decisions are recorded for future reference. It serves

130 

 Eva Semertzaki

as a knowledge base for the “Ask a Librarian” service documenting the research made by the reference staff as well as the sources consulted for replying to complicated reference queries. It also contains the Library Committee minutes and significant internal documents easily searchable. It is used as a shared folder with a “web-saved” function. It operates as a common working place for sharing files commonly used by certain groups of the library staff. The collaboration space saves time and effort to the group as it facilitates the workflow by easily locating, retrieving, updating and saving the data. It is a dynamic tool, custom-made to accommodate the operational needs of the library staff, expandable to capture and preserve information and knowledge created during the library’s activities.

Conclusions We have to remember that changes, crises and difficulties open up new opportunities. The wise librarians keep their eyes, ears and minds open to look and identify new opportunities. Knowledge management is not a fad but a reality. Since the 1990s when the term was introduced, knowledge management has expanded in organizations. At the beginning, the conception of the idea to transform the library to a KMC seems intimidating and difficult to accomplish. It requires that a sustainable strategic plan will be implemented. Nobody declares that big projects do not entail high costs, risks and even failures. The value of the KMC gradually becomes apparent as the volume of the content introduced in the system increases. The phase of persuading people to become knowledge workers for the KMC is time consuming but not a waste of time. The KMC lives with the contributions of people who are the driving force of the centre. Furthermore, the success of the KM initiative is based on the devotion and enthusiastic contribution of all staff, including the library personnel, within a supportive environment. However, it predominantly depends on the support by the upper management. The reason is obvious that the top management is the decision making agent who provides the financial resources and motivates the knowledge management team. It is fundamental that the governing body of the organization is persuaded to embrace the project. It often happens that innovative ideas, such as knowledge management, emanate from people in various hierarchical levels. The core team has to spread the word and persuade others to join. A well justified project plan is to be presented to the upper management to inform them about knowledge management and pursue their support. It is not an easy step but it is the most essential. It takes much effort and time.



9 Why Special Libraries are the Right Places 

 131

Besides the support of the upper management, new competencies of library staff are required to accomplish complex tasks. How ready are library personnel to change their attitudes and start learning novel things? The role of the knowledge manager entails increased responsibilities. The enthusiasm of the knowledge manager or the director of the library is crucial to convince the rest of the team. These are some questions that our profession should address in order to stimulate further discussion and to promote necessary training and changes in support of library staff. While doing this we have to stay inspired and share ideas across boundaries.

References ALA (American Library Association). 2012. “The 2012 State of America’s Libraries: a report by the American Library Association.” American Libraries April, digital supplement. http://www.ala.org/news/sites/ala.org.news/files/content/ StateofAmericasLibrariesReport2012Finalwithcover.pdf. Accessed on 1 October 2015. ALA. 2014. “The state of America’s libraries: a report from the American Library Association.” American Libraries digital supplement http://www.ala.org/news/sites/ala.org.news/files/ content/2014-State-of-Americas-Libraries-Report.pdf. Accessed on 1 October 2015. ALA. 2015. “2015 Library design showcase.” American Libraries Sep./Oct.: 40–49. http:// americanlibrariesmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/0915_AmLib.pdf. Accessed on 5 October 2015. Castle, James. 2014. “Digging below the Subsurface: How Data Visualization and Knowledge Capture Helps Statoil Stay Competitive.” Business Information Review 31 (2): 100–105. Central Bank of Malaysia. 2014. “Sasana Kijang and Lanai Kijang.” http://www.bnm.gov.my/index.php?ch=en_about&pg=en_thebank&ac=1110&lang=en. Accessed on 1 October 2015. Colvin, Gaye. 2009. “Education for Changing Roles.” Information Outlook 13 (7): 21–26. Dana, John C. 1910. “The President’s Opening Remarks.” Special Libraries 1 (1): 4–5. Davenport, Thomas H. and Lawrence Prusak. 1998. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press. FT and SLA (Financial Times and Special Libraries Association). 2013. The Evolving Value of Information Management, Alexandria, VA: Special Libraries Association and Financial Times. Hughes, Ceri and Alex Chapel. 2013a. “Connect, Communicate, Collaborate and Create: Implementing an Enterprise-wide Social Collaboration Platform at KPMG.” Business Information Review 30 (3): 140–43. Hughes, Ceri, and Alex Chapel. 2013b. “Connect, Communicate, Collaborate and Create: Implementing an Enterprise-wide Social Collaboration Platform at KPMG. Part Two: Realizing Value.” Business Information Review 30 (4): 191–95. Kouzelis, Lamprini. 2012. “Βιβλιοθήκη που δεν εξελίσσεται πεθαίνει.” [The Library that does not Develop Dies]. Το Βημα [To Vima, newspaper] 12 February.

132 

 Eva Semertzaki

Pradt Lougee, Wendy. 2007. “Scholarly Communication and Libraries Unbound: The Opportunity of the Commons.” In Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice, edited by C. Hess and E. Ostrom, 311–32. Cambridge, MA & London: MIT Press. Rosenstein, Bruce. 2012. “The Core Competence of Innovation.” Information Outlook 16 (1): 17–18. Semertzaki, Eva. 2011. Special Libraries as Knowledge Management Centres. Witney: Chandos Publishing. SLA. 2003. Competencies for Information Professionals of the 21st Century, rev. ed. https:// www.sla.org/about-sla/competencies/. Accessed on 16 March 2015. St Clair, Guy. 2001. “Knowledge Services: Your Company’s Key to Performance Excellence.” Information Outlook 5 (6): 6–12. White, Stephanie M. 2010. “The Role of Knowledge Management in Requirements Management.” In Convergence of Project Management and Knowledge Management, edited by T. Srikantaiah, Michael E. Koenig, and S. Hawamdeh, 31–56. Lanham, Toronto; Plymouth UK: The Scarecrow Press. World Bank. 1999. World Development Report: Knowledge for Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://www.wdronline.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/5981/WDR 1998_99 – English.pdf. Accessed on 1 October 2015.

Linda Stoddart

10 Information Outreach and Knowledge 10 Sharing in the United Nations 10 Information Outreach and Knowledge Sharing in the United Nations

New Approaches Abstract: A programme of reform and organizational change at the United Nations (UN) brought attention to aspects of knowledge management that were needed in the organization. This paper first highlights some of the plans for new approaches and describes some of the activities and services that were put into place or planned in 2008 with success in moving forward with improved sharing of knowledge. It then revisits the organization in 2015 and describes the plans for a new knowledge management programme that is being set up within a newly formed Office of Information and Communications Technology. With the use of technology the current management intends to encourage further an effective collaborative environment in which United Nations personnel and stakeholders can capture, share and manage information and knowledge more effectively. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2008 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Quebec City, Canada.1

Introduction Many knowledge management initiatives are viewed primarily as improving the use of information technology to streamline processes. As information professionals know well, this is only one part of the picture. Many organizations in the private and government sectors are deploying new methods, systems and management techniques to encourage knowledge sharing and are seeing some concrete benefits including faster project implementation, more insightful decision-making based on comprehensive understanding of issues and increased efficiency. No one disputes that information and knowledge are the lifeblood of the United Nations (UN); however, the organization has been slow to address the issue of how to leverage this invaluable resource effectively. A report of the Internal Oversight Services on knowledge management noted that there was no 1 This paper was presented when the author was the Director, Knowledge Management, Office of the Chief Information Technology Officer, United Nations, New York. She is currently adjunct faculty at the Haute École de Gestion, Genève.

134 

 Linda Stoddart

common understanding of knowledge management or knowledge sharing in the UN. Typically, knowledge management was associated with disseminating information and overlooked the critical role cross-organizational collaboration and peer interaction plays in effective knowledge sharing (UN. Economic and Social Council. Committee for Programme and Coordination 2006). Over the last year, however, the concepts around knowledge management have been given more attention, due to the emphasis on UN reform and organizational change. There is now recognition that content management and organizational learning are necessarily part of the package. In addition, other entities in the UN System, such as the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), have undertaken significant initiatives on knowledge sharing, and these have served as models for new activities and projects in this area.

Assisting the UN to Manage its own Information and Knowledge Recognizing that recycling and re-using information and knowledge leads to collective intelligence and greater efficiency for the organization and its clients, information professionals in the UN are taking on new roles as coaches and consultants to help the organization manage its own information and knowledge, develop new products, as well as to access relevant external information. Providing the technology tools and applications is only a first step and training can help, but most staff find it difficult to schedule time to take courses, even for short periods of time. Support to staff needs to be tailored to individual needs. The Dag Hammarskjöld Library and Knowledge Sharing Centre is beginning to have a presence across the organization, both in the form of “live” knowledge coaches and teams that help people find and organize information in their offices and at their workstations, and in the network of behind-the-scenes library workers who prepare targeted information resources to support the work of the United Nations. Through a Personal Knowledge Management initiative, library professionals are being transformed into networking facilitators, essential team members in the United Nations community of knowledge workers. Eventually libraries without walls will make UN information professionals more visible. During 2009, the Library and the entire premises of the UN will be renovated, involving a major relocation effort for a period of at least four years. This move will provide an opportunity for more innovation, experimentation and ironically a chance to be



10 Information Outreach and Knowledge Sharing in the United Nations 

 135

more visible to certain core departments. Service points, consulting services and collections will need to be set-up in various locations. By 2009, the Library will effectively be without walls. With the installation of an enterprise content management system (ECM), the processes and work flow relating to the creation, storage and dissemination of information will be improved. In addition, the ECM will help minimize the time spent searching for information and knowledge, improve access to knowledge and information inside and outside the organization and facilitate the development of knowledge repositories.2

Internal Communications at the Core of Knowledge Sharing One of the most visible knowledge sharing tools in the UN is the organization’s intranet, “iSeek”, which was redesigned in 2005. The Dag Hammarskjöld Library and Knowledge Sharing Centre was requested to take responsibility for the management of the UN’s intranet by the Deputy Secretary-General. A dedicated unit, the Internal Communications Unit (ICU), was established and tasked with the development of an internal communications strategy in an effort to identify new means of communicating more effectively, and encouraging a dialogue from the top-down, bottom-up and across the organization. As a result, the Library developed a more prominent, pragmatic role in management reform, helping to strengthen the UN through better information and knowledge sharing. iSeek has been used extensively to communicate messages to foster a sense of community and encourage dialogue at all levels. The objective of the UN intranet’s reconceptualization was to increase transparency between management and staff, facilitate communication and strengthen communities across duty stations. In addition, iSeek’s mandate was to create one intranet for one UN worldwide, with consistent layout, and standard technology, providing relevant and consistent messages to reach potentially some 37,000 staff around the world, plus approximately 100,000 peacekeepers. Senior management began to realize the importance of involving staff in the change process, if it was to be successful. There was also recognition of the role internal communications played in creating perceptions about the UN in the media. The UN’s intranet has been used effectively to support a new internal communication strategy and the creation of

2 Situation as of 2008; see “Postscript – 2015: New Priorities” below.

136 

 Linda Stoddart

a network of focal points at headquarters and in offices worldwide to support and sustain these activities. Poor communication was seen as a source of negative feelings amongst staff, particularly at a time when the organization was undergoing major changes and an onslaught of attention from the media. To address this problem, iSeek took on new importance as management began to craft messages specifically aimed at staff, concerning management reform and a range of other issues intended to share knowledge and increase transparency. This technological tool has already had an effect on the culture of the organization towards a more collaborative environment. In recognition of the role iSeek has played to encourage better knowledge sharing, the team that was involved in the redesign and revamping of the system, received a “UN 21 Award” from the Secretary-General, in 2008. iSeek has become a primary internal communication tool that brought together disparate parts of the organization. Its objective was to inform staff about the UN’s common objectives and where they fit into the overall picture. This involved: –– enabling users to find for themselves what they need to know; –– facilitating staff understanding and focus on UN strategies and priorities; –– helping UN Information centres around the world to better serve their role as points of access to UN information and materials and to operate more effectively as the “eyes and ears” of the organization by making it easy for them to communicate news and events back to the rest of the UN; –– increasing awareness and understanding of UN policies internally; –– providing authoritative, timely, online access to information and documents to all staff worldwide; –– supporting change management through better dialogue from the top-down, bottom-up and horizontally; –– streamlining processes such as reporting to enable faster decision-making; –– assisting work-sharing among teams in different time zones around the world; –– aiding peacekeeping and humanitarian operational staff in their communication and information needs; –– promoting greater operational efficiency throughout the organization by connecting staff that need to collaborate and share knowledge and information. iSeek is now established as the corporate intranet for the UN worldwide, providing relevant and consistent messages to staff almost everywhere in the system. Eventually, the installation of portal technology and social networking applications will facilitate even more active participation and involvement of staff.



10 Information Outreach and Knowledge Sharing in the United Nations 

 137

Knowledge Management Approaches By taking advantage of both mature and leading-edge knowledge management technologies in the market, such as social networking applications (e.g., weblogs, wikis and other Web 2.0 tools) and visualization products, the knowledge management programme, part of the information and communications strategy for the UN, will facilitate organizational innovation and change, building on the knowledge sharing activities that have thus far served as catalysts for change. The programme will support the further use of search tools to help locate relevant information quickly and easily and facilitate the analysis and synthesis of information and knowledge. Encouraging and facilitating collaboration will help change the organizational culture which is largely bureaucratic and heavy on process (UN. General Assembly 2008). One of the key developments will be the transformation of the UN’s web site3 as a gateway for finding information on the substantive and support activities of the United Nations, effectively transforming the site into a knowledge-sharing platform that will serve stakeholders throughout the world. Other priority projects that will be part of this programme will include Secretariat-wide information management policies and standards, implementation of web-content management and document management systems, and collaborative networks. The aim is to provide a “one-stop shop” on the United Nations, facilitating access to relevant, easy-to-use information of specific issues – especially on the three main core areas: peace and security, development, and human rights. Knowledge management approaches focus on: –– retaining institutional knowledge; –– facilitating and enhancing knowledge-sharing, and collaboration; –– improving the organization, accessibility and usability of information; –– improving websites and web-content management; –– reinforcing analytical and decision-support capabilities; –– rethinking information management policies and processes.

Learning to Manage with Knowledge: Sharing Ideas In July 2008, senior officials and staff members from the fields of information technology, human resources and information management from around the UN 3 http://www.un.org. Accessed on 2 October 2015.

138 

 Linda Stoddart

System participated in a forum held in New York, called “Learning to Manage with Knowledge”. The main objectives of this event were to share practical lessons from within the UN system on existing knowledge management initiatives; to understand how knowledge management can help the UN and its specialized agencies to meet their mandates; and to identify concrete steps to implement successful knowledge management initiatives with the UN. The forum provided an opportunity to have a better understanding about which knowledge management approaches would and would not work within specific environments and, based on actual experiences, identify effective methods to share knowledge and to move specific initiatives forward. The forum was opened by the UN Deputy Secretary-General, and the Chief Information Technology Officer, highlighting the importance that knowledge management is now being given by the leadership in the UN. During the event, participants worked in small groups to define priority areas for development to support knowledge management initiatives in the United Nations system. Attendees shared stories about the success and failures of knowledge management projects in their respective organizations and brainstormed about projects that could be considered “quick wins” – those that could be developed within existing policies and resources. Through group work sessions, the following suggestions were made. –– Relating to knowledge collaboration: –– identify existing communities of practice and establish new ones; –– launch the use of wikis; –– Relating to knowledge creation: –– establish knowledge maps – directories of what people know and what they do; –– set up a directory of “alumni” – former UN officials who might serve as mentors or in other activities; –– create a directory of KM specialists; –– launch a guide to “making sense” tools and encourage informal gatherings of staff around themes or activities; –– use stories to promote messages and share knowledge; –– Relating to knowledge application: –– measure and evaluate knowledge transfer initiatives; –– identify technically feasible approaches with programme value; –– encourage more mentor relationships; –– expand the global contact directory to provide a skills inventory; –– provide support for the use of social networking applications such as Facebook;



10 Information Outreach and Knowledge Sharing in the United Nations 

 139

–– create searchable yellow pages; –– determine more effective ways of storing knowledge.

Institutional Memory With the departure of large numbers of personnel in the next few years, the United Nations is beginning to focus on how to capture the institutional knowledge that otherwise walks out the door every time an experienced employee retires or leaves the organization. Approximately 1,900 UN staff Secretariat will reach the mandatory retirement age during 2009–2012. This represents 15.8 per cent of the current workforce. Many of the retirements are at senior levels in the organization. Some plans are being explored to create an interactive directory of expertise of “alumni” who might be willing to serve as mentors or contribute their knowledge in other ways. Although specific methods to mitigate the repercussions of these departures have not yet been put into place, this trend along with the urgent need to improve access to knowledge and information inside and outside the organization now has many champions at senior levels.

Summary: 2008 To be effective, knowledge management in the UN will have to have visible benefits for the work life of all staff. A new knowledge management programme will have to focus on concrete, tangible outputs, particularly those that relate to improvements in processes many of which are currently cumbersome and slow. Effective communication, enhanced collaboration for the sharing of expertise and ideas will be at the core of this work.

Postscript 2015: New Priorities Written in 2008, the text above provides a snapshot of knowledge sharing initiatives that were being undertaken within the United Nations Secretariat at that time. As could be expected, priorities have changed over the last few years. Emphasis has largely been on using technological tools and systems to provide a framework for knowledge management initiatives. A significant amount of resources has been devoted to Umoja, an enterprise resource planning project

140 

 Linda Stoddart

which is intended to harmonize the way the United Nations works by providing a single data repository with reliable real-time information. It is viewed by the United Nations as a business intelligence system which is intended to streamline processes and improve access to key data. The project has required major financial resources and therefore some of the knowledge management initiatives, beyond those related to the Umoja project, have received less attention and resources. However, considerable progress has been made in facilitating internal communication with the continued development of the UN’s intranet, iSeek, and in implementing specific technologies which aim to encourage better collaboration and improve content management. This postscript provides an update on these developments within the UN Secretariat, describing the areas that have particularly evolved over the last few years.

The Evolving Development of iSeek, the UN’s Intranet The UN’s intranet, iSeek, is one of the most visible and successful knowledge sharing tools which were managed by the Dag Hammarskjöld Library when this paper was presented in 2008. The unit managing the intranet was transferred out of the Library in 2010 and is now called Knowledge Solutions and Design, which is part of the Outreach Division of the Department of Public Information. Changes have focused on increased participation by staff and regional offices, and mobility. The intranet is now accessible on mobile devices, an essential component for its success, to ensure that UN staff that travel frequently can be connected wherever they are. Access to internal information has improved over the years as a result of this tool which has served to link staff globally and encourage the participation of regional offices in telling their stories, and creating a sense of community across the world stage.

Facilitating Collaboration and Sharing A new organizational unit set up within the Office of Information and Communication Technology in the Department of Management, has focused on pervasive technological solutions in relation to knowledge management. Acknowledging that knowledge management encompasses far more than just technology, a conscious decision was nevertheless made to put aside that notion (fully aware that



10 Information Outreach and Knowledge Sharing in the United Nations 

 141

knowledge management would require fundamental changes to the UN and its personnel) and determining instead to direct what little resources were available to deliver some concrete results. It was felt that if this approach were to be successful, it would only take hold if credible outcomes could be achieved. The approach therefore is to work with departments, offices, and cross-functional working groups, empowering people to adopt a collaboration platform, called “Unite Connections”. It is largely used by communities within the existing organizational structure that are open to all personnel, as well as thematic communities that support cross-functional or specialized knowledge-sharing. In addition, staff are encouraged to create social, self-defined, or other non-work related communities that encourage work life balance and shared interests. The aim is to enable a modern, connected workforce to reach its goals through the creation of communities where experts in specific areas can interact and share information with one another. Unite Connections is a knowledge-sharing platform that enhances the collaborative process across geographic boundaries within the UN and also between other UN agencies and partner organizations. Knowledge hubs or communities of practice within Connections create a global space for staff to work together toward common goals. Blogs, wikis, profiles, and forums enable information sharing and collaboration.4

Enterprise content management The UN is still operating in information silos, highly focused on documents; however, technology is facilitating the evolution into a more sophisticated, integrated environment, promoting the use of shared digital media – from electronic documents to email, audio and video files, to web and social media content. At this point in time, the United Nations’ business processes remain paper-intensive primarily because of the decentralized structure of the organization and its knowledge. Operating in an ever changing and increasingly complex global setting makes the UN’s need for readily available, authoritative and consistently accurate/reliable information essential. Implementing an enterprise content management (ECM) system, called “Unite Docs”, was therefore considered a priority for the UN to be able to fulfill its mandate of providing easily accessible information. Unite Docs provides a web interface featuring content management 4 https://unite.un.org/connections/communities/community/unite101. Accessed on 2 October 2015.

142 

 Linda Stoddart

functionalities and integrates with other enterprise systems and repositories. It provides a centralized repository of all official documents and records, and improves information sharing and access to institutional knowledge. It serves as the foundational component for implementing the UN’s ECM strategy with the ability to enforce good recordkeeping and information security standards, practices and policies.5

Library Role in Knowledge Strategy What does this mean for the UN’s Dag Hammarskjöld Library, since knowledge management initiatives are now being led and championed by other groups within the United Nations Secretariat? The Library continues to provide essential library services and access to United Nations documentation and its vast collections. However, it does not play a key role in developing knowledge strategy for the organization, beyond an emphasis on creating digital repositories in the area of peace and security, and providing training on a number of technology tools and applications. A new set of competencies for library personnel is needed to be in a position to effectively embrace knowledge strategy initiatives that require adapting to innovative approaches. Adapting to new mandates and requirements and reimagining new services typically provided by the Library, continues to be a challenge. With the current new library leadership and changes in expectations from users, it is hoped that this challenge will be met with effective initiatives over the next couple of years. The Library needs to embrace a new approach which is focused on connections rather than collections in order to ensure its continued relevance. Actively contributing to the UN’s knowledge strategy will be an essential component to being viewed by UN management and stakeholders, as relevant to the work of the organization. As a 2005 UN document on strategic directions for UN libraries stated: “Technology and organizational change have provided opportunities for United Nations libraries to move from independent repositories, to take up a new role as a network of knowledge-sharing communities: from collections to connections, moving from building and maintaining book and periodical collections to facilitating a knowledge-enabled environment and the exchange of information among stakeholders.” (UN. General Assembly. Committee on Information 2005, [1]). Ten years later this approach continues to be the crucial challenge. 5 https:// unite.un.org. Accessed on 2 October 2015.



10 Information Outreach and Knowledge Sharing in the United Nations 

 143

References UN. Economic and Social Council. Committee for Programme and Coordination. 2006. “Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on the Thematic Evaluation of Knowledge Management Networks in the Pursuit of the Goals of the Millennium Declaration”, E/AC.51/2006/2, 2006. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=E/ AC.51/2006/2. Accessed on 2 October 2015. UN. General Assembly. 2008. “Investing in Information and Communications Technology: Information and Communications Strategy for the United Nations Secretariat. Report of the Secretary-General”, A/62/793, 9 April 2008. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc. asp?symbol=A/62/793. Accessed on 2 October 2015. UN. General Assembly. Committee on Information. 2005. “Modernization and Integrated Management of United Nations Libraries: New Strategic Directions.” Report to the Secretary-General. A/AC.198/2005/4. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc. asp?symbol=A/AC.198/2005/4. Accessed on 2 October 2015.

Giuseppe Vitiello

11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged 11 Mission 11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission

Abstract: This article describes the case of a special library working in collaboration with communication and information services and using knowledge management principles to adapt its role within an evolving information landscape. The library at the NATO Defense College has had difficulty convincing its users to favour its complex and nuanced digital catalogue over the simplicity and immediacy of Google. As rosters for NDC Courses change frequently, it has been a challenge to keep its user base informed while the user base is constantly overturning. The library recognized its own particular role and challenges within a specialized institution, then examined the distinct needs of its two most prominent communities of practice: course members and faculty advisers. We then addressed the research and managerial challenges involved with servicing these communities.1 This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Helsinki, Finland, in August 2012.

Introduction Knowledge Management (KM) has been implemented in a variety of organizations, both public and private. In this article, we shall mainly focus on the restructuring of the NATO Defense College (NDC) Library as a result of the application of knowledge-based services. In order to set this reorganization in the appropriate context, we shall first describe the workflows and the actors involved in the activities of the NDC, together with the overall course format and the communities of practice for whom didactic and research material is provided.

The NDC: Educational Programme and Structure The NDC is a military-academic structure that offers a variety of subject-specific programmes.2 The NDC’s flagship course, and largest academic undertaking in 1 The author wishes to thank Brittany Trafford and Ari Weitzman, who interned at the NATO Defense College respectively from February to July 2011 and from August 2011 to January 2012, as well as Peter Mead, Senior Interpreter at NDC. 2 http://www.ndc.nato.int/. Accessed on 10 September 2015.



11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission 

 145

terms of time to completion and scope, is the Senior Course. This five-month programme is run twice a year, with each edition usually catering for about 70 participants. It prepares officers with a rank of Colonel or higher, together with equivalent-ranking civilian officials, diplomats and civil servants, for senior appointments in NATO or NATO-related duties. Course members are divided into Committees, each with about 10 participants, within which they prepare for lectures, discuss course material and work on their Study Projects. The course is organized in six distinct study periods, lasting a total of 23 weeks, during which lectures are given by visiting experts on specific topics. In their short stay at the College, course members carry out independent research to identify, locate and consult readings useful for individual and Committee-based work. Course members’ working practices are thus strictly regulated in a tight agenda of lecture attendance, individual work, presentations, and collective work on Study Projects. The NDC is a specialized, well informed and highly professional environment, with clear constraints related to the tightly structured course schedule. In such a setting, it is the task of the Library not only to provide just-in-time, justin-place information, but also to be constantly updated on and, when possible, anticipate the information needs of its users. In addition, the Library’s mission has expanded in recent years ‒ both as an institution with its in-house needs to address, and as a provider with challenges of managing knowledge flows to users (including the need to incentivize knowledge-sharing among persons with different educational backgrounds and cultural perceptions). Overall, KM activities have triggered an extensive reshuffle of tasks and functions within the Library, and an essential rethink regarding its role within the College.

Communities of Practice at the NDC Communities of practice are “groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and their expertise by interacting on an ongoing basis” (Wenger, McDermott and Snyder 2002, 4). Two central, and interrelated, communities of practice at the NDC will now be described in detail: faculty advisers and course members. Faculty advisers are sent by national governments to work for a period of approximately three years before leaving the College for further appointments. Unlike other colleges and academic institutions, the NDC does not have tenured teaching staff: the faculty advisers are facilitators in charge of ensuring that the right inputs are provided for the smooth, effective running of the Senior Course

146 

 Giuseppe Vitiello

and of the other courses at the College. They are responsible for organizing themebased study periods, inviting lecturers, facilitating discussion within Committees, as well as for running occasional inter-Committee debates and exchanges. Rotation may create differences among faculty advisers in the rate at which they organize course topics and update resources, or their approach to these tasks. It is very rare that an incoming faculty adviser would slavishly follow in the footsteps of his/her predecessor. To become fully autonomous and proficient in organizing didactic materials and providing the appropriate educational setting, faculty advisers must absorb in a very short period of time a multitude of articles, books, working papers and other sources dealing with the topics for which they are responsible. Attendance at the Senior Course affords course members the opportunity to develop critical thinking skills at the strategic level, and develop their knowledge and understanding of current and prospective political-military issues facing the Alliance. This is achieved through direct participation in a broad spectrum of activities, ranging from Committee and inter-Committee debates to field studies, simulation exercises and a variety of other course components. The Senior Course culminates with a study project, which should be pertinent to NATO’s mission and activities, covering a range of subjects such as international or regional security, missile defence, strategy and global partnerships. For this project, course members work in collaboration within their respective Committees, each of which produces a consensus-based paper and presentation. When embarking upon the implementation of KM-based activities, the Library identified these two communities ‒ faculty advisers and course members ‒ as both targets and providers of services. In order to serve their needs, a profound overhaul of its structure was deemed necessary.

Organizational changes The new organizational chart of the NDC Library – now known as the Library and Knowledge Centre (LKC) ‒ represents the end structure of our knowledge-management process and can be easily transferred to other libraries (Figure 11.2). In this article I expand on how KM has impacted the Library’s internal structure, staff profiles and scope of activity, and how its organizational set-up was changed accordingly. Created in 1951 with the foundation of the College, the NDC Library has progressively absorbed electronic information to become a hybrid infrastructure in terms of content dealt with. Yet the injection of electronic resources into the



11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission 

 147

Library was not accompanied by any change in its organization, still dominated by a logic of exclusion – within the NDC, the Library has the monopoly of documentation – and self-containment – make or buy, with knowledge-sharing as a mere option. This mindset led to a constant decline in the number of users and transactions. As has been the case in many specialist libraries, a growing number of scholars came to routinely bypass library catalogues in favour of other discovery tools. At the end of the first decade of the new millennium, the operating structure at the NDC was still the classic three-fold service model, in which communication, command and control work around three poles: acquisitions, processing and dissemination. The Library was a repository designed to be generally of interest to all library users, either making information available to them via their own discernment or selecting resources for them via Faculty Advisers or researchers acting as intermediaries. This model can be readily illustrated in a simple flowchart based on a three-stage sequence: selection, storage, and usage (Figure 11.1). This model is appealing in its simplicity, but fails to account for several important aspects of the Library’s operation. These are the process of collection-building, the explicit creation of study-period reading materials, provision of research tools, task specialization by Library staff and, most importantly, provision of lost implicit knowledge in an institution which by its very nature has a high turnover rate among staff and ‒ above all ‒ users (twice yearly).

Figure 11.1: Workflow at the NDC Library (until 2012).

148 

 Giuseppe Vitiello

By complete restructuring and by redesigning our services, we made clear to the NDC top management that, with the advent of web-based resources, the NDC Library was facing the following dilemma: –– either it would drop its documentary function to manage commercial resources already selected by search engines and databases; or, –– it would reinforce its documentary function, by acting as a “first dyke” against the information “flood”. To this end, information reservoirs would have to be created for, accessed by, and shared among faculty advisers, course members and researchers. The Library’s restructuring was formalized through interdepartmental rebalancing of roles and through its official reconstitution as the LKC. The resulting organizational structure reflects this conversion: the LKC acts as a manager and “first” selector of information created by external producers, or aggregated in databases, as well as an engine for sharing and circulating knowledge created within the NDC. This has meant a reorganization of workflows in the LKC, as shown in the flowchart in Figure 11.2.

Figure 11.2: Workflow at the NDC Library and Knowledge Centre.



11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission 

 149

Project Implementation With the new organizational structure, areas of deficiency in the old model were addressed by foregrounding KM principles. Such principles were categorized into four different overarching patterns: a) tacit and explicit knowledge within the knowledge cycle, b) knowledge flow structures, c) knowledge codification as information management, and d) the design and the marketing of formated knowledge objects. To conceptualize the necessary adjustments, the LKC has made use of several tenets of KM theory according to the classic SECI model. This posits knowledge conversion as operational within four possible modes: Socialization (from tacit knowledge to tacit knowledge), Externalization (from tacit to explicit knowledge), Combination (from explicit to explicit knowledge) and Internalization (from explicit to tacit knowledge) (Nonaka [1991] 2008, 16­–19; Nonaka, Toyama and Konno [2000] 2005). On the basis of careful investigation and needs analysis, it emerged clearly that socialization was the most usual channel of communication among faculty advisers, both internally and externally. In relation to the services provided to faculty advisers, the LKC set as its main goal the conversion into externalized modes of some of the socialized practices. It has already been mentioned that faculty advisers work at the College for a limited amount of time. Though not necessarily experts in the fields they are assigned to cover, they must be timely in acquiring detailed knowledge of these topics in the very limited preparation time they have before their respective study periods. Normally, they gain an expert understanding of the specific discipline or NATO-related issue concerned by studying a considerable amount of specialized literature. Building up this knowhow requires a “learning time”: this largely rests with the skills and talents of individual faculty advisers, who store such knowledge in a tacit way and usually do not (or have no time to) formalize it in such a way that it can be easily and intuitively transferred as an intellectual legacy to their successors. To address this issue, the LKC endeavoured to reinforce the faculty advisers’ community of practice by reconstructing their individual know-how and identifying the know-what, know-how, and know-when linked to each of the study periods. This was done through systematic monitoring of previous selected readings, up to a period of three-five years depending on the topic. A study-period-related “core literature” was established, with separate lists of books, articles and working papers. Resources taken from the NDC digital library were included as soon as faculty advisers started selecting them. These operations were made transparent through a portal in which each faculty adviser would establish his or her own library, ready to be passed on to their successor.

150 

 Giuseppe Vitiello

A similar problem was addressed among course members, with specific reference to their interaction with the LKC. It was for the final activity in the curriculum – the study project – that the need was felt for enhancement of work flows through KM practices. As a rule, course members work in collaboration and produce outputs based on the consensus gained within the individual Committees. Actually, each course member may have personal experience of the thematic or regional issues that are part of the syllabus. For example, they may have been sent on a mission or into theatres of war and have first-hand personal knowledge that can (and should) be transferred to their colleagues. In other words, each individual concerned should be considered, literally, as their own distinct body of knowledge. Investigation of course members’ practices showed that, while transfer of information was formalized at the Committee level, interaction between Committees was spontaneous and sporadic. An inter-Committee, and not intra-Committee, gap had to be filled by externalizing as much knowledge as possible from the socialized practices of course members. To make such operations more effective, working methods were reinforced through a variety of techniques taken from the publishing, KM and library areas, as the need arose. The communication of tailored information in appropriate formats and in due time now takes the form of “collections”, where articles, working papers and other useful documents similar in format and focused on the same subjects are aggregated in an attractive way for specific categories of users. Not all channels of dissemination are yet in place, but the criteria defining such “collections” – article length, timeliness in release, distinctive focus and thematic approach (analytical vs synthetic) – “brand” them in such a way that the practices of the communities involved are made explicit and easily recognizable. A cursory glance at the new organizational structure also shows how extensively workflows and processes internal to the LKC have been affected. In the past, collection development was kept separate from, and only indirectly linked to, reference services. Both are now unified in a resource discovery process involving faculty advisers and course members, who are involved in the regrouping by format and subject of the content offered by the LKC. The organizational chart also shows where KM-based operations end and information management comes in. Resource discovery and KM-based operations are preliminary to information management. Only after having gone through the assessment of faculty advisers is content formatted into a bibliographic record and stored in the library catalogue for future research and didactic purposes.



11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission 

 151

Technologies at Work? Many success stories are told about KM, but harshly dismissive comments also thrive. One of these describes KM as pouring the old tenets of organizational theory and scientific management into a new SharePoint bottle. As long as KM has an organizational, and not a technological foundation, this statement does not hold true. In his seminal book on innovation, Rogers identifies two broad activities for the innovation process in organizations. First is the initiation phase, consisting in setting the agenda for innovation and matching it with the organization’s own agenda. Second is the implementation phase, consisting in a) redefining/restructuring the organizational structures, b) clarifying the implementation process to all interested parties and c) routinizing it (Rogers, 2003, 120). The LKC was not familiar with Rogers’s views, but followed the pattern he describes almost literally. The agenda for innovation in LKC practices was set up to match the NDC’s technological agenda, even though the intranet platform that was used did not allow for advanced KM applications. Awareness-raising activities consolidated the implementation, so that the system could then be routinized among the two communities of practice. The time thus seemed ripe to migrate data and operation to a SharePoint platform. In 2012, a prototype model was designed as a possible KM tool; in addition, web pages were created to respond to the requirements of users, and to further their ability to share and manage information. The demo course member’s portal was separated into two segments, based on knowledge objects: Study Projects developed by the course members, and Study Periods, assigned to faculty advisers. These distinct groups of pages reflect the NDC curriculum and pedagogy. Each portal (Study Projects and Study Periods) included tools for monitoring progress and working collaboratively. To maintain consistency, the portals both flowed from a monitoring display page to working pages, where Committee members were encouraged to collaborate. The demo product is represented in Figure 11.3.

152 

 Giuseppe Vitiello

Figure 11.3: SharePoint prototype (not implemented).

Unfortunately, this development never took off. The organizational agenda shifted, or better added a distance-learning component as a requirement for any internal technological development. The LKC was thus trapped in step 2 of the initiation phase described by Rogers, with an internal agenda mismatching that of the organization. Plans had to be revised accordingly. The old system was, however, still in use and KM-based services were regularly supplied. In this way, the LKC did not lose its grasp of the two communities’ requirements and resources. After a few months, a new attempt to use technologies with a view to improving the Knowledge offer was set in place. This time, SharePoint was used as the framework and the whole application was developed through a web-based tool: LibGuides.3 Again, the pivotal knowledge objects in the technological architecture were Study Projects and Study Periods. The resulting web pages were designed as described below. First, the web pages built up around the Study Periods activity looked as shown in Figure 11.4.

3 http://www.libguides.com. Accessed on 2 October 2015.



11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission 

 153

Figure 11.4: Current application for Study Periods (SharePoint and LibGuides combined).

Second, the Study Project web pages were as shown in Figure 11.5.

Figure 11.5: Current application for Study Projects (SharePoint and LibGuides combined).

The combined SharePoint-LibGuides technology, however, does not mark the end of the story. At the time of writing, the College is discussing whether to adopt an enhanced version of SharePoint or to go towards a Moodle application. Which-

154 

 Giuseppe Vitiello

ever of these applications is installed, the result will not be a complete success story without a revision of existing work flows and organizational patterns.

Conclusion The professional literature is unanimous in promoting the idea that KM initiatives should be applied organization-wide, with an enlightened management and a fully committed staff so involved in KM progress that they have no hesitation in taking a large part of their time to discuss the best ways of adjusting/enhancing workflows and communication among people (Koenig and Srikantaiah 2007, 29–120). The underlying philosophy is that of an organization able to associate, evaluate and eventually decide ‒ a self-learning and “truly innovative organization [with] an ethos and holographic spirit where the innovative attitudes and abilities designed of the whole are enfolded in the parts” (Morgan 1986, 105). Reality tells a different story. Innovation may spread from distinctive cells within an organization and expand at a different pace, with constant gaps to be filled. As Morgan says: “unless an organization is able to change itself to accommodate the idea it produces and values, it is likely eventually to block its own innovation” (Morgan 1986, 105). In spite of occasional mismatching with the organizational agenda, there is a proven advantage in undertaking KM operations. The most tangible result is a sense of belonging, a feeling that the organizational cell designated to implement knowledge creation and sharing is moving closer than other units also involved in knowledge production to the imperatives linked with the organization’s ultimate goal. It is the feeling that meaning is constructed as a collective undertaking, (Wei Choo 2006) and that the somewhat abstract mission statement routinely presented by an organization is embodied into cohesive operations and sharedby-all practical procedures.

References Koenig, Michael E.D., and T. Kanti Srikantaiah, eds. 2007. Knowledge Management: Lessons Learned. What Works and What Doesn’t. Medford (NJ): Information Today. Morgan, Gareth. 1986. Images of Organisation. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Nonaka, Ikujirō. (1991) 2008. The Knowledge Creating Company. Boston (MA): Harvard Business Press. Originally published in Harvard Business Review. Nonaka, Ikujirō and Hirotaka Takeuchi. 1995. The Knowledge-creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.



11 Restructuring the Library for an Enlarged Mission 

 155

Nonaka, Ikujirō, Ryoko Toyama and Noboru Konno. (2000) 2005. “SECI, Ba and Leadership: A Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation.” In Managing Knowledge. An Essential Reader, edited by Little, Stephen and Tim Ray, 23–49. The Open University; Sage. Originally published in Long Range Planning. Rogers, Everett M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press. Wenger, Etienne, Richard McDermott and William M. Snyder. 2002. Cultivating Communities of Practice. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Press. Wei Choo Chun. 2006. The Knowing Organization: How Organizations Use Information to Construct Meaning, Create Knowledge and Make Decisions. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia

12 Selection, Implementation, and 12 Behavioural Considerations for 12 Knowledge-management-tool Adoption

12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations

Abstract: Successful deployment of knowledge-management tools involves understanding how stakeholders, including current employees and administration, create, gather, and use knowledge, as well as the ways in which organizational culture and change impact adoption. Librarians and information professionals can play a key role in the selection, launch, and integration of knowledge management solutions across a wide variety of organizations. This paper presents a case study of a financial services company’s decision-making process. The organization is a US investment performance management solutions software company serving a market footprint of 300 financial institutions and employing 100 personnel at its headquarters in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas. Toward this end, the current paper reports on three salient aspects of this decision: (1) the similarities and differences between enterprise content management systems and learning management systems, including their benefits and challenges; (2) what principles of knowledge management, change management, and organizational culture are most applicable to this situation; and (3) collection and analysis of employee data on information-seeking behaviours as a baseline for change management feedback. Drawing upon Nonaka’s (1994) theory of organizational knowledge creation, we examine the multidimensional adaptation process for introducing knowledge management practices and structure throughout the organization. We suggest that professionals skilled in the library and information sciences have the potential to be ideal consultants, contributors, and leaders in managing change at any organization. This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Lyon, France, in August 2014.

Introduction This paper presents a case-study analysis of a financial services company’s decision-making process for the implementation of knowledge-management (KM) tools. The company’s name is intentionally removed by request to maintain privacy and confidentiality. The primary interests of this study are regarding decisions prior to KM implementation and applications of change management principles for KM tool adoption. Definitions of KM are abundant in the literature (e.g.,



12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations 

 157

Hasanali 2004; Koenig and Srikantaiah 2004; McElroy 2003; Nonaka, Toyama, and Hirata 2008; Short and Azzarello 2004; Spender 2013; Von Krogh, Ichijo, and Nonaka 2000) and will not be repeated here. Knowledge management research contains three stages of maturation: (1) best practices, or capturing lessons learned after significant projects are launched; (2) knowledge sharing and collaboration among peers in areas of focus called “communities of practice”; and (3) enterprise-content management (Koenig and Srikantaiah 2004, 3–5). Stages two and three are most applicable to our case study. For stage two, Ikujiro Nonaka’s theory of organizational knowledge creation is a useful framework for understanding practical, human-based needs of knowledge creation and culture. For stage three, a compare–contrast approach to enterprise content management systems (ECMS) and learning management systems (LMS) is useful. Survey assessment methods of and results from current employee information behaviours are provided for discussion. Although this study centres on a sole financial services company in Texas, and Nonaka’s theory was developed from his research with massive production corporations in Japan, we suggest that the decision-making processes discussed in this paper may be used when considering the implementation of KM solutions in libraries in other information settings worldwide.

Knowledge Creation, Sharing, and Communication: Nonaka’s Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation In 1991, Nonaka’s seminal piece for the Harvard Business Review journal stated that while “hard to formalize and difficult to communicate to others”, organization knowledge relies heavily on “subjective insights, intuition, and hunches of individual employees” (i.e., tacit knowledge) (97–98). Several years later, Nonaka (1994, 14, 20) proposed a theory of knowledge creation, asserting that organizational knowledge occurs out of continuous dynamism between the tacit (subjective) and the explicit (objective) (see also: Nonaka, Toyama, and Hirata 2008, 18, 26; Xu 2013, 67). In 1995, Nonaka extended his theory into a socialization–externalization–combination–internalization (SECI) model (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995; Nonaka and Toyama 2003, 2005; Nonaka, Toyama, and Hirata 2008). Essentially, the SECI model is Nonaka’s depiction of complex processes of organizations’ tacit and explicit knowledge.

158 

 Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia

As the knowledge society emerged, Nonaka gained a new perspective of knowledge creation and interpretation by any and all members of an organization. The new perspective extended the focus on connections between tacit and explicit knowledge. As Nonaka and Toyama (2005, 422) wrote, “creating knowledge organizationally…means that subjective tacit knowledge held by an individual is externalized into objective explicit knowledge to be shared and synthesized”. Nonaka saw typical notions of KM as limited to information processing and instead preferred a dynamic model where knowledge could be viewed as involving communicative, recursive relationships between organizational actors and environments. In this way, knowledge creation is a synthesis of cognitive, behavioural, and socially interactive processes. Grant (2013, 82) noted that “social interaction is at the core of Nonaka’s conception of the processes through which organizations promote organizational knowledge creation”. The human implication of Nonaka’s theory is apparent – the creation of new organizational knowledge thrives in social interactions and a culture of sharing. In terms of organizational KM, social interaction and sharing culture acts as conduits through which knowledge is facilitated, created, processed, shared, disseminated, and archived. Naturally, the question arises: How best can social interaction and sharing culture be enabled? Extant KM literature yields clues. For example, Von Krogh, Ichijo, and Nonaka (2000, 7) wrote that “enabling context is a shared space that fosters emerging relationships” [italics ours]. According to Nonaka and Toyama (2003, 3), “dialectic knowledge creation occurs as the actors embrace their environment and synthesize tacit and explicit knowledge in social space” [italics ours]. Hubert and O’Dell (2004, 72) noted the importance of “creat[ing] a space and system [italics ours] for people to share what they know and create new knowledge”. Shared space for collaborative new knowledge development cannot be constrained in practice to face-to-face encounters between organizational agents. Indeed, much of the creation, collaboration, and sharing as envisioned by Nonaka in 1994 is now virtual. David Teece, Nonaka’s colleague and scholar in his own right, wrote (2013, 20) that new combinations of knowledge are more likely to emerge as the availability of information to employees increases and “this is where database-driven approaches to knowledge management fit into Nonaka’s framework”. Following Teece’s logic, our primary assertion is that centralized space provided by enterprise content management systems (ECMS) or learning management systems (LMS) can provide the integrated platform for social interaction and collaboration in the organization, therefore motivating and supporting the knowledge creation and culture envisioned by Nonaka. Such a proposition from development through completion can bring tremendous changes to organizational norms. Damodaran and Olphert (2000) outlined



12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations 

 159

both the potential positive and negative outcomes of the change in organizational culture when a new KM tool is implemented and concluded that KM tool adoption alone without preparation for culture change is organizationally disastrous. As echoed by Hubert and O’Dell (2004, 79), “forgetting change management principles [is a] major roadblock”.

Content Management: Comparing and Contrasting Knowledge-management Tools Knowledge management (KM) has been established in enterprise and academe since the 1990s and, rather than dissipating like most management fads, has solidified in concept and practice (Koenig and Srikantaiah 2004). KM maturation occurs at three distinct levels: (1) lessons learned or best practices where emphasis is on creating content and collecting corporate stories of embedded knowledge from an employee, team, or department’s collective experience; (2) communities of practice where talent or expertise from across the organization is brought together around common themes and initiatives; and (3) KM tools and taxonomies. As defined by Arnold (2004, 165), KM tools are “a class of software systems that includes the functions that generate, retain, share, and exchange knowledge in an organization”. A popular KM tool option is an enterprise content management system (ECMS). ECMS is “software that shares a common architectural foundation [and] industry standards” (Arnold 2004, 165), giving back-end structure for content organization and access. Beyond a repository for disparate artefacts, ECMS offers hierarchical depiction of categories, subcategories, overarching themes, and descriptors of (meta)data that lends itself to tagging and labelling. Robust ECMS includes document management capabilities, cohesive graphical user interface consistent with the corporate brand, and interoperability with programs such as client relationship management systems (CRMS), enterprise document management systems (EDMS), and custom applications. A learning management system (LMS) provides targeted learning audiences (e.g., new employees, organization staff, team members, etc.) with guided access to content tailored to their specific needs. The LMS can have extended application to audiences outside of the organization such as clients or vendors. A trend among companies with an established LMS is to operate it as a virtual corporate university (VCU) in an effort to encourage learning. Of note is that training involves pushing uniform content to users in a top-down fashion, where delivery is formal and consistent with the objectives of management. Learning, however, is uniquely user-specific, happens sporadically, and occurs at a personal and

160 

 Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia

informal level. Learning is difficult to measure and intangible, but if users overall report that the system allows them to find and use the content they need effectively, that is a good indicator of success. The key difference between ECMS and LMS is that the former serve up content on demand either by a navigation path or search strategy, whereas the latter deliver training content in a sequence and timing in accordance with an overall training plan. It is possible to implement the two in tandem, and the LMS would benefit from the content linking that is already structured and labelled within the ECMS. The LMS could even be an extension of a robust ECMS and the learning modules would not reside elsewhere. Table 12.1 provides a basic comparison between ECMS and LMS. Table 12.1: A basic comparison of electronic content management systems (ECMS) and learning management systems (LMS). ECMS

LMS

Back-end, infrastructure component to how content is stored and archived

Front-facing content delivery mechanism for guided training experiences

Document management capabilities Workflow capabilities for tracking activities related to content review, approval, and creation

Integrated or stand-alone deployment Possible future revenue stream with client-oriented training packages

Can include an LMS for more broadly encompassing solution; facilitates knowledge portals

Can link to content in a separate ECMS; commingle with corporate intranet presence; provides an interface and navigation path pre-set for users

Hasanali (2004, 64) suggested a unified KM tool is essential by noting that “having a hodge-podge of technologies that may or may not communicate with one another can hamper the ability of an organization to provide its employees with a solid infrastructure for sharing”. Here, Hasanali described perfectly the unfavourable situation with which we are faced; the financial services company of the current study uses at least four independent technologies (SuperOfficeTM, Public Folder Share, a corporate wiki, and e-mail archives) causing major clogs in their daily workflows. At this juncture, the company faces four possible outcomes to its KM strategy. The first option is to do nothing or belabour the decision. An all-too-common story, taking no action or delaying action is easy because decisions require timeand effort-consuming input and deliberation of multiple groups of stakeholders. Lack of available funds for an enterprise-wide solution, lack of motivation toward



12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations 

 161

change, or inadequate staffing levels for a system deployment are all potential impediments. While we hope that the firm decides to pursue an option that brings KM solutions to its employees, to do nothing is recognized as a valid choice. The second option would be to deploy an ECMS and invest the time, finances, and labour in ensuring the company’s content migrates properly into the new KM tool, including consistent and correct classification with findable and usable enterprise search capabilities. A third option would be to bypass the ECMS and move directly into an LMS. Finally, the company could choose to deploy an integrated ECMS with an LMS module included in it, or deploy two best-of-breed systems either simultaneously or staged to enact a holistic knowledge-management solution. At the crux of this change will be the undercurrent of motivations, behaviours, and experiences of the company. Dissatisfaction or contentment with current methods of finding and sharing information, integration of job performance tasks with the KM tool, perceived time and cost savings, and elimination of redundant or obsolete knowledge transfer will all indicate the likelihood of an effective diffusion of innovation. In order to capture a representation of this current state at the financial company in question and gain an understanding of present motivations, behaviours, and experiences held by employees, we chose to create and distribute a brief survey.

Methods Sample All US employees (N = 100) of a financial services company centred in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas were emailed a survey. The first email was sent on 29 April 2014 and follow-up reminders were sent once a week for two weeks thereafter. A total of 67 survey responses were recorded from 21 April through 13 May 2014. Five of these responses were coded as incomplete, yielding a final usable sample size of N = 62 (valid response rate = 62%). An incomplete response was defined as a missing response on at least one of the ordinal survey questions.

Survey An 11-question survey was designed by the authors of the current study to elicit responses from organization employees concerning their workplace information

162 

 Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia

behaviours. The survey was designed using QualtricsSM1 software. The first ten close-ended questions were written as quantitative ordinal-scale questions. Possible closed-ended answers were 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree. Questions 1 and 7 through 10 dealt with use of current workplace information tools, while questions 2 through 6 dealt with tribal knowledge, or resident expert information that is known in the minds of members of the organization but not extensively documented. Question 11 was open-ended to allow for qualitative respondent feedback. The survey was accessible to respondents only by email invitation with the link included. When clicked, the link opened the survey directly in the Qualtrics platform. The survey was anonymous in that no names of persons or IP addresses of computers were asked for or recorded and no log-in credentials were necessary.

Analysis Survey data were exported from Qualtrics into SPSS® version 20. Responses to all ten ordinal questions (N = 62) were analysed using basic frequencies and Spearman’s rho correlation. Spearman’s rho (ρ) was an appropriate measure of correlation to use because the data were recorded at the ordinal level of measurement. All valid responses to question 11 (n = 25) were reviewed “by hand” by the current authors for recurring themes.

Results –– Ordinal survey question 1 stated: “When I need to figure something out at work, I first turn to Google or another search engine.” Over half (53%) agreed or strongly agreed that they use Google or other search engine to figure out something at work. –– Ordinal survey question 2 stated: “Helping fellow co-workers find information comes naturally to me.” An overwhelming 92% agreed or strongly agreed that they are naturally helpful when co-workers ask them for help. No one disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. –– Ordinal survey question 3 stated: “When I need to find work-related information, I ask my teammates for help.” A large majority (82%) agreed or strongly agreed that they ask teammates for assistance when looking for work-related information. 1 http://www.qualtrics.com/. Accessed on 5 October 2015.



12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations 

 163

–– Ordinal survey question 4 stated: “If I need information about another department at work, I know who I could ask.” A large majority (80%) agreed or strongly agreed that they know who to ask when needing work-related information about another department. –– Ordinal survey question 5 stated: “I feel comfortable asking my supervisor for work-related advice, directions, or other questions.” Close to 90% agreed or strongly agreed they feel comfortable asking their supervisor about work-related information. –– Ordinal survey question 6 stated: “My co-workers frequently ask me questions.” A large majority (77%) agreed or strongly agreed that they are frequently asked questions. A small but notable 20% were neutral. –– Ordinal survey question 7 stated: “I archive work or project documents in SuperOffice and refresh them as needed.” A total of 40% agreed or strongly agreed with this statement, but just a few less (37%) disagreed or strongly disagreed. Nearly 25% were neutral. –– Ordinal survey question 8 stated: “I find helpful information in the corporate wiki.” The majority (63%) agreed or strongly agreed that the corporate wiki contained helpful information. Thirty-seven percent disagreed or were neutral. –– Ordinal survey question 9 stated: “If I need to share a document with multiple co-workers, I upload it to the Public Folder Share.” Exactly half (50%) agreed or strongly agreed that they upload documents to Public Folder Share, though a notable 30% disagreed or strongly disagreed. Twenty-one percent were neutral. –– Ordinal survey question 10 stated: “I frequently search my old emails to recollect past conversations with co-workers and clients.” Nearly all (95%) agreed or strongly agreed that they frequently search through old emails to recollect past conversations. –– Open-ended survey question 11 stated: “Please provide any feedback or suggestions about how [the company] may improve employee storage, delivery, and access to company and/or client information.” A review of responses revealed several patterns. Forty percent of responses centred solely on the use of SuperOffice, more than any other topic. Thirty-six percent gave an overall snapshot about how knowledge sharing was or was not working in the company. Four respondents specifically took issue with the corporate wiki, while two respondents discussed the Public Folder Share for storing files. Spearman’s rho correlation analysis of the ten ordinal survey questions showed eight statistically significant correlations (see Table 12.2). Spearman’s rho cor-

164 

 Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia

relations indicated statistical relationships that would not be expected by chance alone existed between the corresponding survey questions. Table 12.2: Eight statistical relationships between survey questions using Spearman’s rho correlation analysis (N=62) No. Correlated survey questions

ρ

1.

Sig.

“When I need to figure something out at work, I first turn to Google or another search engine” + “When I need to find work-related information, I ask my teammates for help”

*

-0.302

0.017

2.

“When I need to figure something out at work, I first turn to Google or another search engine” + “My co-workers frequently ask me questions”

0.281*

0.027

3.

“When I need to figure something out at work, I first turn to Google or another search engine” + “I frequently search my old emails to recollect past conversations with co-workers and clients”

0.326**

0.010

4.

“Helping fellow co-workers find information comes naturally to me” + “If I need to share a document with multiple co-workers, I upload it to the Public Folder Share”

0.285*

0.025

5.

“When I need to find work-related information, I ask my teammates for help” + “I feel comfortable asking my supervisor for work-related advice, directions, or other questions”

0.353**

0.005

6.

“I feel comfortable asking my supervisor for work-related advice, directions, or other questions” + “If I need to share a document with multiple co-workers, I upload it to the Public Folder Share”

0.330**

0.009

7.

“My co-workers frequently ask me questions” + “I frequently search my old emails to recollect past conversations with co-workers and clients”

0.383**

0.002

8.

“I archive work or project documents in SuperOffice and refresh them as needed” + “I find helpful information in the corporate wiki”

0.363**

0.004

*

p ≤ 0.05; ** p ≤ 0.01; df = 60

Discussion Frequency analysis suggests that the organization has no issue with individual instances of knowledge transaction. Generally, the employee base seems comfortable approaching one another within and outside of their respective teams, peers, and leadership. Important to note is that conversation between small groups of



12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations 

 165

employees is not exactly facilitating knowledge sharing across the enterprise. To satisfy the conditions discussed in our review of Nonaka’s model, sharing must occur in a social, public setting accessible by all employees and accompanied by some narrative or discussion for sense-making and contextual understanding. Survey results indicate that the use of multiple, decentralized tools offer a sporadic, fractured view of knowledge resident within the company. Two key correlations from Table 12.2, question 2 (ρ(60) = 0.281, p ≤ 0.05) and question 4 (ρ(60) = 0.285, p ≤ 0.05), signal potential content contributors in the new solution. Both the understanding and detection of resident experts and contributors underscore the need for the KM team to locate industry experts who are willing to share their knowledge. The themes found in responses from question 11 include a desire for increased collaboration and better processes to access and store data. There is also commentary about missing product information or industry knowledge. Some respondents mention specific websites or resources external to the organization from which they would like to find information. Based on the survey findings, we can draw several inferences about the company’s overall KM strategy, its need for a new KM tool, and its current organizational culture. The company’s goal would seem aligned with alleviating frustrations of employees in the areas of addressing content gaps, eliminating unfavourable content from the knowledge landscape, and providing structure around organizing content specific to the financial performance measurement industry, company projects, products, or departments, teams, committees, and functional roles. However, in terms of a need for KM tools, the most salient problem indicated by respondents is their dissatisfaction with the misuse of the in-house client relations management systems (CRMS) tool, SuperOffice. The company recently launched its own CRMS client-based solution to its customer base in early 2014, so one course of action might be to deploy a similar CRMS company-oriented solution where content could be archived, shared, and put to use in an actual KM tool that supports enterprise search, categorization, tagging, and metadata. The second need is to scrutinize the existing content on the corporate wiki for possible migration to the new solution, or whether content can be created to address information gaps. The wiki is currently on end-of-life servers not stable for long-term use and expansion. For the employees of this company, the wiki seems to be the preferred option for easily sharing and searching content, and wiki-like features are embedded and inherent to many ECMS solutions on the market. Finally, the company is rapidly adopting a virtual corporate university (VCU) department and needs to leverage the targeted audiences and structured delivery

166 

 Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia

of content similar to what is achieved through an LMS. User entitlements (i.e., permissions to access certain content based on credentials provided at login) and workflow capabilities present in multiple ECMS tools could replicate LMS delivery within an enterprise solution, but might prove challenging with training outside of the company to clients or channel partners in the future. These limitations should be considered when making long-term purchase decisions. With respect to corporate culture, the organization enjoys a relaxed, familial atmosphere in its workplace relations and communications among employees. While knowledge transactions are most frequent via email and face-to-face between two colleagues, this behaviour is not conducive to the company’s stated goals of growth. In order to operate and share knowledge at increasing intervals and audiences, the company must provide a social arena for knowledge that is cohesive and encompassing, combining multiple features into a preferred solution.

Application to Libraries In the same way that we began the current study for the financial company, librarians can (1) adopt Nonaka’s model as a theoretical framework to guide the KM process; (2) develop needs assessment strategies to gather data and feedback from employees; and (3) collect and analyse data to inform the next steps to be taken. Types of needs assessments can – and should – be varied; they may include surveys, focus groups, interviews, and other data-gathering methods using employees, including management, as participants. As the first step toward a larger KM plan, the current study reports only data obtained from one needs assessment method. As in any setting, the KM process takes time and commitment to be realized. Why should libraries develop a KM plan? Libraries and librarians deal in some way with collecting, classifying, organizing, and disseminating information to and for their constituents. If librarians are to maximize their potential, a KM platform should facilitate workflow processes, collaboration, and social interaction via centralized, organization-wide access. Toward the maximization of creating and sharing librarian knowledge for the benefit of the entire library across time, the adoption and utilization of a KM tool in a library’s strategic management would be a sensible investment. Future research will do well to quantify such a beneficial relationship. Librarians also can consider the three stages of KM maturation by first capturing lessons learned and best practices from independent projects, programs, or campaigns where these may be seen by the entire workplace. The library may include content tailoring to specific communities of practice to cultivate dis-



12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations 

 167

cussion among similar specialties or areas of focus. Of course, libraries are not unfamiliar to enterprise searching relevant to its holdings. By taking searching to the next level via expert search (i.e., advanced directories of resident librarians and their areas of talent), policy and programme search, and instruction search, libraries can provide a more robust view of services available to library users and better demonstrate their value.

Limitations There were some limitations of the survey due to the necessity of protecting the confidentiality agreement with the company. If provided an opportunity to revisit the questions we posed, one strategy might be to ask employees to self-report whether they could name three experts outside of their department relevant to a specific performance or product topic. We would also ask more guided prompts for conversational questions and hone in on the perceived successes and failures of the corporate wiki as a guide for developing new KM criteria. Finally, a section on maintenance and administration of the tool would provide practical guidance over time. This study represents only one early component of a long-term solution blueprint; it is not meant to stand alone as a complete, start-to-finish project. Indeed, the current study reports only on one initial step in the complex process of organizational KM development. To successfully complete a project of this scale, additional and varied types of needs assessment data is required.

Conclusion Given the foundation of Nonaka, principles of change management and organizational culture, and the findings of our case study, we have learned that solution recommendation could range widely from highly tailored, scalable, or specific KM-tool options. The most important takeaway for this company would be caution that knowledge should not be split among a wide array of diverse platforms, nor should it be held captive in the minds of only a few employees. Because a social, public space is necessary for true knowledge sharing, we believe that the next steps are to begin planting the seeds of change by communicating the intent to address knowledge sharing problems identified in the survey and create a new, unified arena for the organization to collect refined information about the needs and preferences of its knowledge community. Further, we have learned that irre-

168 

 Elizabeth Turner and Spencer Acadia

spective of the institution, librarians can assist with strategy creation for managing the categorization, tagging, labelling, and organization of content, while maintaining the ECMS and offering instruction to maximize adoption of the new tool. Nonaka’s framework is an “approach that puts knowledge creation exactly where it belongs: at the very centre of a company’s human resources strategy” (Nonaka 1991, 97). Going forward, attention to retaining and recruiting expertise and content contributors will give longevity to the solution and can be uncovered by performing a knowledge audit after implementation on a recurring basis. Knowledge has a use and purpose which increases as it is shared and refined by an organization. Providing a social space and system to access such knowledge, comment on it, and discuss its meaning and importance will be paramount in driving a successful change via KM solution regardless of the tool chosen.

References Arnold, Stephen E. 2004. “Content Management: Role and Reality.” In Knowledge Management: Lessons Learned: What Works and What Doesn’t, edited by Michael E. D. Koenig and T. Kanti Srikantaiah, 157–172. Medford, NJ: American Society for Information Science and Technology. Damodaran, Leela and Wendy Olphert. 2000. “Barriers and Facilitators to the Use of Knowledge Management Systems.” Behaviour and Information Technology 19 (6): 405–413. Grant, Robert M. 2013. “Nonaka’s Dynamic Theory of Knowledge Creation: Reflections and an Exploration of the Ontological Dimension.” In Towards Organizational Knowledge: The Pioneering Work of Ikujiro Nonaka, edited by Georg von Krogh, Hirotaka Takeuchi, Kimio Kase, and César Gonzáles Cantón, 77–95. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Hasanali, Farida. 2004. “Critical Success Factors of Knowledge Management.” In Knowledge Management: Lessons Learned: What Works and What Doesn’t, edited by Michael E. D. Koenig and T. Kanti Srikantaiah, 55–69. Medford, NJ: American Society for Information Science and Technology. Hubert, Cindy and Carla O’Dell. 2004. “Successfully Implementing Knowledge Management: Lessons Learned and Best Practices.” In Knowledge Management: Lessons Learned: What Works and What Doesn’t, edited by Michael E. D. Koenig and T. Kanti Srikantaiah, 71–81. Medford, NJ: American Society for Information Science and Technology. Koenig, Michael E. D. and T. Kanti Srikantaiah. 2004. “Three Stages of Knowledge Management.” Knowledge Management: Lessons Learned: What Works and What Doesn’t, 3–8. Medford, NJ: American Society for Information Science and Technology. McElroy, Mark W. 2003. The New Knowledge Management: Complexity, Learning, and Sustainable Information. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. Nonaka, Ikujiro. 1991. “The Knowledge-Creating Company.” Harvard Business Review 69 (6): 96–104.



12 Selection, Implementation, and Behavioural Considerations 

 169

— 1994. “A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation.” Organization Science 5 (1): 14–37. Nonaka, Ikujiro and Ryoko Toyama. 2002. “A Firm as a Dialectical Being: Towards a Dynamic Theory of a Firm.” Industrial and Corporate Change 11 (5): 995–1009. — 2003. “The Knowledge-Creating Theory Revisited: Knowledge Creation as a Synthesizing Process.” Knowledge Management Research and Practice 1 (1): 2–10. — 2005. “The Theory of the Knowledge-Creating Firm: Subjectivity, Objectivity, and Synthesis.” Industrial and Corporate Change 14 (3): 419–436. Nonaka, Ikujiro, Ryoko Toyama, and Toru Hirata. 2008. Managing Flow: A Process Theory of the Knowledge-Based Firm. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Short, Tim and Richard C. Azzarello. 2004. “Knowledge Management in Action: Nine Lessons Learned.” In Knowledge Management: Lessons Learned: What Works and What Doesn’t, edited by Michael E. D. Koenig and T. Kanti Srikantaiah, 31–53. Medford, NJ: American Society for Information Science and Technology. Spender, J.-C. 2013. “Nonaka and KM’s Past, Present, and Future.” In Towards Organizational Knowledge: The Pioneering Work of Ikujiro Nonaka, edited by Georg von Krogh, Hirotaka Takeuchi, Kimio Kase, and César Gonzáles Cantón, 24–59. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Teece, David J. 2013. “Nonaka’s Contribution to the Understanding of Knowledge Creation, Codification, and Capture.” In Towards Organizational Knowledge: The Pioneering Work of Ikujiro Nonaka, edited by Georg von Krogh, Hirotaka Takeuchi, Kimio Kase, and César Gonzáles Cantón, 17–23. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Von Krogh, Georg, Kazuo Ichijo, and Ikujiro Nonaka. 2000. Enabling Knowledge Creation: How to Unlock the Mystery of Tacit Knowledge and Release the Power of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press. Von Krogh, Georg, Hirotaka Takeuchi, Kimio Kase, and César Gonzáles Cantón. 2013. Towards Organizational Knowledge: The Pioneering Work of Ikujiro Nonaka. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Xu, Fangqi. 2013. “The Formation and Development of Ikujiro Nonaka’s Knowledge Creation Theory.” In Towards Organizational Knowledge: The Pioneering Work of Ikujiro Nonaka, edited by Georg von Krogh, Hirotaka Takeuchi, Kimio Kase, and César Gonzáles Cantón, 60–73. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Donna Scheeder

13 Knowledge Management: Toward 13 Understanding in a Multicultural World

13 KnoweldgeManagemeTno:twad rUndesratndnin g a iMu citultlW a rlodlr

Abstract: Knowledge Management (KM) on a global scale is now an opportunity and an imperative. Globalization is a factor in just about every issue affecting us today. Along with the development of new information and communication technologies, the conditions now exist for renewed dialogue among cultures and civilizations. Knowledge Management is a key tool that can be used to share the knowledge which will lead to greater understanding among differing cultures. Librarians are by definition knowledge managers and should be leaders in global efforts to share knowledge. Understanding the factors that make for a successful multicultural collaboration is critical to undertaking any global collaborative effort. Many of those factors are illustrated in the experience of the Global Legal Information Network (GLIN), an international knowledge management project of over 40 government partners around the world.1 This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2008 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Quebec City, Canada.

Introduction UNESCO tells us that, “globalization, facilitated by the rapid development of new information and communication technologies, though representing a challenge for cultural diversity, creates the conditions for renewed dialogue among cultures and civilizations” (UNESCO 2001). Koche Matsuura of UNESCO has noted that intercultural dialogue is the best guarantee of peace. Knowledge management on a global scale presents more than an opportunity to facilitate that dialogue. It is an imperative. It is the key strategy that can be used to share the knowledge, which will lead to greater understanding among differing cultures. Eugenie Prime, a US library leader, exhorts her fellow librarians to “have no puny visions” (Prime 1997), so I am going to discuss knowledge management not in the organizational sense. I will discuss it in the context of using its general development of collaborative processes to turn the world into a learning organi-

1 Global Legal Information Network (GLIN) is a collaboration to make laws and legal decisions of member states available internationally. At the time this paper was written GLIN was housed at the Library of Congress where it had originated in 1996. In 2015, it is in a transition to the GLIN Foundation to continue future development. http://www.glinf.org/. Accessed on 10 September 2015.



13 Knowledge Management: Toward Understanding in a Multicultural World 

 171

zation. I will demonstrate that librarians as knowledge managers can play a role in facilitating intercultural dialogue that leads to world peace. When I began thinking about this presentation I engaged myself in a debate regarding whether I should begin with the usual practice of defining terms. I am speaking primarily after all to the Knowledge Management Section of IFLA. I decided to check and see if there were new developments in defining knowledge management, a subject on which there is an agreement that practitioners agree there is no one definition. When I did a search, I discovered that high up in the search results was the Wikipedia, probably one of the largest grass-roots KM projects currently in existence. It was surprising to me that in that context, the KM entry was rooted in the traditional practice and that it spoke of KM mainly in the business sense. However, the Wikipedia is an example of how the opportunities for knowledge management can go beyond the single organization, and indeed there are already several examples in the library world of knowledge management projects that cross national and cultural borders.

KM Projects There are as many opportunities as there are kinds of libraries and there are already examples of on-going projects. Certainly corporate special libraries have responded to the need to link their knowledge workers that are distributed in company offices around the globe to a common set of resources. Special library communities have started their own projects. The Biodiversity Heritage Library2 is an example in the biological sciences community and the Global Legal Information Network (GLIN), which I will use as a model for this presentation, is an effort by the legal information community. The World Digital Library and the European Digital Library represent efforts of national and academic libraries to build a common repository of their accumulated knowledge. In addition, there are collaborative efforts within library functions. QuestionPoint has enabled collaborative reference in the digital world. Knowledge management is nothing new for librarians. We are knowledge managers. These efforts have been undertaken because globalization, interconnectivity, and the ability to engage in partnerships means we have the capacity to build global virtual libraries. There are a number of factors that require libraries and information organizations to share knowledge across national boundaries:

2 http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/. Accessed on 5 October 2015.

172 

 Donna Scheeder

Globalization Impetus The first of these is globalization. There are both pragmatic and altruistic motives that result in institutions sharing their information across their borders. There is a need to deal with issues that do not respect or recognize national boundaries. They cannot be solved by one country alone. For example, global climate change is an issue for everyone. Scientists, government officials, agricultural experts, energy companies to name a few, all have a stake in sharing knowledge about this issue. Preservation of cultural artifacts and of the knowledge contained in them is a shared issue of this profession. In my area, the law, the parliament, its library, lawyers and judges, the business community, and individuals all have the need now, not only to know the laws of their own country, but to understand the laws of other nations. Business investors looking for a foreign investment opportunity, legislators looking to see how other countries have handled an issue to see if they can get ideas for what to do themselves, individuals looking to adopt children from other countries all have need of a legal knowledge management tool. I emphasise that it needs to be a knowledge management tool because there is a difference between a database and a knowledge management program.

Collaborative Aspects of KM I repeat, there is a difference between a true knowledge-management tool and a database. Databases have information but the context which knowledgeable contributors add to that information may be absent. To use knowledge management effectively, projects must have collaborative partners who are willing to contribute knowledge in addition to information. Collaboration among partners makes a difference. Partners are needed and desired for a variety of reasons including the project is too big for one institution, and ownership of the information resources needed is in several countries. Most important in the global arena, however, is that collaborators bring their different perspectives as part of their knowledge base. This is extremely important when that perspective is needed to bring understanding to a multicultural project. Global projects are do-able because technology has greatly expanded our capacity to create and share knowledge in real time and on a larger scale. Technology trends are towards software that takes the clerical work out of portal building; automating updating processes allowing the knowledge worker to concentrate on expanding the scope of resources provided, adding the context,



13 Knowledge Management: Toward Understanding in a Multicultural World 

 173

and improving the currency of the product. It allows the knowledge manager to concentrate on the really difficult task of building a knowledge sharing culture. Web 2.0 has enhanced the capacity to share information and has furthered the ability of potential contributors to collaborate on a knowledge sharing project. The application of social networking tools and techniques facilitate the ability to work together to build community while contributing and sharing content. It has enabled the strategy of global content integration to foster the greater understanding among cultures and to preserve cultural diversity. Therefore, not only the end result, the contributed content, leads to understanding, but the process of collaboration itself furthers that goal. If knowledge management on a global scale is the goal, how would one define global content integration for the purposes of this discussion? It is the creation of a knowledge management system of knowledge assets contributed from around the world by equal partners. Parties retain ownership of their content and have the responsibility to describe it and put it in the context of their own culture. It is a true collaboration in the knowledge management sense but also in the Web 2.0 sense. In order to explain I will use the Global Legal Information Network as an example of this.

An Example: Global Library Information Network Project In order to understand let me very briefly explain what GLIN is. GLIN is an international cooperative of over 40 nations and growing, all of who have agreed to enter their laws and other legal material, including judicial decisions, legislative records, and other legal writings, into a common database according to agreed upon standards. The characteristics of GLIN are that it is a global, intergovernmental, non-profit, multilingual, cooperative organization. Every full-text document is accompanied by a summary, written by an attorney trained in the laws of that country, that describes the legal effect of the document. It is also both a database and human network. The database is presented and searchable in 13 languages and as new countries join there is a commitment to add their official language as well, if it is not already represented. It is also a human network of tacit knowledge for the other members. When the summary leads to more questions or a country does not have the capacity to translate the original document of the law, the GLIN station members are readily available to answer those kinds of questions for each other.

174 

 Donna Scheeder

All of the members have signed the GLIN charter, which states that whereas it is beneficial to promote the rule of law within and among nations, to facilitate the orderly development of national and international laws, and to encourage mutual understanding among peoples with differing legal heritages; and whereas these goals would be well served by a legal archive that would provide access to authentic, current, complete versions of the law of many nations, presented in the original language with summaries in a common language, organized under a standardized scheme and shared indexing vocabulary, and delivered electronically they are agreeing to join GLIN. The charter also states that the signatories have agreed to share the burdens of making the laws of the world available throughout the world. These statements are significant because they are illustrative of two factors that make an initiative a good candidate for a global collaborative project: –– partners share a common interest and are mutually interdependent; –– the project is not owned by any one country or partner.

Requirements for Success Assuring Equality of Partnerships The GLIN experience also highlights a prime lesson learned for success. In order to have equal partners, all partners must maintain a level of sensitivity about differences in culture. For the GLIN partners, that means reigning in the tendency to think we know all and our way of doing things is the best. It means realizing there are different points of view regarding access to information and that sometimes a short-term compromise is necessary in order to have long-term impact. Partners should always remember that being judgmental in these situations does not help. There are several factors, that when present, help to guarantee equality of the partners which is important to the success of any multicultural knowledge-sharing project. First, there must be a decision-making structure that emphasises collaboration and cooperation. This goes beyond the common understanding of partnership, where participation is the defining common feature, to partnership, where decision-making is the defining common feature. This has been an area of concern when discussing global digital libraries. It is clear that countries want to retain ownership of their cultural assets, even in their digitized form and to have a say in how they are presented and explained. This concern, for example, is at the heart of discussions regarding libraries partnering with Google. In GLIN, the response to these concerns is the GLIN charter. Having a governance docu-



13 Knowledge Management: Toward Understanding in a Multicultural World 

 175

ment, whether it is as formal as a charter or it is an agreement or memorandum of understanding of some kind, sets the ground rules for participation and gives representatives of different cultures the assurances that they need that they have ownership. In addition to entering and summarizing their own laws, members collaborate on the subject thesaurus which provides the taxonomy covering different types of legal jurisdictions, so that accurate and complete search results will be achieved when doing comparative searching. In true knowledge management fashion, users do not have to know what they do not know in order to get accurate and complete search results. This is the value a collaborative project adds that a single database does not. The creation of the thesaurus by itself is one path that leads to common understanding. Most importantly however, the collaboration model is also used to govern and plan improvements to the database. The features developed for each new release are requirements that were developed and recommended at the GLIN Directors meeting, the annual meeting convened to discuss GLIN and its plans for the future.

Standards Standards are the second requirement for success in a global knowledge sharing project. The important thing to remember is that the standards must be agreed to by the partners and must suit the purpose and resources of the project. Standards fall into at least three areas: –– information quality standards; –– interoperability; –– the need for conceptual linking through a thesaurus. Information quality involves authoritativeness and accuracy. This is an area where structured collaboration adds value that grass-roots collaboration can lack. By having information quality standards, libraries and other information providers are adding value by assuring users that the item they are using is authentic and that the information provided about it is accurate and provided by an expert. In the field of law this is particularly important, as having authoritative and accurate information can be the difference between winning and losing a case. The need for information quality standards can be demonstrated in many other disciplines as well. Standards must also be established for the technical aspects of the work. Technical standards involve a number of areas such as defining the production environment and defining the hosting environment. Global projects have

176 

 Donna Scheeder

a wide range of choices before them. Open source is available and can help to lessen resource requirements. As already mentioned Web 2.0 technology makes it easier to build a common platform for contributors to use. The important thing to remember is that the standards are there to serve the collaboration. In the case of GLIN this included answering such questions as backup resources, the need for network redundancy, firewall and other security requirements, IP expansion, mean time to restore, and application availability. The standards are there to allow the systems to exchange data and information and to manage knowledge. Perhaps the most important standard in a multicultural environment is the one that contributes to a common understanding, a multilingual thesaurus. The larger the scope of the project, the more difficult this is to do. However, it must be addressed if contributors are to find their commonalities and to understand their differences. In the case of GLIN, the foreign legal specialist, foreign trained lawyers, who are experts in their jurisdiction, and the GLIN station legal analysts, participate in person and remotely in GLIN thesaurus meetings. New terms are suggested and are defined in terms of all of the different types of jurisdictions, civil law, customary law, common law, religious law and combinations of those. It is this kind of labour-intensive work that guarantees the accuracy of search results and that makes a GLIN search different from a Google search.

Recruiting Partners Knowledge management in a multicultural environment also means being savvy about recruiting partners. Patience is necessary. Different cultures have different requirements for getting approvals. When looking at potential partners, stability of the institution may be an issue to consider. How much risk can the partnership sustain without undermining the viability of the project? Anyone recruiting partners needs to do their research ahead of time. Partners need to see how participation is aligned with their own strategic goals. Being flexible and anticipating potential problems and solutions, and coming prepared with some alternative solutions, will help potential partners get to yes.



13 Knowledge Management: Toward Understanding in a Multicultural World 

 177

Conclusions Stewart Brand, co-founder of The Long Now Foundation,3 reminded us to consider what the duties of librarians are when the client is civilization? He challenged us to be the constant memory, the integrators, and the source of continuity. As knowledge managers, we are being given a powerful chance to expand our thinking about what knowledge management can do. The opportunity to think about employing it as a strategy for endeavours that are beyond the traditional business systems and purposes is here. There can be a new collaboration that brings people and their knowledge together to share the knowledge of their cultures that is contained in their books, their art, their maps, their photos, and most importantly in their heads, where the act of collaboration itself also leads to a greater understanding among differing culture. I want to leave you with the words of Peter Senge, an American scientist and the author of The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization ([1990] 2006, 137): Sharing knowledge is not about giving something or getting something from them. That is only valid for information sharing. Sharing knowledge occurs when people are genuinely interested in helping one another develop new capacities for action; it is about creating learning processes.

That is our biggest challenge. If we are to turn the world into a learning organization, then it is up to us to collaborate in such a way that we learn from the process as well as the end result. It is up to us to lead the way..

References Prime, Eugenie. 1997. “Special Presentation: A Practitioner’s Perspective.” Presentation at the Special Libraries Association Annual Conference, Seattle, 1997. Senge, Peter. (1990) 2006. The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. Revised edition. New York: Doubleday. UNESCO. 2001. “UNESCO Universal Declaration On Cultural Diversity.” http://www.unesco.org/ new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/5_Cultural_Diversity_EN.pdf. Accessed on 2 November 2015.

3 http://longnow.org/. Accessed on 2 May 2015.

Part 2: Knowledge Management as a Tool for Part 2: Changing Library Culture

Claudia Lux

14 Knowledge Management in 14 Public Libraries 14 Knowledge Management in Public Libraries

Abstract:Knowledge management for libraries began essentially in special libraries within research institutions and companies and over time, with necessary discourse, moved to include strategies specifically for academic and research libraries. Now the question is how to fit knowledge-management tools and practices to benefit public libraries. This discussion concerns the application of diverse KM tools when serving an entirely different group of library users and a different kind of staff, compared to other library organizations using KM techniques. The library environments are ever changing and change management must be applied if libraries are to continue to succeed. It is no longer enough to collect knowledge to use but to have the best available knowledge for developing better and more effective services for the public. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2012 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Helsinki, Finland.

Introduction For many years the term “knowledge management in libraries” was attached to special libraries only, to describe their additional role in their specialized research institution or company, where sharing of knowledge and knowledge management of the institution is essential to stay abreast in research and production (Special Libraries Association 1998). Discussion about knowledge management developed a great deal specifically for the academic and research libraries in general, and brought a wave of knowledge-management strategies and practices (Wen 2005). But how should this apply to public libraries, with a completely different group of users and a very different staff compared to special or academic libraries? Is there any potential for knowledge management in public libraries? What will knowledge management add to the output of a public library? Are there strategies and practices of knowledge management that can help the development of public libraries, without imposing an administrative elephant on the institution? First, there is no doubt that a public library is not at all just a book-lending institution but a place for access to knowledge. This is not a new development, but it is more evident since the digital age. Nowadays public libraries provide access not just to their own collection and their branches, but access to all kinds

182 

 Claudia Lux

of university catalogues, the WorldCat, full-text databases, digitized archives and digital aggregations like Europeana.1 Therefore, the potential to meet their users’ needs have grown exponentially, and the need for more knowledge embedded in each public librarian is developing every day. This knowledge has to be shared inside the public library team, and knowledge management can be a cornerstone to develop the organization. Second, it is obvious that in metropolitan public libraries and in public library systems with many branches, communication is not so easy, nor is the sharing of knowledge. Due to many localities of branches and due to longer opening hours and shifts at different locations, staff meetings or email communication alone will not take the communication to the professional level of institutional knowledge needed. Knowledge management is the key to manage these new challenges and to build a streamlined service for the public. Third, only when public libraries identify and actively distribute the professional experience in their institutions and organize and manage it in a structured way, can we talk about knowledge management. Knowledge management in public libraries comprises the internal and the external aspects and focuses on the development of a better quality in library services. Internally, library staff need to discuss how to organize and distribute the knowledge they develop in their institutions. Externally, public librarians are supporting knowledge management in their services.

Knowledge Management: A Key Internal Factor for Public Libraries Knowledge management in public libraries is first of all the management of the internal knowledge as it is in other institutions. In Germany, a traditional library country, librarians have been in their jobs as civil servants, often for a lifetime. These librarians have acquired a long-term stable knowledge of internal procedures and professional experience and they contribute to the continuity of the library and sustainability of internal knowledge. This knowledge is very often not written down, nor it is now in a current state, although exceptions exist for regular development of trainees. Stability is still an important aspect for academic and research libraries, but times are changing. In a modern public library a group of people with the same old knowledge of procedures and their internal organizational traditions might hinder new perspectives of library services and any kind 1 http://www.europeana.eu/portal. Accessed on 2 May 2015.



14 Knowledge Management in Public Libraries 

 183

of change management. However, some of the knowledge needs to be kept and to be developed, as much as librarians will acquire and share new knowledge. Contrary to Germany, in Qatar, where since 2011 a new Qatar National Library with three integrated functions of a national, an academic and a metropolitan public library is in construction, the knowledge base of the library is developing with librarians who have worked in different library settings outside the country. Most of them have joined in recent years or months. Policies, procedures and guidelines are not yet totally defined and need to be developed. For sure, these documents will not be cut in stone, as everything changes and is in a flow. The actual situation in Qatar is changing constantly. This is close to the situation in Germany after the wall came down, when the central public libraries of East and West Berlin united. It was a special political situation and the library staff had to redefine many new guidelines and had to take the best from each side of two different library cultures, or had to implement totally new policies and procedures. Looking at the emerging Gulf Region and the State of Qatar with many foreign workers and the need for more professionally trained librarians from among Qatari nationals, librarians see more than ever the importance of knowledge management. There will be negative consequences without proper knowledge management when after a few years expatriates leave the country. Professional knowledge leaves with people, if it is not managed well. There is a simple test to understand some of the principles of knowledge management. Close your eyes and think of all the people you have met in your life. Are you organizing them into groups – for example family, classmates, friends, colleagues you meet at a library conference? In addition you will remember nice ones and not so nice ones. And you will remember some you have not seen for a long time. Now, open your eyes and this time try to use knowledge management tools to organize your memories to make them known to the person next to you in a structured way. How long will it take to write down what you remembered in the short moment before? Or do you want to wait until computer systems will be developed that are attached to your brain and write it up for you? The above showcases the idea of what a public library needs to do to follow up their history of processes, decisions, procedures, and knowledge creation to install it in the organization with one goal: to serve their users better. There is a clear difference between knowledge of individuals and knowledge embedded in organizations, like processes and procedures that are needed to sustain the library and support its functions. Knowledge management is important, as knowledge leaves with people, if the organization does not take responsibility for it. A normal procedure in finance, in procurement or in information technology systems is to document the changes in procedures or in the software, so that everyone can follow up. This documentation now becomes more and more important

184 

 Claudia Lux

for the normal organization of the public library. Knowledge management does not only reflect processes and procedures that need to be documented, but also collects the intangible knowledge embedded in the staff of the public libraries. “It could also be argued that employees with high organizational knowledge have a better grasp of their jobs and require less management supervision. Quicker, higher quality decisions could be made from lower levels of the organization. For employees who interact with customers, these intangible benefits could translate into better customer service with faster reaction times to customer questions. This better customer interaction provides an organization with an intangible competitive advantage” (Schloetzer 2003).

Key Areas for Knowledge Management in Public Libraries There are a few main areas in public libraries where knowledge management is of significant importance: collection development, acquisition, processing, reference work, activities and programmes – all of them have a mixture of tangible and intangible knowledge that is important for the smooth organization of the library. In collection development the policy is mostly written up and it is an important piece of tangible knowledge. Public libraries in many countries work together with some special providers, who are choosing the collection according to a written collection policy document. Or, in some cases, the library has a special arrangement with a bookshop for bestsellers, and a written contract keeps this knowledge clearly defined. In addition, organized internet resources that broaden the collection, and wish-lists from the customer, support document collection development. It is important to keep all this knowledge actual and reliable for the library work. There is also intangible knowledge which is not managed in the same way even though it is collection-related knowledge. This intangible knowledge can be the knowledge about certain publishers, for example which publishers have the best-quality books, or how databases from different sources overlap. Often public libraries do not care to document this knowledge, but sometimes they pass it on to trainees, to the next generation, as they see that this is something important they need to know. And last but not least, new trends in collection development are often intangible knowledge for a certain time and often not understood as trends until there is a breakthrough and it is adopted by all libraries. All of this



14 Knowledge Management in Public Libraries 

 185

kind of intangible knowledge is embedded in library staff, but not in the same way in the library as an institution, and it is very difficult to manage. In acquisition the tangible knowledge is now in our IT system, with list of providers, costs and all kinds of codes that should make our life easier. Here in the system everything is documented and this knowledge stays in the library, it is developed and passed on to all newcomers. The intangible knowledge in acquisition might become the more important part, as librarians know very well, if a provider delivers in a timely manner, makes exceptions, takes books back and has a good style in delivering the material requested. To document all this in our system will overload the system with information that is not always needed or is changing too fast. But naturally this intangible knowledge needs to be shared in a structured way that it becomes knowledge of the organization. Processing in public libraries has changed a lot, but there are still many public libraries doing it themselves. Many procedures are fixed on paper in the contract, when processing is outsourced to companies who have to deliver shelf ready material. Cataloguing rules are clear and processing rules are defined to secure where exactly the RFID tag will be fixed, and which box will be used for a CD or a DVD, and which electronic format needs to be used for e-books etc. In addition there are more written rules for the binding policy. Again, when cataloguing is still done in the public library, this knowledge is written down in policies and procedures. But knowledge management also means to distribute and enable adoption of this knowledge. Therefore, public libraries do a lot of in-house training as an important part of knowledge management, especially for processing and cataloguing, if this is not outsourced. This learning on the job stays in the organization for quite a long time – sometimes longer than needed. “We have always done it like this…” was one of the common phrases of resisting staff, when public libraries started not only to change to modern technology but to change their processing procedures completely and to include diverse media and e-collections. In reference work there is far less knowledge documented and it seems to be more difficult to share knowledge. Search methodologies and overviews of reference tools are a part of this knowledge taught at library schools. But there is more intangible knowledge that is difficult to share. Reference-librarian skills are characterized by their experience in using the catalogue and the web resources to develop an associative knowledge to find what was requested. Reference librarians in a public library have an excellent psychological knowledge concerning what kind of users are coming and what their needs are. Nevertheless, it is still very difficult to place this knowledge on a written paper, classify it, share it with others and make this knowledge available for the future.

186 

 Claudia Lux

Many libraries try to collect the special knowledge of their reference librarians with machine supported tests or with handwritten documentation over a certain period of the year. They want to analyse the amount and complexity of reference questions in a library. But it is still difficult to analyse the quality of the answer. The clear knowledge about the resources, which today are constantly changing, and a systematic approach on how to analyse and answer the question from the public, is all embedded in the reference librarian. Some “Ask a Librarian” systems tried to collect these reference questions and answers to be able to answer the same question again and save time for the reference librarian. However, it became obvious that almost never is the exact same question asked. In public libraries same questions and answers might only happen when students have the same assignments and the library knows the school curriculum and can prepare for repeat questions. There are many ways that reference librarians share their knowledge with other librarians, such as, giving lectures and training or work together at the reference desk, but at the end, there is no effective knowledge management system for this intangible knowledge other than to share it individually. However, most often because of a lack of time and staff this is impossible. Therefore, very often intangible reference knowledge leaves the organization with the person. Maybe there will be new developments in the future that can change the process. Knowledge management for activities and programmes has changed during the last ten years. Activities are now evaluated and there is far more documented and shared with others than before. This is especially the case when new activities and programmes are developed. Due to lack of staff and time, new developments and changes are often not documented and the knowledge about the participants, even though they have all filled in the evaluation forms, are not shared. Some public libraries still refuse any documentation in activities and programmes, as they argue it is more important to do activities with the public instead of documenting activities. However, once in a while it is very important to hold on and evaluate what the library is doing and to write up the knowledge that librarians have collected about the people attending activities. Only then will public libraries be able to see their impact on society. Many activities and programmes are built on personal relationships and often change completely when the person, who conducted these, leaves. Knowledge management can mitigate this situation so that the library is able to keep their stakeholders and continue to attract new ones. To mitigate staff shortage a system of written and non-written knowledge management methods needs to be developed and a partnership with a student or a research project from a university could help with knowledge management tools.



14 Knowledge Management in Public Libraries 

 187

Public libraries’ partner networks are among the key areas of knowledge management in the organization. The situation when you closed your eyes and remembered people you have met in your life shows the difficulty in sharing this categorized knowledge about human relationships. For a public library it is important to describe partners, build categories and analyse the character of the partner relationship to serve them in the best way and to get the support needed. There is no need to completely change a partner network after the head of communication leaves the organization or a new director comes on board. To expand the stakeholders and contacts to new dimensions does not mean to cut out former relationships. A systematic and regular approach supported by knowledge management tools can expand public library partnerships.

Knowledge-management Strategies and Tools for Public Libraries Strategies to implement knowledge management in big organizations often starts with a total approach by introducing an elaborate system, which may or may not function in big public library organizations. There are some knowledge management systems that can be evaluated by library professionals to determine if they are useful to implement in a public library. As for many libraries developing and installing these systems might create too much administrative work, especially when they are not integrated into the library IT system. In smaller libraries, and for most part public libraries are smaller, it is important to have some simpler tools and adjust those to the staff available. First there is the need to conduct regular staff meetings across departments, the main library and the branches. This is basic, but not always executed in a knowledge management manner to exchange cross departmental information. Most libraries have meetings and are aware that proper documentation helps a lot to improve efficiency. Staff not attending these meetings will be able to learn from the minutes or the presentations distributed. A new method is the video documentation of the full staff meetings. From this those that are not present get more knowledge about the atmosphere, which sometimes explains the intention of procedures and decisions. Second, share-point tools, shared files, are the most common tools and easy to use on a desktop. Everything can be well organized and all information is stored immediately in the specific section and easy to find again for reuse. Third, group email lists or certain social media can be used for knowledge management features. Using a staff email list for knowledge management it is best

188 

 Claudia Lux

to number all related emails (e.g., reference tool number 1, cataloguing information number 25 etc.). This helps to find and collect the knowledge easily and later this information may be stored in special files, although new staff will be able to read it and learn from it. In this way knowledge management for public libraries grows steadily and does not start with an oversized system. It is very important that sharing the knowledge is not forgotten and changes are adapted regularly. Therefore somebody should be made responsible to update and monitor this content. In this way mailing lists can be used to distribute knowledge about different aspects of library organization and services and support internal training. After a certain time, the numbered emails can be saved in a special file and used as training or referring tools. In addition, e-learning platforms can be used to collect and distribute internal knowledge. Anyhow, without a responsible person to update all knowledge related aspects and promote distribution in the organization it is useless and will soon become a dead file. Knowledge management will also function in a traditional way through written reports – if they are read and if they contain important knowledge aspects and if they are distributed. In a time of information overload many reports are not read anymore, not by management nor the professional level. However, reports can prove that knowledge is collected, organized, managed well and distributed to all relevant participants, even though it might not be as effective in a changing environment. In addition a version of storytelling seems to be an additional option to exchange knowledge in organizations. Examples create pictures in the mind and might stay longer with trainees, instead of asking them to read a report. And it works well in special cultures where storytelling is alive and related to an excellent memory of young staff as in Qatar. How to apply diverse knowledge management tools needs a profound discussion to make the right decision for a public library. In Qatar for example it takes time to build a new national library from scratch that includes a metropolitan public library and to develop staff internal knowledge to overwrite some of the knowledge staff brings from outside and establish its own original institutional knowledge. Knowledge management helps to streamline and makes the institution effective. Nevertheless change management must be applied to secure success in an ever changing environment. This combination will help to erase knowledge no longer useful and replace it with new knowledge. It also supports acknowledgement of ideas and intangible knowledge of staff and keep it as new institutional knowledge. For public libraries it is more important than ever to re-evaluate written rules and regulations and create a new collective knowledge for a better organization and development.



14 Knowledge Management in Public Libraries 

 189

In the changing world of public libraries, knowledge management is not a method to collect knowledge but to use the best available knowledge for developing better and more effective services for the public.

References Schloetzer, Jason. 2003. “Managing the Intangible Knowledge.” http://www. eknowledgecenter.com/articles/1009/1009.htm. Accessed on 2 May 2015. Special Libraries Association. State-of-the-Art Institute. 1998. Knowledge management: a new competitive asset. Washington, DC: Special Libraries Association. Wen, Shixing. 2005. Implementing Knowledge Management in Academic Libraries: A Pragmatic Approach. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Library. http://www.white-clouds.com/iclc/cliej/ cl19wen.htm. Accessed on 2 May 2015.

Anja Flicker and Thomas M. Paul

15 Theory in Action

Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital Management at Würzburg Public Library Abstract: Anja Flicker describes why she thinks Knowledge Management is important for an organization and takes the reader through its application and results in her institution, the Würzburg Public Library in Würzburg, Germany.1 She examines the changes her library instituted in three areas of knowledge management: communication of knowledge, documentation of information, and reflection on experiences. She finishes with a discussion of the generalized Intellectual Capital Management methodology and how her library used it for formulating strategies and future views. This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Helsinki, Finland, in August 2012.

A Vision of Innovative Libraries as Structural Capital of their Cities When I think of libraries in the future, I like to imagine versatile, innovative, attractive places. They offer their visitors a variety of media and services, according to the customers’ needs – and beyond. This means 1) beyond the customers’ needs of today and 2) beyond the customers of today. Libraries of the future observe society’s cultural, technological, and media developments and continue to develop the institutions – in terms of the library as a place, in terms of the employees’ skills, and in terms of the services offered in anticipation of society’s changing needs. These future libraries are success factors within their city’s structural capital.

1 Würzburg is a town with approximately 125,000 inhabitants and 30,000 students. The Würzburg Public Library has a team of 40 employees, and owns roughly 180,000 media items. The collection reaches 1,135,000 loans per year; 2,000 customers visit the library per day.



15 Theory in Action 

 191

Why Knowledge Management in Libraries? In our “knowledge society” a lot of people already agree on what we gain by Knowledge Management (KM) and on why we should apply it: we will increase the quality of our products and results, transparency on and access to information and knowledge, and we will reduce the number of mistakes made.2 After working nine years in private companies, I want to add: librarians are predestined for doing KM. It is very near to our core competences, and we believe in it without counting every hour or Euro we have to invest. In the public sector I meet a lot of people whom I did not have to convince of the value of KM. They do not have to be convinced that there is more to the iceberg than you can see (Figure 15.1). If you compare employees’ knowledge to the ice of an iceberg, you will notice most of their knowledge is hidden and worth diving for under water. In the public sector, it is agreed upon, you do not have to argue.

Figure 15.1: Iceberg – approximately 80% of the ice is under water Photo: Ullala, „Eisbergspiegel“, CC-Licence (BY 2.0: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/de/deed).

In the private sector managers want to count input and output in Euros. They count the hours that employees spend on KM instead of spending them as billable 2 A few words about the definition of “knowledge” and “information”: The former president of the German Society of KM, Dr. Ulrich Schmidt, likes to say “knowledge is between the ears”. As soon as you communicate or document it, it’s information. Nevertheless I may occasionally use the term “knowledge”, even if strictly speaking it is “information”.

192 

 Anja Flicker and Thomas M. Paul

hours on customer projects, add further expenditures, and then report the input cost in Euros. But with the output it is different. You can hardly count the hours (e.g., of research) the staff save daily because information is easily found and accessible or because the organization’s knowledge is transparent. It is just as difficult to account for the financial value of avoided mistakes, increase in quality, or the re-use of lessons learned. Due to this difficulty to count cost savings for the output, I often had to argue with managers and justify the input cost of KM.

Why I Apply KM I want my employees to form a happy and healthy team, working and learning together. I want us to perform professionally as an efficient and healthy organization. And I want to produce the best service every day for happy and satisfied customers. I apply KM to support me and my team with these challenges, as I will later show with specific examples of our KM practice in Würzburg. And we also need KM to cope with the challenges of the future. How else, for example, could we keep up with the cultural and technological developments of the “digital world”? If libraries and librarians want to live up to their image as media and information experts, we need to be familiar with all the technologies our customers are confronted with and use in their daily lives – from mobile devices like smartphones and e-readers, to Web 2.0 and applications with “Web 2.0-character”, to a variety of social networks. We need the expertise to use these technologies; we need to apply them in and integrate them into our library services; we need to know how to handle them well enough to be able to consult and train our customers; and we need to constantly stay up to date in this quickly changing world. But we are never finished with learning about new technologies: We need to accept the cultural change that came with “Web 2.0” (contribution and networking methods, sharing of content and knowledge, etc.), and realize that this will not go away. So we must build, constantly develop, and operate the library as part of this modern society. People of today’s society use the modern devices as information channels and for media consumption, for leisure activities like gaming or reading, and to support their daily lives. And they want to have coffee and company while doing so. We must understand the library as part of this modern society. I want to make clear, though, that a library should still offer traditional services. It should still be a place in which customers can access books and other media and information sources; a place in which they can read, meet and



15 Theory in Action 

 193

communicate, and learn and be trained in reading and information skills; and a place for people of all ages and with a wide variety of interests. The mission for future librarians will be to combine tradition and innovation – a complex job for smart and engaged professionals! How – without KM – could we succeed here?

Daily Practice in Würzburg: What We Do and How KM Adds Value Now down to today’s daily practice: I want to outline the most important KM methods we apply and what we intend to gain from them. I write this as a practitioner. So let me break down the different KM-models and theories to a very hands-on practical version of four points. In my team, we apply a combination of methods to accomplish: –– communication of knowledge; –– documentation of information; –– reflection on experiences in order to learn; –– Intellectual Capital Management (ICM).

Communication of Knowledge We hold transparent team meetings weekly: one representative of every unit tells the colleagues what was important during the last week, which tasks have to be fulfilled, what’s of interest or occupying the unit this week, which problems or subjects are being discussed these days. As a result, the whole team gains transparency. Among other advantages, insight in the other units brings an increase of understanding, respect, and mutual help so that common problems can be solved together. An additional gain is to make hidden experts visible, thus bringing their knowledge into a flow. We conduct (moderated and documented) face-to-face knowledge transfer if, for example, someone leaves or joins the team, or if tasks are newly organized and someone has to be introduced. If possible, the experienced experts try to talk the newest employee into his/her new job. Dave Snowden3 says “I 3 Dave Snowden is founder and chief scientific officer of Cognitive Edge, noted for pioneering a science based approach to organizations drawing on anthropology, neuroscience and complex adaptive systems theory.

194 

 Anja Flicker and Thomas M. Paul

know more than I can tell and I can tell more than I can write down” (Snowden 2008). That is why I want my employees not only to document tasks and processes, but also to show and explain, face-to-face. It can be helpful, to support this conversation, to use a moderator who will help them stay focused on the subject, ask further questions, and document the essentials, for example, in our wiki. In our organization, eight colleagues may be responsible for a branch library and they form a Community of Practice (CoP). Driven by a common motivation – wanting the best for their branch – these experts meet regularly to discuss daily operational problems. They also have my order to think strategically about what branch libraries should look like in the future. We gain synergies, professionalism, and efficiency if experts work on things together instead of alone and that leads to more quality in the customer services. For the colleagues it is an opportunity to learn together, develop their personality and expertise – and It is more fun working as a team. Our internal weblog, a blog, combines features of communication and documentation. Blogs are websites where entries of text (posts) can be published. We have a blog that is accessible only for staff members of the library. We use it to communicate news and information that is relevant for the whole team. Before the creation of the blog, we spread this information via “mail to all”. In comparison, the blog is more personal; we write more casually, and add photos and links. The possibility of commenting on posts makes the colleagues’ reactions transparent to everybody – and we also use this function for taking votes.

Documentation of Information When I started as the new director at Würzburg Public Library in 2010, I interviewed every single team member in order to work out their individual expert-profiles with them, and I continue this practice as staff change. I document the employee’s learning and working history as well as their current tasks and responsibilities. I summarize their skills, experiences, and fields of expertise and knowledge. We also put down the sources of information he/she uses and the professional network and relations to people relevant for the expert’s daily business. Thus, I gain a transparent overview of every employee. It is very important that I only write down what the employees agree upon and that they only say as much as they want. Finally, the personnel board is informed of our conversation, and privacy protection is preserved. These expert-profiles are very important and valuable instruments for my day-to-day human resources management. On this



15 Theory in Action 

 195

basis I plan knowledge transfers; I organize tasks and units; and I decide on the organizational and personal development of employees. The staff and I set up a wiki to document knowledge. The wiki has become our common information platform, in which we can write down, search for, and find every piece of information we need during our daily business. As of today, our wiki contains 400 articles (Figure 15.2).

Figure 15.2: Wiki homepage.

We use it to publish information about the current day, for example activities and rosters; to document rules and procedures; or to gather contact details such as emergency phone numbers. The wiki is not only used as an information platform but also as a tool for saving knowledge: every time a staff member leaves the team, he/she documents experiences, knowledge and information about his/her tasks in order to make it easier for the successor to get started quickly and avoid making the same mistakes as his/her predecessor. We organize the content by adding tags or categories. There is no hierarchical structure. We expect a search is done by the wiki’s full-text search engine, not in any systematic order (Figures 15.3 and 15.4, p. 194 and 195). Common wiki-principles are: 1) everything is common content, 2) there are no personal copyrights, and 3) there are no hierarchies or publishing workflows.

196 

 Anja Flicker and Thomas M. Paul

Figure 15.3: Information about the music library.

We also did some preliminary research on success factors for organizational wikis before beginning. We planned it carefully, supported by an experienced member of my KM-network, and then we discussed and tested it in detail with a pilot team before letting the whole team try it out. We also announced “wiki-gardeners”. Their duty is to have a closer look at the content, add links to other wiki or websites where appropriate, do some “weeding” if necessary (e.g., delete obsolete content), “nourish” new content (e.g., encourage colleagues to add information about a new topic), groom and cultivate here and there (e.g., improve layout and structure of the text). Gardeners make all the difference in our team because they feel an even stronger sense of responsibility than the others. With our wiki, we have gained “information at our fingertips”. We find information much more quickly and easily and the customers at the information desks can notice this directly.



15 Theory in Action 

 197

Figure 15.4: Saved knowledge.

Reflection on Experiences A learning organization needs to reflect regularly. It should become aware of experiences and newly gained knowledge, and be able to use these to adjust future behaviour. We conduct structured project reviews in order to achieve this goal. Everyone who was involved in a project takes part in an “after action” workshop. Thus the project is reflected on and considered from every perspective. During this workshop we review what happened regarding every phase of the project, we talk about goals, activities, failures, and successes, as well as about personal or emotional ups and downs. Finally, the team summarizes what has been learned and expresses conclusions to be implemented in projects to come. Project-review outcomes include an increase of professionalism and efficiency which leads to more quality in our projects and customer services. We also avoid repeating mistakes, but make sure it is possible to repeat successful strategies.

198 

 Anja Flicker and Thomas M. Paul

Though communication, documentation and reflection help to improve a sense of team and organization, the motivation to invest all these internal efforts is to improve our services for customers.

Intellectual Capital Management (ICM) Another method we apply is about strategy and the management of our Intellectual Capital (IC). IC consists of three elements: 1. Employees: The IC experts call this element “human capital”; I prefer to talk about employees – their knowledge, skills, attitudes, motivation, i.e., everything they have between their ears and in their hands and hearts. 2. Structural Capital: This can be an infrastructure that supports our work, methods for communication, and tools for sharing knowledge and documentation of information. Further parts of structural capital can be the library’s processes and team culture. 3. Relational Capital: This consists of relationships to customers, to suppliers and partners, to public relations, and relationships with city council and investors. It leads us to ways of integrating external knowledge. We analyse and evaluate our IC using Intellectual Capital Statements (ICS), the version called “made in Germany” (Arbeitskreis Wissensbilanz 2013; Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour 2004). The IC method in brief We set up a project team that is made up of representatives of all the units, hierarchies, and groups we have in the library. Every employee should have someone in the ICS team who speaks for him/her. In order to fulfil all our tasks, we need different perspectives – not only those of the management or the librarians. Together we discuss our mission and vision and define the library’s goals. Then we analyse the library’s IC. We evaluate every single element of our IC, but it is very important that we do not evaluate in relation to today’s daily work, but in relation to our vision and goals. Our vision for Würzburg Public Library is made up of the following ideas: –– we are one of the best libraries in Germany; –– our efficient, customer-oriented, professional and innovative work is exemplary; –– to serve our customers with excellent products is our first priority;



15 Theory in Action 

 199

–– we have a pioneering spirit and are among the first libraries to implement innovations; –– we act as a team and are a learning organization. At the end of the process of creating an ICS, we have gained transparency about what parts of our IC might need to be developed, in what priority in order, to best reach our goals.

KM Embedded in ICM Combining the evaluation of our IC with our vision, we then design the strategic development of the prioritized parts of our IC. Our KM activities are part of this development. Two examples: –– with our first ICS in 2010/2011 we found out that we needed to improve our activities to save and document knowledge. To meet this need, we implemented our wiki; –– another outcome of the same ICS was the need to develop staff skills. This was a general result. To make it personal and individual, we use the above-explained expert-profiles to gain transparency about who already had which skills and thus who needed exactly what kind of development. This is how we embed KM into strategy. If you apply KM, you deal with only a few parts of the IC: with knowledge (part of human capital) and information (part of structural capital). But there can be more to it: a more holistic approach is the management of the IC of the institution.

The Library as a Success Factor of the City’s IC A few questions to think about: –– What are the most important intangibles of a library? Are they all visible and well known? Is it all in knowledge, that is to say, “between the ears of the employees”? Or are there more things essential for a library’s success? Do we really see everything? Do we really know all the hidden potentials? How much time, money, and attention do we invest to develop and sustain them? –– What if we design our products and services for every citizen – not only for those who already are customers of the library? How can we position our

200 

 Anja Flicker and Thomas M. Paul

library as part of the city’s structural and relational capital? My vision is that the future of libraries lies here!

Challenges and looking forward Public Libraries as structural capital success factors can be the engines of innovation within a community – for the city council and urban administration as well as for the citizens. Libraries can act as prototypes: pioneers who try out new technologies, methods, and tools. Who else will play this role without commercial, political, religious or any other tendentious motivation? In Würzburg we have succeeded in creating the image of a “first mover”. We were the first institution of the city administration, for example, to have a wiki, to work with expert-profiles or to offer WIFI to the public. Our experience has been that after a while, other institutions get interested, ask us how this or that works, and want to implement it too. They are impressed that their library, the information and media specialist, is always ahead of the times. What librarians need for this vision to come true is mostly courage, I believe: –– courage to change – our role, our attitudes, our habits, our houses; –– courage to try something new that could fail (fail and learn is a major principle of KM, so do not be afraid of it); –– courage to share knowledge with the customers and develop things together; and to accept that collective intelligence and the knowledge of the crowd is bigger than one’s personal knowledge. I believe that tomorrow’s KM is more about “shared knowledge” than about “I know better than you”; –– and finally, courage to “Go out, meet people, speak up in public for your library” (Lux 2012).

References Arbeitskreis Wissensbilanz. 2013. “Wissensbilanz – Made in Germany.” http://www. akwissensbilanz.org/index-en.htm. Accessed on 25 May 2015. Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour. 2004. Intellectual Capital Statement – Made in Ger­many: Guideline.” Berlin: Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour. http://www.akwissens bilanz.org/Infoservice/Infomaterial/Leitfaden_english.pdf. Accessed on 25 May 2015. Lux, Claudia. 2012. “Taking Knowledge Management to New Horizons: Interview with Claudia Lux.” IFLA KM section newsletter 14 http://www.ifla.org/publications/knowledgemanagement-section-newsletter?og=85. Accessed on 25 May 2015. Snowden, Dave. 2008. Rendering Knowledge http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/renderingknowledge/. Accessed on 6 October 2015.

Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury

16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times 16 and Building the Way for Future Success Abstract: People resist change. Lack of control over a situation, a fear of the unknown, an upset in status quo, no interest in keeping up with changing technology or institutional restructuring – these are just some of the reasons why. Our mid-size academic library has been undergoing myriad changes over the past several years. One result of those changes was that 7 out of 37 library positions have been opened, filled or eliminated, which has shifted the way that the Library looks at leadership development, managing change, and knowledge transfer. While the value of knowledge transfer may be inherently apparent, it is also a huge investment of time and effort on everyone’s part. So, questions were raised: when a library is temporarily or permanently short-staffed and everyone is wearing several hats, what are the best practices for transferring knowledge to the new staff and preventing loss of organizational memory? For our Library in these circumstances, this was the central question. This paper will provide practical applications of knowledge management concepts within an academic library setting. It will address three components of knowledge management, namely human, structural and relational, and will discuss strategies and tools for using each to navigate a process that promotes change. It will look at our successes, as well as our failures. It will discuss issues that range from strategic planning to documenting changes, and will answer how to innovate without ambiguity, how to maintain private boundaries and confidentiality, and how to target critical behaviours, and it will give advice on conflict resolution. This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Lyon, France, in August 2014. 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success

202 

 Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury

Introduction It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. (Charles Darwin, 1809–1882)

Knowledge Management – Need and Approach Knowledge management is a practice lauded as a twenty-first century management strategy for business organizations. Rao (2005, 3) asserts that businesses operate in an environment marked by “increasing economic and political turbulence, a faster pace of innovation, an inter-networked organizational structure, a focus on intellectual capital, and an increasing employee churn rate”. Knowledge management, according to Rao, can help business deal with the loss of an estimated 4.5% of corporate knowledge due to employee turnover, information mismanagement, and knowledge hoarding. While some of these challenges are cultural problems, others can be resolved through the proper alignment of content management systems, information policies and knowledge work. Tools and techniques such as content management systems, taxonomies, groupware, online communities of practice, portals, social network analysis, e-learning, storytelling, wireless platforms, innovation management tools, and inter-organizational knowledge sharing platforms, he states, can help achieve this alignment. In addition to addressing problems, knowledge management can offer other benefits. It is cited as an essential strategy for those seeking to strengthen their value, to improve operations and services, and to inform decisions about investment in resources. When well executed, it can also create conditions for creativity and innovation. In order to execute knowledge management properly, an organization must understand how knowledge is managed among employees, and how individuals share knowledge among themselves. One important aspect of this is knowledge sharing. It is influenced by factors such as a motivation to share, the nature of knowledge, the opportunity to share, and organizational culture. If there is motivation to share knowledge, but the opportunities to share are insufficient, or, if the culture of the organization attributes power to those who are perceived to possess certain knowledge, then the motivation by itself may not result in actual knowledge sharing (Ipe 2003). Non-business organizations have also recognized the value of embracing the concept and exploiting the implications of knowledge management. The environment that these organizations operate within is similar to that noted above for business organizations, i.e., one marked by increasing turbulence, rapid innova-

 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success 

 203

tion, and an emphasis on intellectual capital. Non-business organizations, too, are complex, seek to maximize their use of resources, and struggle with employee turnover. Thus, the use of knowledge management techniques can strengthen a non-business organization’s parent organizations, can assist in facing change, and can competitive advantage in the same way that knowledge management has been shown to assist businesses. Writers within the library profession recognize this and offer ways to consider knowledge management within the context of a library. Tripathy, Patra and Pani describe the concept in terms of action: Knowledge management processes are “the activities put into place to enable and facilitate the creation, sharing and use of knowledge for the benefit of the organisation” (Tripathy, Patra and Pani 2007, 66). Ferguson, Hider and Lloyd focus on results. Knowledge management, they note, is the “...planning, development and implementation of strategies, processes and systems to support the securing of, and value‑adding to, an organisation’s knowledge assets” (Ferguson, Hider and Lloyd 2008, 53). Both sources contribute to an understanding of knowledge management within a library context that suggests that it is no single tool or method, but rather, a set of tools that can be used in different ways on knowledge assets to achieve a similar end, i.e., that of adding value to an organization.

Knowledge Management as Intellectual Capital A study of knowledge management is a study of the management of intellectual capital. Iivonen and Huotari use the term “intellectual capital”, and managing that asset properly, they assert, will provide results similar to what others describe as proper knowledge management. They assert that the managing intellectual capital “adds to existing outcomes by producing something more, a competitive advantage or additional value.” Some examples of the “capital” they characterize include the educational level, skills and experiences of staff, staff’s personal networks, organizational routines, procedures, techniques, relationships with administrative body, and relationships with publishers. They further their argument by proposing that intellectual capital can be divided into three components: human capital, structural capital and relational capital, which provides a useful way of describing the facets of the concept (Iivonen and Huotari 2007). The management of intellectual capital which includes strategies and systems, which addresses human beings and technology within the context of a particular organization, and which is subject to probable change would be a complex, exacting task that would necessarily have to draw on a number of skills.

204 

 Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury

Tripathy, Patra and Panihave, while discussing knowledge management, identified some of those skills. They include: –– interpersonal communication skills: listening reiterating, recording; –– general management skills: human resources management, change management skills; –– information management skills: consolidation, repackaging; –– information technology skills: webpage development, database design, networks; –– strategic thinking; –– writing skills; –– learning skills; –– presentation skills; –– ability to be open and responsive to criticism. Most, if not all, of these high level skills are requisite for managers in an intellectual capital management context. They must be utilized in a combination determined by the circumstances to draw out, transfer and increase the knowledge in existence in an organization (Tripathy, Patra and Panihave 2007). Knowledge management, or intellectual capital management, can be used to add value to an organization. By understanding what its assets are and utilizing knowledge management principles, an organization can adapt successfully to changing conditions. These practices have been followed by various types of entities, including libraries. What follows is a study of the intellectual capital management practices followed by one academic library.

Idaho State University (ISU) Library, Pocatello, Idaho, USA Idaho State University Library is one such library that has employed the use of knowledge management strategies in its operations. Located at a medium-sized public institution, the staff of 35 at three sites administer a full-service academic library for an institution that enrols 9,300 full-time equivalent (FTE) students, many of whom are graduate students. The Library includes a health sciences library, and has extension sites that are 50 and 230 miles from the main campus. As have many libraries, it has undergone change. Limiting the scope to the past five years presents a cornucopia of changes challenging staff. Changes experienced by this library within the most recent five years include:

 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success 

 205

–– a strengthening of promotion and tenure standards for faculty resulting from an upgrade in the Carnegie Classification1 for the university; –– a 33% turnover in faculty (including one death); –– budget-related staff reductions; –– a flat or a reduced budget each year; –– the launch of the Banner enterprise system campus-wide (an administrative system to maintain student, finance, and human resource information); –– the establishment of the Library’s second distance site; –– the Library offered its first for-credit course; –– the Library joined a consortium; –– the Library began creating the university’s institutional repository; –– development efforts began to be expected of the Library, yet it is assigned no development staff. Facing these conditions with a small staff size has provided Library staff with opportunity, or, perhaps, no other choice than to utilize knowledge-management strategies to enable the Library to accomplish its goals. With this utilization of knowledge-management strategies, the administration of the Library is pushed out to all levels of staff, and this causes all staff to have a feet-on-the-ground stake in accomplishing the goals of the Library. There are common elements such as reference, instruction and collection development in all faculty positions, making those positions more homogenous and less diversified than those in larger libraries. This can lead to a group of staff with a team mentality with a common orientation that allows the people-centric nature of knowledge management to engage. Employing Iioven and Huotari’s divisions of intellectual capital allows for a discussion of practices that have been utilized at Idaho State University Library variously to increase, share and benefit from its knowledge assets (Iivonen and Huotari 2007).

Managing Human Capital/Knowledge Canavor (2012) suggests that different age groups have different characteristics, and gives broad outlines to understanding the differences Relevant characteristics for each are as follows:

1 Started in 1970, the Carnegie Classification is a leading framework for recognizing and describing institutional diversity in US higher education. http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/. Accessed on 10 September 2015.

206 

 Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury

–– Generation Y or Millennial Generation or Net Generation (born 1980 on) individuals tend to prefer text messaging and social media networking to face to face communication; –– Generation X (born 1965–1980) individuals tend to value independence, self-sufficiency, freedom and responsibility, resourcefulness; –– Baby Boomers (born 1946–1964) individuals tend to be loyal, work-centric, value office face time, tend to be workaholics, confident and comfortable with confrontation. Understanding these differences as they pertain to job and work-related behaviour is important in the management of human capital/knowledge in terms of the method of communication used, the degree of independence expected, and what constitutes motivating factors, etc. Practices that have been successful in managing human capital at Idaho State University include the following: –– using annual evaluations as a tool for joint goal setting between supervisor and supervisee. This can clarify priorities, and, in combination with conducting position assessments regularly and at each vacancy allow the Library to adapt to changes in environment; –– deploying cross-training as another strategy for skills transfer and one that allows for future flexibility in job assignments. At the ISU Library there is a consistent practice of pairing new librarians, without reference desk experience, with a seasoned professional. For library instruction, cross-training by team-teaching is a useful approach to use for staff who are uneasy about teaching; –– promoting participation in professional workshops. Professional organizations such as the American Library Association (ALA) provide online learning resources. For instance ALA’s Association of Library Collections and Technical Services (ALCTS) conducts e-forum discussions via email exchanges on hot topics in cataloguing, electronic resources management etc. ALCTS also archives past webinars on its portal page; –– holding “Education Hours”. In the late 1990s the head of reference instituted in-house knowledge-sharing sessions for the purpose of training reference staff and librarians on the book and CD-ROM resources available in the Library. These Education Hours have grown into library-wide sessions in which a designated staff member will teach herself, and then teach colleagues about resources, programs, software, innovations and more and continues today. Participation is voluntary, although some staff have included attendance in their development plans in conjunction with their annual evaluations; –– making travel to and from distance sites and the main campus a standard practice. Staff located at a distance from the main campus are isolated and,

 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success 

––

––

––

––

––

 207

while distance technologies such as Skype or Collaborate can help, nothing compares to having either the person come to the main campus or the supervisor or colleague go to the distance site. The ISU Library learned this the first time it employed a librarian at a distance site. As he left for another job, he complained about how he did not feel part of the Library. As a result of this, expenses for travel for the Library’s two distance librarians to visit the main campus regularly are built into the travel budget, as are travel expenses for the Dean and other administration and systems people are funded to visit the distance sites. This has allowed for the integration of distance librarians into the culture of the institution and has assisted in creating a unified, although dispersed, library operation; holding informal new employee orientation. Frequent and regular meetings with new employees allow supervisors the time to assess a new employee’s skills. Weekly is a good frequency at first, and the meeting time should be mutually agreed upon and regarded as a priority. This is the time for supervisors to access a new employee’s skills and knowledge, as well as her comfort level with taking new assignments. With this in mind, it becomes important to think about demographics in structuring effective communication, and to assess continually the efficiency of weekly meeting and gradually decrease the meeting frequency to once in two weeks, once a month, etc.; encouraging mentoring by senior staff to share advice and encouragement with new staff, many of whom are just beginning to explore the areas of the library profession that interest them the most. These mentoring opportunities can also be used to address areas of professional development common to all faculty members: promotion and tenure, service to the institution and community. Such opportunities may reside outside of the established supervisory-supervisee relationship, and may require continuous cultivation; invoking storytelling. A story is a recounting of what has happened in a situation, and is best delivered in a casual relaxed manner. Most people have heard many stories about their organizations. (Rothwell 2004) From uplifting stories on successful grant writers and prolific scholarly publishers to cautionary tales of disruptive behaviours and subsequent consequences – these are the effective ways to learn; practising job shadowing. At ISU, a newly hired Assistant University Librarian for Systems was “overlapped” with an outgoing veteran Associate University Librarian for Systems for a six-month period. This was an excellent mentoring opportunity for the new employee to learn and grow; however, it requires that funding for overlapping positions be arranged; using the rumour mill. One of the most frustrating things as a regular employee is to know that things are being discussed that you might be inter-

208 

 Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury

ested in, or have knowledge about and you don’t know that the topic is being discussed at the administrative level. This is where open conversations about what is being talked about and an airing of rumours can be useful. The trick is to be clear that what is being discussed is only in discussion/rumour and is not hard fact. This brings forward people who are interested in pursuing the topic and those who want to weigh in for good or ill; –– another way to use casual communication is to be sure to talk about the good things staff are doing to other members of the staff. It lets staff know what characteristics you look for in a good employee and what you consider good standards of behaviour or great achievements. It can also foster teamwork; –– cultivating a culture of “yes”. It is important to provide support to those who are resistant to change, giving them lead time to think about the changes, training if needed and final decisions and implementations at the end. Staff who embrace change and innovation and who come forward with ideas and suggestions are valuable and can assist the process. An example lies in one of ISU’s distance sites that has experienced a decrease in reference requests. A staff member there has volunteered to take on more cataloguing, which had previously been performed only at the main campus. Another staff member is excited about getting an online store in place and has agreed to take on the task of setting it up.

Managing Organizational/Structural Capital/ Knowledge Effectively managing organizational/structural capital can be defined as the creative deployment of currently available organizational tools to achieve organizational goals. It is often called into play when the purchase of tools to assist staff in achieving goals is simply not an option. Taking a critical stance toward options available in the marketplace, combined with creative thinking, can result in less expensive and more useful alternatives. An example lies in a library’s contemplation of adopting some form of opensource software. While the software may have the features needed and be of low cost, using it effectively often will require that there be someone on staff with the time and technical expertise to install and maintain the software. For those libraries that have neither the money to spend on proprietary software nor the technical expertise on hand to maintain open-source software, the free Google Apps suite offers an excellent alternative (Hartnett and Koury 2012).

 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success 

 209

Ways of managing organizational/structural capital at the ISU Library include: –– using Google Sites for tracking project progress. At the ISU Library, Google Sites is being used to document progress on two important projects: implementing a new discovery service from ExLibris and tracking and managing the Library’s upcoming recarpeting and earthquake-bracing project. Google Sites allows for updating and reading ability to be controlled by user, this makes an ideal tool for staff to answer their own questions about these long term projects; –– using Google Sites for maintaining collective documents. Google Sites is currently being used as the repository for the Library’s faculty handbook. Here is where policies ranging from those regulating research release time to promotion and tenure can be found. Since some of the policies have undergone significant revision at the university and the library level and are critical to the work lives of Library faculty, storing the files centrally is effective. Again, the control by user for updating and reading allows for a simplified, clear solution; –– using Google Drive for documents requiring input from a number of staff. ISU Library uses this central gathering device for collective statistics gathering, for sign-up sheets for staff events and for informal, collaborative performance reviews of staff. Input on this class of documents is desired from all and can be easily managed; –– using a shared internal drive for access to internal information. This provides a secure environment for what may be considered sensitive or controversial information, or for use by a small number of people. At the ISU Library this has been used to store journal cut information and to manage a policies and procedures updating process to help effectively transfer institutional knowledge. The use of a centralized storage location allows new staff to review internal information on their own terms, which introduces them to how things are done and provides them with an opportunity to edit or suggest new processes. Veteran staff get a reminder on procedures or an opportunity to suggest removing redundant steps; –– exploiting blogs and group email lists. Blogs and/or email lists are used among the library staff to disseminate real time information about what is happening at the reference desk and with online resources etc. One staff member is charged with moving e-mails between individuals from the list to an internal blog for future use by all. The Library also employs a blog on its web page to promote its own and/or university events; –– developing information-literacy tutorials. This practice can be used as an alternative to face-to-face teaching in limited cases, and also encourages col-

210 

––

––

––

––

 Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury

laboration with general education course faculty to create, design quizzes, etc. Tutorials can be tied into course management software; utilizing distributed maintenance software for library products. The ISU Library has created subject-based Wiki and LibGuides as aids to reference and instruction and as ways to reach distance students. This also distributes web-page creation and maintenance among a greater number of staff; using Skype. This is used at ISU for distance personnel to participate in meetings on the main campus and supplements the in-person visits discussed above; using e-learning techniques. With an exponential growth of information and plethora of new technologies, e-learning is transforming ways of learning and knowledge sharing. Publishers not only provide subject specific webinars, but they also create wikis (LexisNexis), twitter feeds (EBSCO), YouTube training channels (Thomson Reuters). ISU Library staff have availed themselves of these tools numerous times; monitoring technological change. Some on the ISU Library staff follow blogs such as Boing Boing and Gizmodo to keep an eye on the tech world. It is useful to monitor the NMC Horizon Report: Higher Ed Edition (New Media Consortia 2015). Based on direction information from the 2010 report, the Library has been increasingly purchasing electronic books. It has implemented quick response (QR) codes as a means of providing alternative access for patrons to its Gale Virtual Reference Library eBook collection to create opportunities for serendipitous browsing in the stacks. The discussion in the 2012 Horizon Report on tablet computing was compelling to the Library, but funds were limited, so it bought a single iPad as a mobile tool to be used only by staff when making presentations. The report also discussed about cloudbased computing, and the Library has been increasingly using Google Apps for storing and sharing library documentation. Guided by ideas in the 2013 Horizon Report, the Library is considering migrating to a cloud-based integrated library system (ILS), and studying local applications for 3D printing.2

Managing Relational Capital/Knowledge If, as Nitse and Parker note, “Competitive intelligence is the process by which organizations gather information and analyse it to solve a wide variety of prob2 The earlier editions of the Horizon Report are available at http://redarchive.nmc.org/horizonproject/horizon-reports/horizon-report-higher-ed-edition. Accessed on 6 October 2015.

 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success 

 211

lems or satisfy requests for information,” and, “these range from competitive information about competitors or customers, to information on mergers and acquisitions or recruiting” (Nitse and Parker 2002, 396–397), then managing relational capital is to libraries what engaging in competitive intelligence is to the business world. The process of gathering external knowledge for the purpose of solving internal problems thus serves as the final component in this intellectual capital discussion. Practices that the ISU Library has followed for managing relational capital/ knowledge include: –– monitoring vendor offerings for collections and systems. The Library has a standing committee of people who review possible collection enhancements and communicate with vendors about offerings. All staff remain aware of system offerings via conference attendance, listservs and monitoring the literature; –– joining consortia. The Library is an active member of several consortia. The interaction with like-minded staff that this provides has generated ideas and practices, in addition to valuable discounts on collection purchases; –– monitoring technological changes. To keep abreast of new technology (e.g., MOOCs, 3D printing, robotics, curved-screen TVs), consider visiting technical conferences such as the annual Consumer Electronics conference in Las Vegas, Nevada. Additionally, the NMC Horizon Report: Higher Ed Edition will report on new and developing technologies to anticipate and apply; –– making external contacts an information source. ISU Library staff are aggressive about making contacts with vendors and peers at conferences and educational opportunities, and from these contacts, learn about initiatives peer libraries are implementing; –– securing representation in university groups. ISU Library faculty recently fought to retain our seat on university governance committees. These are useful opportunities to learn from and to educate others on campus, thereby promoting the Library’s interests; –– determining when the help of a consultant is needed. The Head of Special Collections passed away unexpectedly. This left one paraprofessional staff member in the department, and the situation was made even worse in that the previous Head of Special Collections had also passed away unexpectedly. Institutional memory was erased by these two deaths, and a failure of the main computer for the department exacerbated this difficult situation. The Library realized that it needed help and was able to secure as a consultant the Head of Special Collections and Archives at another institution. The consultant did an extensive survey of the department’s current status, reviewed the documentation that existed and did not exist, reviewed the state of the

212 

 Sandra Shropshire, Jenny Semenza and Regina Koury

various collections and wrote a lengthy summary of the condition of the archives and special collections. This, along with recommendations for the kind of experience to seek in a replacement, greatly assisted the Library in providing for the future management of this department.

Conclusion Miller notes that no organization is filled with change agents ready to rethink basic assumptions about practice, or to question time-honoured values upon which they believe that practice is based (Miller 2012). Yet contemporary organizations confront change regularly, so circumstances will force the issue and mid- and lower-level staff may find themselves in new roles as rethinkers and questioners. Since history suggests that many revolutions began as minority movements, the dynamics of this type of momentum in libraries should not be dismissed. The ISU Library has experienced this, having faced numerous tipping points for change within the last five years. Each caused the Library to question traditional mores and utilize the practices discussed in managing valuable human, organizational, and relational intellectual capital to steer the Library in a new direction.

References Canavor, Natalie. 2012. Business Writing in the Digital Age. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. Ferguson, Stuart, Philip Hider and Anne Lloyd. 2008. “Are Librarians the Ultimate Knowledge Managers? A Study of Knowledge, Skills, Practice and Mindset.” The Australian Library Journal 57 (1): 39–62. Hartnett, Eric and Regina Koury. 2012. “Using Google Apps through the Electronic Resource Life Cycle.” Collection Management 37 (1): 1–8. Iivonen, Mirja, and Maija-Leena Huotari. 2007. “The University Library’s Intellectual Capital.” Advances in Library Administration and Organization 25: 83–96. Ipe, Minu. 2003. “Knowledge Sharing in Organizations: A Conceptual Framework.” Human Resource Development Review 2 (4): 337–359. Miller, Rush. 2012. “Damn the Recession, Full Speed Ahead.” Journal of Library Administration 52 (1): 3–17. New Media Consortia. 2015. “NMC Horizon Report, 2015 Higher Education Edition.” http:// redarchive.nmc.org/horizon-project/horizon-reports/horizon-report-higher-ed-edition. Nitse, Philip S., and Kevin R. Parker. 2002. “Library Science, Knowledge Management, Competitive Intelligence: Archive Theory, the Common Link.” Reference Librarian 38 (79/80): 395–407.

 16 Managing Change in Turbulent Times and Building the Way for Future Success 

 213

Rao, Madanmohan. 2005. Knowledge Management Tools and Techniques. Amsterdam: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Rothwell, William J. 2004. “Knowledge Transfer: 12 Strategies for Succession Management.” IPMA-HR News February. Tripathy, Jayant Kumar, Nihar Kanta Patra and Manas Ranjan Pani. 2007. “Leveraging Knowledge Management: Challenges for the Information Professional.” DESIDOC Bulletin of Information Technology 27 (6): 65–72.

Hannele Näveri-Ranta

17 Applying a Dialogical Approach to 17 Development Discussions 17 Applying a Dialogical Approach to Development Discussions

Management of Learning as a Catalyst for Change Abstract: A new way of conducting development discussion is introduced. This dialogical approach includes both individual and common elements. The former are personal development discussions defining the work identity and compiling personal learning plans; the latter are group discussions in learning meetings, and learning maps. Development discussions are an essential part of knowledge management. Multiple methods and tools have been constructed and attention has been paid on management of learning. Promoting learning contributes the ability to encounter challenges caused by continuous and rapid changes in the operational environments of libraries. This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Lyon, France, in August 2014.

Introduction The University of Helsinki is the oldest and largest university in Finland. It places heavy emphasis on research of top international standards and high-quality teaching. Helsinki University Library is the largest multidisciplinary academic library in Finland. It operates on campus and online. The four campus libraries and the joint services of the library are responsible for the information and library services for research and learning at the University of Helsinki. The number of library staff is 218. In Helsinki University Library a dialogical approach, a new way of conducting development discussions, has been implemented since 2010. A theoretical framework of a new, dialogical way is based on the research and development work of Dr Heli Ahonen (Ahonen 2008, 2010; Virkkunen and Ahonen 2008).1 Methods and tools, for example a development discussion and learning plan schedule, a fourfold table, and learning meetings and maps, have been further developed in close cooperation with the library. Development discussion and learning plan schedules have been used in the whole library, but so far learning meetings and 1 I would like to thank Dr Heli Ahonen for formulating the theory of dialogical approach and her kind cooperation in further exploring the subject in practice.



17 Applying a Dialogical Approach to Development Discussions 

 215

maps have been implemented and further developed only in one of the campus libraries, Kumpula. Multiple qualitative tools have been developed in the course of the dialogical approach. Utilizing multiple qualitative methods helps to gain deeper understanding about phenomena explored (Fabritius 1999). Currently our environment is under rapid and continual change, and at the same time the direction of the change is difficult to predict or unpredictable. Managing contexts has become more complicated, even complex (Snowden and Boone 2007). Development discussions are an essential part of knowledge management and it is worth noticing that they will be included in strategic management as well. The staff costs form a considerable part in the budgets of libraries. Due to rapid and unpredictable change, we are not wholly capable to anticipating what kind of competencies will be needed in the future. Thus, the management of learning is required. The dialogical approach is guided by the management of learning. In the dialogical approach the whole work community is included in anticipating the upcoming period and preparing for it. During the process knowledge and competencies needed in the future are emphasised.

Stages of the Dialogical Approach The dialogical approach consists of methods and tools which are regularly updated and regenerated. The methods are learning meetings and personal development discussions. A set of tools have been developed; they are a fourfold table, a work identity cycle, a learning plan and a learning map. Stages of dialogical approach to development discussions are described in Figure 17.1.

Figure 17.1: A dialogical approach to development discussions.

216 

 Hannele Näveri-Ranta

The First Learning Meeting The first learning meeting of the year takes place after a strategic plan and an action of the library is developed. The purpose of the first group discussion in the workplace is to build a fourfold table. A preliminary draft of a fourfold table is done by the managers and superiors on the basis of a strategic plan of the library, but the members of the work community discuss it in more detail using their own experience and observations in practice. The current situation is discussed and analysed together: how the work is done, who the patrons are, what services are well conducted, and how the organisation is functioning and what kind of learning habits it utilizes. After an interactive conversation, the ideas will be collected in order to determine what kind of new work tasks come up in the upcoming period, how the current work tasks could be done better, and what kind of learning will be needed when these tasks are carried out. The results are written on the fourfold table. The fourfold table shows the development phase of library services. The table describes stable, both permanent and developing library services, and patrons’ relationships, and the new ways of service production and learning habits which enable development. In the table, the direction of development trends of library services, customers, intentions of services and modes of producing services and learning are shown. The idea of the fourfold table is to present the library’s target programme and action plan in a visual form for both current and new work tasks. The four quarters of the fourfold table will describe different fields: –– basic work tasks conducted in the library (e.g., cataloguing and indexing); –– how to improve and optimize these services so that they can be complemented as well as possible, and how they could be further developed; –– what services customers will want (e.g., services that utilize social media); and last but not least, –– what kind of new services will be requested and should be developed in order to manage or even survive in a changing operational environment, (e.g., bibliometric methods and analysis and research data management).

Personal Development Discussions At the second stage of the dialogical approach, personal development discussions are conducted. Library superiors conduct annual development discussions with each of their employees. During the discussions, the superior and employee talk about the employee’s future goals, how the employee’s own work contributes to the unit’s goals, as well as the kind of competence and resources the employee



17 Applying a Dialogical Approach to Development Discussions 

 217

needs to achieve his or her objectives. The role of the development discussion is to help managers and supervisors to assess the performance of their unit with respect to defined targets, to recognize the competencies and development potential of their staff. The target is to enable the success of the unit and its members as well. In the course of development discussion emphasis is put on the dialogue: one listens to the other side in order to understand, find the meanings, and the points of connection. Successful discussions should be open and interactive, with both parties actively listening to one another and being prepared to both provide and receive feedback. An atmosphere of cooperation and shared understanding is sought. The new kind of development discussion form was modified and tools were built up to help the conversation. These tools are a fourfold table, a cycle of a work identity and a personal plan of development targets, called a learning plan. A fourfold table will show the upcoming adjustments in work tasks and it is supposed to form the basis of the discussion. The employee gets an overview of all the work done in the library and workplace and should find her or his recent and upcoming work tasks on the fourfold table, plus see the connections of these tasks to others. It also clarifies what the direction of the changes is and what kind of development and learning these changes will require from the whole work community. One subject of the discussion is what kind of attitude the employee has towards her or his job and what kind of changes will reveal learning habits. A helping tool for this kind of estimation is the cycle of the work identity. Nowadays changes and development are more rapid than before. Earlier we spoke about a profession; nowadays it is more precise to call it a work identity. The work we do has an influence on our identity. This kind of identity will transform over time. The work identity will evolve and grow at the same time as we learn and conduct various kinds of work tasks. The work identity is rather a cycle than a stable entity. In the course of development discussion, the continuously changing work identity of the employee is discussed. In the very first dialogical development discussion the previous work history of the employee is also taken into account and turning points of the work identity are examined from the point of view of learning new skills. Four types of learning will be found in the cycle of the work identity. They are survival, seeking, innovative and optimising learning. In the course of discussion, the employee will reflect on which type of learning she or he is presently utilising in the work tasks. At the survival phase, work is simply coping day-by-day. Work seems to be a mere routine and does not offer anything new to learn, or to the contrary, it has an excess of challenges and too many things to learn. This kind of situation cannot last a long time, but the employee has to seek an explanation and try to understand why working is frustrating or stressful. She or he begins to orga-

218 

 Hannele Näveri-Ranta

nize contacts and means to opening up new views of work tasks. The situation is bound to cause turning a point in the work identity. It is a position of choice whether to accept new challenges or to hold onto familiar operating modes. A solution is needed and it can be the beginning of a new learning process. Either the employee gets new kinds of work tasks or finds a new job. The phase of innovative learning follows; it is learning to remodel and renew. Having gained new work tasks or even a new job, the employee has a fresh view of things, poses various questions, and is ready and eager to find new solutions together with colleagues. Gradually, when new skills increase, the employee is familiar with the job but still interested in deepening and strengthening her or his knowledge, and willing to transmit it to others as well. The employee has moved to the optimizing phase in learning. The longer in the course of the work identity cycle the employee stands the more committed she or he is in the work. The outcome of the development discussion is a plan of personal development targets, which each employee will compile. These targets will be written on the learning plan schedule. It defines what kind of knowledge and skills or behaviours one needs to develop in order to gain good work results. The employee will define three to five learning objectives on which she or he will concentrate during the next few months. Finding out how to learn is the employee’s responsibility. Naturally the first idea which comes into mind is to search for formal training events to achieve the skills needed. In some cases, however, such formal training just does not exist. Workplace learning can be divided into three general categories: First, most of professional development will be based on on-the-job experiences, tackling challenges and solving problems in the course of work tasks. Second, professional development learning will come from others, (e.g., receiving feedback, sharing experiences or following a colleague at work). Third, a minor part will be based on formal training, like courses and seminars. Therefore it is important to keep in mind the various types of non-formal learning; for example, working alongside others allows the employees to observe and listen to others and to participate in activities in order to learn new practices, to become aware of different kinds of knowledge and expertise, and to gain some sense of other people’s tacit knowledge. Also working with clients may be useful. Tackling a challenging task requires on-the-job learning, and if this is well-supported it may lead to increased confidence and motivation (Eraut 2004). Confidence and motivation may have an effect on the modification and development of one’s work identity. During the year individual learning plans should be maintained and checked up.



17 Applying a Dialogical Approach to Development Discussions 

 219

The Second Learning Meeting After conducting all dialogical development discussions with the employees the supervisor will arrange a learning meeting in the workplace. The purpose of this group conversation is to find out what kind of learning is needed and what kind of interests each employee has and what kind of things are the most interesting or necessary to learn. The common attributes of individual plans will be discussed in the learning meeting in order to indicate the important common learning goals of the unit which can be the whole library, a team or some special service activity. It is important to build and form structures that facilitate team learning, with features such as boundary crossing and openness. Team learning requires individuals to engage in dialogue and discussion; therefore team members must develop open communication, shared meaning, and shared understanding. Several ways of arranging learning meetings have been tried out and tested. The very first learning meeting was begun in a simple way by talking in pairs and then the outcomes of conversation were gathered together. The other way is to do group work in advance. Members of the groups may be named beforehand by the supervisor or the groups are allowed to build up freely on the basis of peers. One possibility is that every group has a certain theme to work out. Group work on the peer basis turned out to be quite time-consuming. The most effective way proved to be theme-based workgroups done in advance. In the learning meeting the workgroup results were presented, discussed and further developed. As a result of learning meetings the work community will create a common and a shared learning map where the learning objectives are introduced, responsibilities are named, and the time of implementing is set. Since 2011, three kinds of learning maps have been tried out. The first was a simple chart and the second consisted of various concentric circles which described tasks and activities. The latest and the most usable turned out to be a multidimensional chart where the common learning objectives were introduced, responsibilities were named, and the time of implementing was set. The learning map which includes links to information sources can also serve as a tool for personal development and orientation when one has to learn to conduct work tasks of a new kind or when a new employee starts to work.

220 

 Hannele Näveri-Ranta

Conclusions The dialogical approach serves as a method of engaging the staff and it can promote workplace well-being as well as cooperation between management, superiors and employees. According to our experience, applying the dialogical approach makes us more flexible, meeting challenges of changing and complicated environment, and personnel seem to be more committed in developing library’s core services, plus developing totally new ones as well. Also the processing of the emergent complexity of the environment will be enabled. The methods used can be divided into individual and those that applied to the work community level. The former are development discussion forms, the work identity cycle, and learning plans; the latter are fourfold tables, learning meetings and learning maps. Group work organized in various ways will enhance team learning. The benefit of team or shared learning is that the problem solving capacity of the unit will improve through better access to knowledge and expertise. It is important to enable building structures that facilitate team learning with features such as boundary crossing and openness, this is especially the case in network connections. Learning meetings and maps require individuals to engage in dialogue and discussion; therefore they develop open communication, shared meaning and understanding. Visualization techniques were applied on the fourfold table, on the work identity cycle and on learning maps. Visualization helps us to comprehend information and to think about it more thoroughly, just by observing figures at a glance. A learning map where the objectives are linked to information sources also proved to serve as a good tool in the orientation process of a new employee. We need to support the work of supervisors as they conduct development discussions in order to make sure that dialogue really becomes effective in the course of discussion, and the tools for helping it will be properly utilised. We need to support employees as well. At first some employees had difficulties in making learning plans. The first idea to gain new skills was to find a formal training event and where to attend. Nevertheless there are several other ways like learning from others, job-shadowing, visiting the colleague who has similar work tasks, etc. The ability of reflection is needed in order to learn from experience. Reflection is associated with learning that has occurred through experience. Reflection is also enhanced, however, when pondering learning events with others (Costa and Kallick 2008, 221–222). Job rotation is one way of learning in a workplace. Thus far we have not succeeded well in promoting it. Focusing on learning in the work is important due to the rapid change of our environment, and especially because nowadays it is more difficult to predict changes. The methods and tools introduced will help all kinds of learning at



17 Applying a Dialogical Approach to Development Discussions 

 221

work. Through the methods introduced employees’ active engagement and motivation to learn become a key element for upgrading library services and making sure that the library will achieve the goals set in its strategic plans. The core target of learning management is a combination of demand and supply. The supply consists of development possibilities and even of the new work tasks the organization has to offer for the employees. The supply is shown in the form of fourfold table. The demand represents the ever changing work identity of the employee. It describes the interests of the employee and willingness to develop current work tasks or to obtain new ones in order to gain new skills. The most crucial challenge of the dialogical approach, and especially development discussions, is how to make both demand and supply coincide in order to execute the strategic goals of the library.

Acknowledgement This paper is supported by a SWETS stipend granted by The Society for Finnish Information Specialists and The Swets Information Services.

References Ahonen Heli. 2008. “Oppimisen kohteen ja oppijan vastavuoroinen kehitys. Teleyrityksenasiakaspalvelun työyhteisöjen oppimiskäytäntöjen uudistaminen osana teknologis-taloudellista kumousta.” Väitöskirja, Helsingin yliopisto, Kasvatustieteen laitoksen tutkimuksia 218. [The Reciprocal Development of the Object and Subject of learning: The Renewal of the Learning Practices of Front-line Communities in a Telecommunications Company as Part of the Techno-economical Paradigm Change. Dissertation, The University of Helsinki Department of Education. Research Report 218.] Helsinki: Yliopistopaino. Ahonen, Heli. 2010. “Muutosjohtamisesta oppimisen johtamiseen.” [From Change Management to Management of Learning] In Rajapinnassa – Uusi Helsingin yliopiston kirjasto [At the Interface – the new Helsinki University Library], edited by Kaisa Sinikara et al., 141–152. Costa, Arthur L. and Bena Kallick. 2008. ”Learning Through Reflection.” In Learning and Leading with Habits of Mind , edited by Arthur L. Costa and Bena Kallick. Alexandria, VA Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). http://www.ascd.org/ publications/books/108008/chapters/Learning-Through-Reflection.aspx. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Eraut, Michael. 2004. “Informal Learning in the Workplace.” Studies in Continuing Education 26 (2): 247–273. Fabritius, Hannele. 1999. “Triangulation as a Multi-perspective Strategy in a Qualitative Study of Information Seeking Behaviour of Journalists.” In Exploring the Contexts of Information

222 

 Hannele Näveri-Ranta

Behaviour: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts (13–15 August 1998, Sheffield, UK), edited by T. Wilson and D. K. Allen, 406–419. London: Taylor Graham. Snowden, David J. and Mary E. Boone. 2007. “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making.” Harvard Business Review 12: 68–76. Virkkunen, Jaakko and Heli Ahonen. 2008. Oppiminen muutoksessa. Uusi väline työyhteisön oppimiskäytäntöjen uudistamiseen. [Learning in Change: A New Tool for Renovating Learning Practices in Work Communities.] Helsinki:Infor.

Liz Walkley Hall

18 Using Knowledge Management 18 in Building a Culture of Research

18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research

Abstract: Flinders University, a mid-sized teaching and research institution located in Adelaide, Australia, undertook to develop a research culture among its professional staff to enable them to deal better with change. It created a Research Working Group (RWG) as one strategy to support the effort. This case study of an Australian academic library paper focuses on how knowledge creation, knowledge sharing, and knowledge re-use have manifested in RWG-related research projects. To understand this, two methods were used: an audit of knowledge-management (KM) tools available to the RWG was conducted; and a secondary analysis of interview transcripts was undertaken. Together, these approaches show how KM tools have been used by the RWG in building a culture of research. This paper was developed from a presentation given at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Lyon, France, in August.

Introduction Knowledge management (KM) has been much discussed in the library and information science literature, from papers describing its potential for the profession (Broadbent 1997; Butler 2000; Nelson 2008; Sarrafzadeh, Martin and Hazeri 2010; Townley 2001) to case studies of uptake and impact (Branin 2003; Jain 2013; Jantz 2001; Islam et al. 2015; Porumbeanu Madge 2010). Similarly, there are many representations in the literature of libraries establishing support groups for librarians undertaking research, especially in academic libraries (Blessinger et al. 2010; Cirasella and Smale 2011; Fallon 2012; Gratch 1989; Lee 1995; Sapon-White, King, and Christie 2004). However, there are few who have explored the intersection of knowledge management with creating a culture of research and learning in libraries (Porumbeanu Madge 2012; Sheng and Sun 2007). This paper seeks to add to this literature in describing a case study at an Australian academic library. Flinders University Library has, over the past four years, been actively building a culture of research among its professional staff, in order to equip them with the skills and expertise necessary in an era of continuous change for libraries. It has done so through the implementation of a support group for professional staff to undertake research projects, known as the Research Working Group (RWG). Its brief is to “support the development of a culture of research and professional

224 

 Liz Walkley Hall

reflection in Flinders University Library” (McBain, Culshaw and Walkley Hall 2013, 460). While it is focused on the creation of knowledge in undertaking research, there are other important components: diffusing this knowledge throughout the organization and re-using this knowledge to inform decision making.

Definitions There is no universally recognized definition of knowledge management. It has been noted that the different KM definitions are contextual; that is, they are largely dependent on “the disciplinary tradition and practice from which the authors write” (Ferguson 2006, 198). In LIS literature, especially in an academic library context, Townley’s definition of KM (Townley 2001, 45) is often quoted and is used here: Knowledge management may be defined as the set of processes that create and share knowledge across an organisation to optimise the use of judgement in the attainment of mission and goals.

Knowledge management is concerned with both tacit and explicit knowledge: tacit knowledge is learned from experience, subjective and difficult to capture (Nonaka and Takeuchi, in Arahony 2011, 112). It is embedded in the minds of workers and shared most commonly in social interactions (Townley 2001, 47). Explicit knowledge, by contrast, is more easily communicated by text or diagrams, is objective and can be codified (Nonaka and Takeuchi, cited in Aharony, 2011, 112). The key to effective knowledge management has been described as its human, and therefore social, aspect: “…some analysts understand knowledge management as facilitating interaction among people and groups, this interaction being the real source of knowledge creation and sharing” (Porumbeanu Madge 2012, 246).

Literature Review Knowledge Management in Academic Libraries Knowledge management has been studied widely in the LIS literature, and includes many examples of the use of KM in academic libraries (Branin 2003; Jain 2013; Jantz 2001; Islam et al. 2015; Mphidi and Snyman 2004; Porumbeanu Madge



18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research 

 225

2012; Porumbeanu Madge 2010). As this paper is a case study of an academic library, that sector will be the focus here. One of the earlier case studies is provided by Branin, who describes the implementation of an IT-based knowledge-management solution at the Ohio State University. As an institutional repository, its intention was to capture the variety of digital assets being created by the institution (Branin 2003, 52). This project did not, however, seek to capture any tacit knowledge. Jantz also offers an example of an IT-based knowledge-management tool at the New Brunswick campus library of Rutgers University. The Common Knowledge Database was designed to capture “the informal knowledge that every librarian possesses” (Jantz 2001, 33) – that is, their tacit knowledge. Jantz acknowledges the difficulty of doing this, with both cultural issues in the library and personal issues for librarians who were unaccustomed to sharing knowledge (Jantz 2001, 39). Mphidi and Snyman report on South African academic libraries’ use of intranets as a knowledge-management tool. They identified several factors of intranets as successful knowledge-management tools, including consistency, interactivity, and ease of use (Mphidi and Snyman 2004, 395–96). While all these papers offer examples of KM tools that were innovative at the time, it is also important to recognize that these systems may have less relevance now, given developments in mobile and social media applications. More recent papers on KM in academic libraries explore some of the cultural issues in capturing and sharing librarians’ tacit and explicit knowledge. Porumbeanu Madge creates a model for knowledge sharing in her study of a large academic library in Romania. While noting the importance of technology to underpin the process of knowledge management, she stresses that “developing an organizational culture open to sharing knowledge…is perhaps the most important step” (Porumbeanu Madge, 2012, 255). Her framework emphasises communication, specifically informal communication, as a way of encouraging learning from one’s colleagues (Porumbeanu Madge 2012, 253–260). Huang assesses individual and organizational knowledge activities in academic libraries in China, and finds that while academic librarians recognised themselves as undertaking knowledge-intensive activities, they did not identify their libraries as knowledge-intensive organisations (Huang 2014, 442). Jain examines KM practices in Southern African Development Community (SADC) university libraries. She found that one of the challenges of implementing KM is organizational culture, and that while many SADC community libraries were practicing KM, not all were doing so fully (Jain 2013, 9–10). These papers build a picture of the use of KM in academic libraries around the world. In the Australian LIS literature, however, those who have examined KM have done so outside of the specific confine of academic libraries. Southon and

226 

 Liz Walkley Hall

Todd explore library and information professionals’ perceptions of knowledge management and implications for education in their two part study (Southon and Todd 2001; Todd and Southon 2001); Ferguson discusses the implications of Australian Standard 5037–2005 (Knowledge Management) for the LIS profession (Ferguson 2006); Martin, Hazeri and Sarrafzadeh provide an international perspective of KM from an Australian base (Martin, Hazeri and Sarrafzadeh 2006); and Ferguson, Hider and Lloyd explore whether librarians are the ultimate knowledge managers. (Ferguson, Hider and Lloyd 2008) While some participants in these studies are drawn from academic libraries, none focus exclusively on that sector.

Support for Librarians Undertaking Research There is also a strong body of literature that has examined support for librarians undertaking research. The value of support, such as peer support and mentoring, writing groups and resourcing for research, has been shown to be highly beneficial in creating a research culture (Blessinger et al. 2010; Cirasella and Smale 2011; Gratch 1989; Lee 1995; Sapon-White, King and Christie 2004; Stephens et al. 2011). However, most studies have concentrated on those academic libraries with a tenure process, usually in the United States or Canada. There are fewer examples of how librarians are supported to undertake research where it is not required for promotion (Allen 1986; Fallon 2010; Hall, Kenna, and Oppenheim 2011; Sullivan et al. 2013). Although there have been linkages made between a culture of learning and knowledge management in libraries (Madge 2012; Huang 2014) as well as innovation and knowledge management in libraries (Islam et al. 2015; Sheng and Sun 2007), there has not been a focus specifically on KM in a research context in academic libraries. Those who have examined building a successful research culture have often done so through case studies that describe support for research and its outcomes, usually measured by publication rate (Stephens et al. 2011; SaponWhite, King and Christie 2004; Sullivan et al. 2013; Fallon 2012). The background to, and implementation of, the RWG at Flinders University Library is explored in detail in a separate paper (McBain, Culshaw and Walkley Hall 2013). That paper outlines the context in which the RWG was formed, the structure and governance of the group, and the group’s operation. A subsequent paper then examined impact of the RWG on professional staff (Walkley Hall and McBain 2014). This paper now focuses on looking at how knowledge management has supported building a culture of research, through the creation, sharing and re-use of knowledge.



18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research 

 227

Context University Profile Flinders University is a mid-sized, PhD granting, teaching and research institution based in Adelaide, South Australia. It offers over 350 courses in a range of disciplines, and has research strengths in medicine, psychology and sociology (Flinders University 2013). The University’s student population is approximately 24,000, of whom 15,000 are undergraduate students and 9,000 postgraduate students. There are around 1,100 academic staff and 1,500 professional staff. Flinders University, like most universities in Australia, is a publicly funded institution.

Library Context Flinders University Library, over the last decade or so, strategically aligned itself with the teaching and learning programmes of the University. This has occurred in both the online and physical spaces: for example, the University’s learning management system was adopted as the key mechanism for library service delivery to students; and the library’s public spaces were redesigned to create more shared study facilities and group spaces. The success of this approach has been recognized with high rankings in nationally benchmarked user satisfaction surveys as well as high per capita use of library facilities and resources. However, it is only recently that there have been attempts to build similar engagement with the University’s researchers and research processes. The Research Working Group has been one of these mechanisms. The library employs around 95 staff, almost half of whom (approximately 45%) are qualified librarians. Most librarians hold an undergraduate (Bachelor) degree as well as a postgraduate qualification (Masters or Diploma) in librarianship; those librarians who do hold research higher degrees have earned them in disciplines outside librarianship and, until the implementation of the RWG, there had been little experience of undertaking research in a LIS context. Further, librarians at Flinders are employed as professional staff members of the University rather than academic staff and are not expected to undertake research in order to gain promotion. This is also the case for the majority of other academic libraries in Australia.

228 

 Liz Walkley Hall

Methods In order to understand how KM tools have been used in building a culture of research at Flinders University Library, two methods were used. Firstly, an audit of KM tools offered to the RWG was undertaken, as identified in AS 5037–2005: Knowledge Management (Standards Australia 2005) and augmented by those described by Agarwal and Islam (2014). Secondly, a re-analysis of interviews that were conducted with past and current members of the RWG was undertaken, seeking evidence of how research-related knowledge has been created, shared, and re-used. The interviews were semi-structured and exploratory in nature, seeking narratives rather than quantifiable data; participants were encouraged to describe events in their own words. The target population was those staff who had directly participated in RWG projects. Eleven potential participants were identified, and an invitation to be interviewed was distributed by email to all. This email comprised the formal request as well as the information sheet and consent form. Interviews were recorded using TagPad, an iPad application designed specifically for recording qualitative research interviews (Bornoe et al. 2011). One participant declined to be recorded, but allowed notes to be transcribed. Interviews were analysed using the qualitative data analysis program NVivo, Version 10 (QSR International Pty Ltd).1 Ethics approval for this research was obtained from Flinders University’s Social and Behavioural Research Committee.

Findings Audit of KM tools Knowledge-management tools – also known as enablers – are those activities, techniques and technologies available to organizations to support all phases of the knowledge-management cycle, from capture or creation through to application and re-use (Dalkir 2011, cited in Agarwal and Islam 2014, 323). While many sources of comprehensive lists of KM tools exist, that compiled by Standards Australia has been used as a source list, supplemented by the list of KM information technology (IT) and non-IT tools identified for a LIS context (Agarwal and Islam 2014). Table 18.1 describes each of the KM tools that have been used by the RWG.

1 http://www.qsrinternational.com/product. Accessed on 8 October 2015.



18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research 

 229

Table 18.1: KM tools used at Flinders University Library. Tool

Description

Implementation

Champions and Advocates

Those who actively support the adoption of the change. Both formal and informal leadership roles as champions are advisable (Standards Australia, 2005, 36)

The RWG is led by a Chair who acts as an advisor for both group members and other library staff interested in research. There is also a Consultant attached to the RWG who is an experienced researcher. The Chair and Consultant can be considered the formal champions. All RWG members have selfselected to undertake projects, and in this sense act as informal advocates to the rest of the library staff.

Digital Repository

Allows collections of content to be organised and accessed in a consistent manner (Standards Australia, 2005, 42)

Publications produced by RWG projects can be added to the University’s digital repository, further enabling knowledge sharing outside the library as well as potential knowledge re-use.

File Sharing

Facilitates sharing work online securely for those working in groups (Agarwal and Islam 2014, 336)

The RWG contains members from different workgroups in the library. As RWG projects can sometimes contain confidential information, a RWG share drive was created that is restricted to RWG members only. Members use the shared drive to save working documents, datasets and ethics forms so that other members of their research team can access them.

Intranet/ Wiki

An internal computer network with a web browser application that allows authorised access to documents, forms, etc. that is searchable, accessible and secure (Standards Australia 2005, 50)

All RWG projects, both past and current, are documented on a Wiki on the library’s Intranet to which all library staff have passwordcontrolled access. Each project can upload those documents that can be shared internally (e.g., timelines, completed ethics forms, survey instruments, internal reports and the like) that are not necessarily suitable for an external audience.

Knowledge Cafe

A group discussion, used to reflect and to develop and share any thoughts/ insights that emerge in a non-confrontational way (Agarwal and Islam 2014, 331)

A Knowledge-Café was organized by the RWG Chair, to which all professional staff were invited. Facilitated discussions were held on three topics: library data and statistics; the publishing process; ALIA’s role in research. This gave the library’s professional staff the opportunity to both share their own knowledge and learn from each other.

230 

 Liz Walkley Hall

Table 18.1: (continued) Meetings

Effective meetings can facilitate sharing of both tacit and explicit knowledge, and can help build a bank of relevant knowledge. (Standards Australia, 2005, 43)

RWG meetings are conducted throughout the year. Members report on progress, share their experiences and offer advice and support. As RWG members work in different areas of the library, it is also beneficial in bringing together staff that may not normally interact regularly with one another.

Networks and Communities

Networks and Communities that extend beyond organizational boundaries to external groups or individuals helps expand the existing shared knowledge base. (Standards Australia 2005, 45)

RWG members are encouraged to network outside the organization in order to contribute to the wider development of professional ideas and discourse. Interactions with library colleagues, for example through ALIA (Australian Library and Information Association) events, as well as more broadly in the higher education sector, are both considered highly useful. Conferences, seminars and workshops have all been used to facilitate sharing amongst wider networks by members of the RWG.

Peer Assistance

Direct knowledge transfer from individuals to others; used to solicit assistance from peers and subject matter experts (Agarwal and Islam 2014, 331)

RWG members are encouraged to seek support from one another, and from previous members. In addition, an informal register of research interests and strengths of those outside the group is maintained, in order to call upon the wider expertise available in the library. The most used ‘peer expert’ to date would be the University’s statistical consultant.

While by no means exhaustive, this list provides an example of how these specific tools have been used to build and support a culture of research. Agarwal and Islam note that no single set of tools is applicable across every library and stress that IT tools are constantly changing (Agarwal and Islam 2014, 330). Their advice is apposite: libraries seeking to adopt KM tools or activities should undertake their own audit to discover what might best suit them at the time of their implementation.



18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research 

 231

Interviews Seven librarians self-selected to participate in interviews, of a possible 11 who were deemed eligible for participation through their direct involvement in a past or current RWG project. Recruitment for interviews coincided with a teaching break, making some staff unavailable due to leave. To differentiate between responses, participant codes – P1 for participant one, and so on – have been used.

Knowledge creation Interview participants were encouraged to explore what they had learnt through undertaking their research projects. While some interpreted as a skills assessment, analysis of the transcripts found that many did refer to the creation new knowledge. This manifested in descriptions of the doing of research projects, with some participants articulating that they may not have created their knowledge any other way. For example, P5 noted that doing research “forces you to learn … then you can be a bit of an authority” and P6 observed that “I don’t think I could have understood it [research] until I did it”. These responses invoke “knowledge by practice” (Sheng and Sun 2007, 45) as a knowledge-creation method. However, the largest gain in knowledge creation that participants identified was in completing the University’s Social and Behavioural Research Ethics Committee’s approval process for projects with human participants. Even though some participants had previous research experience, this was the first time that all but one had submitted an Ethics application. All interview participants mentioned the Ethics process specifically, and again alluded to the value of doing it as a learning experience: ... one of the most valuable parts of the whole project was going through it [the Ethics approval process] (P2) … the Ethics process … I don’t think there’s any other way we in the library could have learnt that kind of thing (P5) … going through Ethics approval... that’s been useful in many ways, thinking not just about our research but understanding what our researchers do (P6)

It could be argued that this was most obvious in participants’ minds because it was the first time most had done it, and that many other aspects, such as literature reviews or report writing, have a basis in other professional tasks. However, it does seem that the participants also felt it to be a baptism of sorts into the

232 

 Liz Walkley Hall

research world, with one saying she now felt she had “bona fide involvement” as a researcher (P5) because she’d successfully completed an ethics application.

Knowledge Sharing Knowledge sharing has been described as the critical barrier for knowledge management (Arahony 2011, 111). With an estimation that up to 90% of the knowledge in any organization is located in its employees’ heads (Sheng and Sun 2007, 38), opportunities to share this are crucial to maximizing its re-use, as well as the potential creation of new knowledge. The RWG has brought professional staff together to share knowledge that they have gained in undertaking a research project through knowledge management tools such as meetings, seminars, knowledge cafes, and the use of peer assistance, as described in Table 18.1. Interview participants were asked to explore how they had shared what they’d learnt as part of their research projects. When these responses were analysed and coded, three tiers of knowledge sharing emerged: –– sharing knowledge within their own research groups; –– sharing knowledge internally, with peers in the RWG as well as more broadly within the library; –– sharing knowledge externally, with others in the profession. The opportunity to share knowledge and learn from each other was identified by three participants who work in research groups (P3, P5, P7), with one identifying that knowledge creation can be borne out of knowledge sharing: “a lot of it is learned from listening to other people’s experiences” (P3). One participant also described how, because her team consisted of colleagues from different departments, they’d had opportunities to share knowledge outside of their research work too: “We’ve gone to meetings to ostensibly talk about our research and come out with something [else]… because it’s not focused on our normal working conversations – it brings up stuff, or values, that hasn’t been shared [before]”. All interview participants identified that they had shared knowledge with their peers, either within the RWG or more broadly in the library. Mostly this had come about due to mechanisms put in place by the RWG, consistent with the literature in showing that opportunities need to be created for people to share their tacit knowledge (Butler 2000, 38; Townley 2001, 47). These KM tools for tacit knowledge sharing include RWG meetings (identified by P1, P3 and P4) and RWG seminars which all professional staff are invited to attend (identified by P5). Meetings were described as “motivating” (P1) and “learning experiences” (P4).



18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research 

 233

P5 described how “the [internal] presentations to talk about research are really important [because] everyone in the library gets involved”. The third tier of knowledge sharing identified by participants was external; that is, sharing knowledge more widely in the profession. Analysis of the transcripts found that conference attendance was mentioned specifically by P1, P4, P5 and P7. This is in line with the description of “networks and communities” by Standards Australia, which enables “individuals [to] return to their organization with new knowledge or a contrasting viewpoint” (Standards Australia 2005, 45). Two participants also identified that the RWG was changing the library’s culture of sharing knowledge externally. P5 felt that in the past, Flinders had been “… very good at doing stuff and yet we didn’t tell anyone about it”. P4 noted that prior to the implementation of the RWG, Flinders’ librarians were not “going out there [i.e. to present at conferences] … but now we’re getting out and about and it’s really fantastic.” Whether it is the personality of individuals involved (Arahony 2011), or that the organizational culture is favourably inclined toward knowledge sharing (Porumbeanu Madge 2010), the outcome remains the same: in order to build a successful research culture across the library, it is essential that knowledge is shared. The RWG has created mechanisms for this, but more importantly, they have been used.

Knowledge Re-use Knowledge sharing, by extension, creates opportunities for knowledge re-use (Nelson 2008, 137). Participants were asked to consider how they had re-used, applied or incorporated the knowledge shared by their colleagues into their own projects. However, this does not capture all the potential re-use of this knowledge by those outside the RWG, and so offers only a partial picture. Not unexpectedly, those participants who were amongst the first to conduct RWG projects were less likely to have re-used knowledge, and those whose projects have been conducted more recently were more likely. That the first few projects were the “trailblazers” was acknowledged by more than one participant (P2, P4, P5). Projects where knowledge was re-used were identified by P1, P2, P5, and P7. This was mostly in the application of explicit knowledge, which due to its very nature allows for easier re-use (Sarrafzadeh, Martin and Hazeri 2010, 209). For example, P1 created an internal document which was used to inform information literacy classes, and P5’s project was used to inform a new LibGuide: “Everything’s written down. So we said to someone else, this is what we want … now that we’ve done the research, this is what we know we need.” Another participant identified that she’d integrated another piece of research from the RWG: “I looked

234 

 Liz Walkley Hall

at the research the others were doing [in the RWG] and didn’t think they related to what I was doing. But in the end I actually found they did tie together.” Also significant was P6’s observation: “I also work in a team where a lot of people are doing research. I’ve learnt a lot from their research … [it’s] directly impacting on our practice.” This recognizes the benefits as a recipient of shared knowledge, in line with Davenport and Prusak’s description of how knowledge assets increase with use: “shared knowledge stays with the giver while it enriches the receiver.” (1998, cited in Nelson, 2000, 137). As it is a goal of the RWG to see the knowledge created by its members used and re-used in practice, it is very pleasing to find that this is occurring.

Conclusion The RWG is tasked with building a culture of research and professional reflection in the library’s professional staff. Many KM tools, as identified by our audit, have been used in this process, from human-centric activities such as seminars and peer assistance to IT tools like file sharing and docuwikis. Interviews with past and current members of the RWG found evidence of knowledge creation, sharing and re-use. Participants described how that they have created new knowledge, not only on their research topics but also about the research process itself. Analysis of their interviews also elicited three tiers of knowledge sharing: within their own research groups; internally, with peers in the RWG and the library; and externally, with others in the profession. And evidence of knowledge re-use was also found amongst participants, although this study does not capture all re-use outside the RWG. Building a culture of research is an ongoing endeavour. However, knowledge management tools have given us a strong foundation on which we can continue to build. Introducing further tools as the research culture develops will help us sustain our ability to create, share and use our research knowledge for the benefit of the Library and the University.

References Allen, Geoffery. 1986. “Some Implications of the Development of Research in Librarianship for the Librarian and the Library: An Australian Experience.” In Research and the Practice of Librarianship: An International Symposium, edited by GG Allen and FCA Exon, 41–66. Perth: Western Australian Institute of Technology.



18 Using Knowledge Management in Building a Culture of Research 

 235

Agarwal, Naresh Kumar and Md Anwarul Islam. 2014. “Knowledge Management Implementation in a Library: Mapping Tools and Technologies to Phases of the KM cycle.” VINE 44 (3): 322–344. Aharony, Noa. 2011. “Librarians’ Attitudes toward Knowledge Management.” College & Research Libraries 72 (2): 111–126. Blessinger, Kelly D., Stephanie Braunstein, Alice Daugherty and Paul Hrycaj. 2010. “Formation of an Academic Writing Group at Louisiana State University Libraries: Background, Guidelines and Lessons Learned.” Codex: The Journal of the Louisiana Chapter of the ACRL 1 (2): 18–40. Bornoe, Nis, Louise Barkhuus, Barry Brown and Malcolm Hall. 2011. “TagPad for iPad – Designing a Support Tool for Interview Studies.” In Proceedings of the 11th Danish Human-Computer Interaction Research Symposium (DHRS2011), edited by Mads Bødker, Ather Nawaz and Gitte Skou Petersen, 49–52. Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School. 2011.http://openarchive.cbs.dk/bitstream/handle/10398/8359/ proceeding_DHRS2011.pdf. Accessed on 8 October 2015. Branin, Joseph J. 2003. “Knowledge Management in Academic Libraries: Building the Knowledge Bank at the Ohio State University.” Journal of Library Administration 39 (4): 41–56. Broadbent, Marianne. 1997. “The emerging phenomenon of knowledge management.” The Australian Library Journal 46, 1(1997): 6–24. Butler, Yvonne. 2000. “Knowledge Management – If Only You Knew What You Knew.” The Australian Library Journal 49 (1): 31–43. Cirasella, Jill, and Maura A Smale. 2011. “Peers Don’t Let Peers Perish: Encouraging Research and Scholarship among Junior Library Faculty.” Collaborative Librarianship 3 (2): 98–109. Fallon, Helen. 2010. “And so it is Written: Supporting Librarians on the Path to Publication.” Journal of Library Innovation 1 (1): 35–41. Fallon, Helen. 2012. “Using a Blended Group Learning Approach to Increase Librarians’ Motivation and Skills to Publish.” New Review of Academic Librarianship 18 (1): 7–25. Ferguson, Stuart. 2006. “AS 5037–2005: Knowledge Management Blueprint for Australian Organisations?” The Australian Library Journal 55 (3): 196–209. Ferguson, Stuart, Philip Hider and Anne Lloyd. 2008. “Are Librarians the Ultimate Knowledge Managers? A Study of Knowledge, Skills, Practice and Mindset.” The Australian Library Journal 57 (1): 39–62. Flinders University. 2013. “Flinders Shows Research Strengths in World Rankings.” http:// blogs.flinders.edu.au/flinders-news/2013/05/17/flinders-shows-research-strengths-inworld-rankings/. Accessed on 18 October 2015. Gratch, Bonnie. 1989. “Fostering Research Activity: Examples of Institutional Support.” College & Research Library News 50 (11): 979–980. Hall, Hazel, Stephanie Kenna and Charles Oppenheim. 2011. “The Rationale for the DREaM: Developing Research Excellence and Methods Project.” Library and Information Research 35 (110): 43–49. Huang, Yuan-Ho. 2014. “Measuring Individual and Organizational Knowledge Activities in Academic Libraries with Multilevel Analysis.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 40 (5): 436–446. Islam, Md Anwarul, Kumar Naresh, Kumar Agarwal and Mitsuru Ikeda. 2015. “Knowledge Management for Service Innovation in Academic Libraries: A Qualitative Study.” Library Management 36 (1/2): 40–57.

236 

 Liz Walkley Hall

Jain, Priti. 2013. “Knowledge management in academic libraries and information centres: a case of university libraries.” Journal of Information & Knowledge Management 12 (4). doi: 10.1142/S0219649213500342. Accessed on 5 May 2015. Jantz, Ron. 2001. “Knowledge Management in Academic Libraries: Special Tools and Processes to Support Information Professionals.” Reference Services Review 29 (1): 33–39. Lee, Tamera P. 1995. “The Library Research Committee: It has the Money and the Time.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 21 (2): 111–115. McBain, Ian., Helen Culshaw and Liz Walkley Hall. 2013. “Establishing a Culture of Research Practice in an Academic Library: An Australian Case Study.” Library Management 34 (6/7): 448–461. Martin, Bill, Afsaneh Hazeri and Maryam Sarrafzadeh. 2006. “Knowledge Management and the LIS Professions: Investigating Implications for Practice and Educational Provision.” The Australian Library Journal 55 (1): 12–29. Mphidi, Hamilton and Retha Snyman. 2004. “The Utilisation of an Intranet as a Knowledge Management Tool in Academic Kibraries.” The Electronic Library 22 (5): 393–400. Nelson, Elizabeth. 2008. “Knowledge Management for Libraries.” Library Administration & Management 22 (3): 135–137. Porumbeanu Madge, Octavia-Luciana. 2010. “Implementing Knowledge Management in Romanian Academic Libraries: Identifying the Elements that Characterize their Organizational Culture.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 36 (6): 549–552. Porumbeanu Madge, Octavia-Luciana. 2012. “Creating a Culture of Learning and Knowledge Sharing in Libraries and Information Services.” In New Research on Knowledge Management Models and Methods, edited by Huei-Tse Hou, 245–268. Rijeka: Intech. Sapon-White, Richard, Valery King and Anne Christie. 2004. “Supporting a Culture of Scholarship for Academic Librarians.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 4 (3): 407–421. Sarrafzadeh, Maryam, Bill Martin and Afsaneh Hazeri. 2010. “Knowledge Management and its Potential Applicability for Libraries.” Library Management 31 (3): 198–212. Sheng, Xiaoping and Lin Sun. 2007. “Developing Knowledge Innovation Culture of Libraries.” Library Management 28 (1/2): 36–52. Southon, Gray and Ross Todd. 2010. “Library and Information Professionals and Knowledge Management: Conceptions, Challenges and Conflicts.” The Australian Library Journal 50 (3): 259–281. Standards Australia. 2005. AS 5037–2005: Knowledge Management: A Guide. Sydney: Standards Australia. Stephens, Jane, Laura Sare, Rusty Kimball, Margaret Foster and Joel Kitchens. 2010. “Tenure Support Mechanisms Provided by the Faculty Research Committee at Texas A&M University Libraries: A Model for Academic Libraries.” Library Management 32 (8/9): 531–539. Sullivan, Doreen, Julia Leong, Annie Yee, Daniel Giddens and Robyn Phillips. 2013. “Getting Published: Group Support for Academic Librarians.” Library Management 34 (8/9): 690–704. Todd, Ross and Gary Southon. 2011. “Educating for a Knowledge Management Future: Perceptions of Library and Information Professionals.” The Australian Library Journal 50 (4): 313–326. Townley, Charles. 2011. “Knowledge Management and Academic Libraries.” College and Research Libraries 62 91): 44–55. Walkley Hall, Liz and Ian McBain. 2014. “Practitioner Research in an Academic Library: Evaluating the Impact of a Support Group.” The Australian Library Journal 63 (2): 129–143.

Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

19 Managing Research Data as a 19 Transformational Role for Librarians

19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians

Abstract: This paper describes a case study of the Association for College and Research Libraries and Drexel University Libraries “turning outward” to tackle organizational change. It discusses reasons for librarians to embrace the data-management landscape and highlights applications under way in academic and research libraries in the United States of America. The case study engaged research faculty in developing strategies for designing local services and librarians in considering best practices to prepare the profession to assume leadership roles. Readers of the paper will gain insights into organizational change strategies that are based on strong engagement with stakeholders. This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Lyon, France, in August 2014.

Introduction Librarians have long ensured free flow of knowledge through services to access information. Now entrepreneurs within the profession are joining other information leaders to champion the open flow of data. Some are framing the challenge to realize the vision in a new way. An international association, the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), and Drexel University Libraries, a mid-sized university in Philadelphia, recently utilized the Harwood Institute for Public Innovation’s strategy of “turning outward” to shift the institutional and professional orientation of libraries and librarians from an internal to an external focus. Instead of focusing on solutions to technical problems, the meeting aimed to accelerate achievement of the shared aspiration by engaging multiple perspectives to more fully understand data within the research life-cycle. The Harwood Approach offers a transformative opportunity for librarians to pursue common aspirations and thereby engage as true academic partners who understand research behaviour, organize and preserve information, and connect multiple perspectives through bridging people and information. The approach exposes individuals’ passions that collectively unfold organizational creativity. Working together, organizations and individuals who are concerned with data management have great potential to improve research environments and foster knowledge exchange.

238 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

Reasons for Librarians to Engage with Data Management The work of academic and research librarians is undergoing major transformations. Changes in and pressures on higher education, scholarship, and publishing are causing librarians to reconceptualize their roles. Data management is one venue where librarians’ knowledge can be leveraged to align with institutional efforts. Librarians are repositioning themselves to engage with the entire life cycle of the research process, not just the information identification and dissemination phases of a research project. In today’s competitive research and development (R&D) environment, universities and other research institutions are recognizing the reasons to have effective systems for preserving their intellectual assets and making them available for use by others. Evolving protocols for eScience – intensive computational investigations using immense data sets over highly distributed networks – are increasing the demand for systematic organization and access to research outputs (preprints, reports, and publications) as well as the associated digital data, analytics, and documentation which would enable the replication of research findings. In the United States a number of federal funding agencies now require grant applicants to submit data-management plans (NSF 2015) and some regulatory agencies impose fines for non-compliance of standards for managing data, such as protecting privacy of personal health information (US Department of Health and Human Services 2015). Federal mandates in the United States and recent studies underscore the need for thoughtful management of research data. A recent study at the University of British Columbia found that 80% of scientific data from a random sample of studies were lost over two decades (Vines et al. 2014). The implications of letting data reside with its creator(s) means that most of it will be lost over time. Librarians are uniquely situated to address this problem.

New Roles for Academic Libraries and Librarians Ensuring that data are preserved for future use and re-use is a natural fit with the library’s traditional role of preserving the cultural heritage – a responsibility that librarians have taken seriously for centuries. In addition, journal editorial policies are beginning to require that the data used to support the published research be made available so that it can be used and replicated by others. What campus unit follows publishing trends better than the library? Librarians can provide



19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians 

 239

guidance and advice for complying with new directives for ensuring access to data. According to Clifford Lynch, librarians have much to contribute to partnerships focused on the development of data management (Lynch 2013), including expertise in organizing, preserving, discovery of authoritative information, use of technologies, understanding information-seeking behaviours, traditions of service and collaborations, and metadata (Erway 2013). These professional core competencies and skills uniquely position librarians to partner in designing efficient tools, services and training. Librarians at the University of Minnesota (University of Minnesota 2015) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT 2015) are already making the case to researchers about the importance of managing their data through the research life cycle, noting on their websites that doing so will: –– simplify life and save time by enabling a repository to house and disseminate data thereby freeing the researcher to focus on research rather than responding to requests or worrying about data that may be housed on personal secure web sites; –– increase the impact of research with data citation; –– clearly document and provide evidence for research in conjunction with published results; –– comply with sharing mandates, copyright, and compliance regulations such as, in the United States, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA); –– preserve data for long-term access and safeguard research investment from loss; –– describe and share data with others to further new discoveries and research; –– support Open Access by raising awareness of issues of scholarly communication and the Open Data movement to foster the development of knowledge.

Some Local Data-management Initiatives at United States Academic Institutions The field of data management is rapidly expanding in the United States. A number of librarians have embraced this challenge and are collaborating with faculty and researchers on data-management issues. Research and data-management units are well established in a number of large research libraries, and even some liberal arts colleges, but most are still in the nascent stages or do not exist. The new Research Data Services units, typically staffed by librarians and, at times offered

240 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

in partnership with other units on campus, offer a variety of services including help writing data-management plans, archiving research data, and training and workshops for researchers. Johns Hopkins University, Purdue University, University of Minnesota, Stanford University, University of California San Diego, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the California Digital Library were early leaders in providing data management services. Smaller liberal arts college libraries, such as the Library and Information Services of Middlebury College in Vermont also are examining what roles librarians may play (Middlebury College Library 2015). A visit to these libraries’ websites reveals very similar goals and services. The websites articulate the specific services available and some articulate the benefits to the researcher for managing their research data beyond preparing a publication. This next section presents a hypothetical composite service based on a sampling of these website descriptions. –– Mission is “to make research data openly discoverable and accessible for the long term” (University of California San Diego 2015). –– Service goal is to assist researchers with the organization, management, and curation of research data to enhance its preservation and access now and into the future . . . (and to) help you create and carry out a data management strategy that will preserve your valuable research data for future sharing and reuse (JHU Data Management Services 2015). –– Purpose is to help faculty manage data before beginning, and throughout the research life cycle, which is essential to ensure usability, preservation and access. Federal agencies and other funders now require that grant awardees include a data management plan with their grant proposals (California Digital Library 2015). Types of services: –– free consulting on writing data management plans, tailored for standards in research fields; –– archiving research data into the Data Archive in order to share and preserve project data (JHU Data Management Services 2015); –– guidance on aspects of data management through course offerings (JHU Data Management Services 2015) or customized consultations; –– facilities, storage, data curation, computing, networking, and expertise to facilitate their research using shared cyberinfrastructure services across campus (University of California San Diego 2015); –– “Support and guidance for description, workflow, management, discovery, dissemination, and preservation of data throughout the research lifecycle”



19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians 

 241

offered to echo the three phases of the research lifecycle “preparing, during, and ending” (Purdue University 2015); –– “Managing Your Data” website that “offers tools and solutions for creation, storage, analysis, dissemination, and preservation of your research data” (University of Minnesota 2015). Some libraries begin their transformative role by focusing on a specific data management aspiration, such as enabling access to geospatial data. The North Carolina State University Library, for example, extended library technical expertise to build a repository, but soon recognized that the librarian’s value is as facilitator to engage in a broader strategy to shape and achieve aspirations for shaping engagement among data users and related industry and organizations (Library of Congress 2015). Others, like Drexel University Libraries, redefined the library in general to better align with their aspiration to advance the university mission to improve student academic experiences and evolve a robust and comprehensive research agenda. By necessity of its relatively small size, the Drexel Libraries seeks campus and other partners to understand research activities and share responsibilities for building a campus infrastructure to facilitate growth in research among its faculty. Technical knowledge resides with staff in the College of Computing and Informatics where a unit designs data management systems for government contracts, especially for engineering models and big scientific data sets, and with the College of Medicine’s Information Technologies staff, as well as with the Libraries system and archives staff where responsibilities to help manage campus records management has grown in the past few years. Another strategy librarians and other information professionals are embracing is to work beyond one institution. One such initiative, launched in March 2013 is the Research Data Alliance. Three different national research-funding organizations – the European Commission’s Research Data Alliance Europe, the Australian Government’s Department of Innovation, and the US National Science Foundation – sought to build “the social and technical bridges that enable open sharing of data” (Research Data Alliance 2015). This alliance is designed to address cross-disciplinary research activities and now includes over 1,600 members representing over 70 countries. The RDA website emphasises the benefits of partnership in conceptualizing its approach to addressing the big data challenge: “the notions of ‘building blocks’ of common data infrastructures and building specific ‘data bridges’ are becoming accepted metaphors for approaching the data complexity and enable data sharing.” The RDA is open to anyone who abides by its guiding principles of openness, consensus, balance, harmonization, community-driven, and non-profit. Its work has raised awareness of the economic and social benefits of e-infrastructures for easy and open data flow, as

242 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

well as technical knowledge through produced code, policies for data interoperability, and data structure solutions. The Association of Research Libraries (ARL), the Association of American Universities (AAU), and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) have united to develop SHARE (Shared Access Research Ecosystem) to ensure “the preservation of, access to, and reuse of research outputs.” SHARE aims to inventory research assets and make them more accessible (Association of Research Libraries 2015a). Work progresses on SHARE and developers are hoping to release a beta version of SHARE Notify in 2015 (Association of Research Libraries 2015b).

Case Study: Getting Started At the time this presentation was developed in 2014 only a few exemplars were found of how librarians can partner with researchers in the e-research cycle, staking this as an emerging area for the academic information profession. In ACRL’s most recent membership survey, data management issues were cited as the number one concern of members of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL). In addition, the Digital Curation Interest Group and the Digital Humanities Interest Group are the fastest growing ACRL membership units. The ACRL Board of Directors, responding to strong membership interest, committed to support librarians in their data management work and began to seek robust information to inform decisions as to how best to engage the issue. The American Library Association (ALA) introduced its leaders to a community engagement approach developed by the Harwood Institute for Public Innovation. The premise behind the Harwood Approach is that organizations can better serve their communities the more deeply they are engaged with them (American Library Association 2015; Fiels 2014; Harwood Institute 2015). The ACRL adopted this approach to organizational development in recognition that data management is a community challenge and not one that librarians can or should solve alone. The method embraces a mindset of partnership to solve problems and offers both the professional association and local libraries an important pathway for understanding the problem and identifying possible solutions through engaging multiple perspectives among those most affected.



19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians 

 243

Engaging with the Community The Harwood Approach eschews the more typical approaches of the experts deciding what the community needs and encourages institutions to “turn outward”. The Harwood Approach starts from a place of positivity, by engaging people in “kitchen table” conversations about their aspirations for their communities rather than starting with a problem that needs to be solved. This approach believes that if you focus on shared aspirations the community can move forward. So before deciding what programmes ACRL should develop to serve its librarian members in the area of data management, we thought to first engage faculty in conversations about their research. Such conversations will not be the typical focus group interviews that start with questions such as “Do you want service x or y?”, or “How can we help you?” Instead the conversation uses the Harwood Approach to gain a deeper understanding of how faculty conduct their research and engage with their data. Once this is understood, librarians with expertise in this arena could help untangle what the faculty discussed and identify potential paths through which ACRL might serve its members. At the same time that ACRL was determining it wanted to move ahead with these conversations with faculty, Drexel University Libraries was considering its role in building a campus infrastructure to address data management challenges within its research community. A conversation between the two authors launched a shared initiative that would help both ACRL and Drexel. Together, the ACRL and Drexel University hosted an invitational meeting in January 2014 during the American Library Association Philadelphia Midwinter Conference. It consisted of two half days of conversations held at the Drexel main library. The authors decided to first hold a facilitated “kitchen table” conversation with faculty and a few librarians, followed the next day by a recap and discussion among a larger group of librarians. Drexel’s Dean of Libraries took primary responsibility for identifying local faculty engaged in “big data” projects and ACRL identified and recruited librarians from around the United States who have expertise in data management to attend the “kitchen table” conversations in person and via video chat.

244 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

Overview and Application of the Harwood Approach to Data-management Conversations The Harwood Approach focuses on engaging the community through conversations about their aspirations. Through its process an institution can (American Library Association 2013): –– authentically engage with the community to deeply understand them and make more informed choices; –– leverage their resources in a way that creates impact on a specific issue while building the conditions for change; –– reorient themselves toward the public and create new opportunities for community impact; –– align mission, resources, and strategies to the community’s capacity so that efforts at community changes will have a greater chance of succeeding. Seven faculty attended the invitational, informal “kitchen table” conversation, and were joined by six librarians with expertise in data management so that they could hear the faculty perspective and join the discussion. An additional twenty librarians joined their peers for the second-day discussion both in person and by remote video connection. As a result of these conversations, ACRL hoped to identify useful roles for librarians as well as the professional association. Planners sent information about the meetings as well as a modest amount of background readings, including the publications by Ricky Erway (2013) and Clifford Lynch (2013). An ACRL staff expert in organizational development facilitated the conversations. The first conversation focused on faculty experiences with research data management in the following areas: data management requirements; organization of research data; and sharing, protection, and discovery of research data. The facilitator had a series of questions planned to elicit conversation: –– How do new federal and funding mandates affect how you manage your research data? –– What concerns you most when you think about managing your research data and results? –– When you consider the growing ability to share and preserve information, how does this change affect how you think about your research and how the results of it will persist? The faculty members were incredibly generous with their time and most stayed beyond the two-hour scheduled event. These conversations reflected the passion faculty members had for their research. They identified research practices as well



19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians 

 245

as frustrations in meeting mandated data management. Their conversations highlighted the contextual importance of their data and stimulated their awareness of where outside assistance might alleviate their own pain points. By starting with the faculty’s aspirations about their research and their data plans rather than a preconceived idea of what librarians might do for them, we created a much richer conversation and obtained a better situational understanding to inform our work. At the outset of the second day, the content of the conversation with faculty was summarized for the librarians. The intended outcomes for this meeting were: –– to develop a shared understanding of the research data management needs of disciplinary faculty; –– to identify the knowledge base, skills, and resources needed by librarians working with faculty and other stakeholders to manage disciplinary research data and data sets; –– to identify resources and programmes already developed that address the needs of librarians supporting data management; –– to create an action plan for ACRL that will inform the creation of materials and professional development programmes on data management to address areas not already being adequately served.

What Did We learn? In general the faculty was willing to share most of their data, although they realized that there would be exceptions and, of course, data would be anonymized whenever human subjects were involved. The faculty agreed that librarians could and should have strong roles in their research processes, including providing consultation on data-management plans, curating data, and long-term preservation of data. A lively discussion ensued about how to deal with the overwhelming amounts of data generated in some fields. Faculty expressed interest in having their data preserved, but noted that not all data need to be preserved. They suggested starting with preserving the data that support published articles, and, more specifically, data needed to replicate research findings. Data that can be easily gathered, even if hours are required to generate large sets of computational analyses, need not be stored. They acknowledged the growing mandates and compliance requirements, as well as how data management was becoming a part of the scientific process. But they did not want to add to their workloads with creating burdensome metadata description or protocol requirements. The faculty also expressed skepticism about the importance of the federal and funder mandates

246 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

on data management since they had not seen enforcement of the implementation of the required plans. The follow-up conversation provided an opportunity for the librarians to discuss what they had heard and for additional librarians to provide their perspectives on how data management services were working on their respective campuses. While we had hoped that explicit next steps would emerge during this conversation, in retrospect that was too ambitious an outcome for the short amount of time we had. Instead a number of ideas were generated for ACRL: –– to serve as a clearinghouse, e.g., developing knowledge banks of specific information, extending the ACRL Scholarly Communications tools and programs to include data management; –– to develop more advocacy messages around the need for data management; –– to help librarians redefine their roles to include managing research data; –– to help institutions think programmatically about research data management; –– to extend its work in information literacy to data literacy.

Next Steps: ACRL A short report of the meeting was provided to the Board of Directors who encouraged its inclusion in committee work to develop next steps for ACRL to take. ACRL’s Research & Scholarly Environment Committee used a knowledge-based decision process developed by consultants at Tecker International (Tecker et al. 2010) who have worked with ACRL on strategic planning and governance. Those using the process define what is known, determine choices of strategy the knowledge suggests, assess relative advantages and disadvantages of the choices, and come to consensus on actions. Its completed report recommended developing a preconference for the ACRL 2015 conference, adding information about data management to ACRL’s web-based Scholarly Communications toolkit, surveying the members of ACRL’s Digital Curation Interest Group, creating additional professional development opportunities based on the survey results, and developing a set of data literacy competency standards for librarians (ACRL 2015). Since this paper was first presented at the Knowledge Management Section Satellite Conference in Lyon, ACRL has completed a number of these steps. A section on data management was added to ACRL’s web-based Scholarly Communications toolkit. A survey of its Digital Curation Interest Group was undertaken which gave the Association more information about the needs of its members. Based on this survey two preconferences and an online course were developed.



19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians 

 247

The first, “Getting Down to Brass Tacks: Practical Approaches for Developing Data Management Services,” will be offered at ACRL’s 2015 Conference in Portland. This preconference will provide an overview of the diverse data-management landscape, strategies to engage their campus communities, and a plan for starting or enhancing data-management services. It is the intention that feedback from this session could be used to inform future ACRL educational and training opportunities for data management/curation. The second preconference, “Writing Data Management Plans Across the Curriculum” was offered prior to the American Library Association’s Annual Conference held in San Francisco in June 2015. Because the demand for data-management plans (DMPs) is growing as more granting agencies add this requirement, this preconference helped individuals to learn how to apply their existing skills to writing strong DMPs for the sciences, social sciences, and humanities. ACRL is also offering an online course, “What You Need to Know about Writing Data Management Plans,” which focuses on consulting with researchers who are engaged in writing data-management plans. ACRL will use data from the evaluations of these sessions to determine what kind of ongoing professional development will best meet the needs of the profession as they partner with other campus stakeholders in developing services that support data management. In addition ACRL was invited to join the advisory board of a project funded by the Sparks! Ignition Grants for Libraries program of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS 2015). The project goal is to develop DataQ, an online resource that will function as a collaborative knowledge base of research data questions and answers curated for and by the library community. The grant recipient and partners are the University of Colorado Boulder library, the Greater Western Library Alliance and the Great Plains Network (IMLS 2015). ACRL will continue to engage its members so that it can provide the programs and services they need to support them as they expand their roles into data management.

Next Steps: Drexel In exploring ways to contribute to building a campus infrastructure for data management, the Drexel Libraries had begun to work with a handful of faculty from different disciplines to understand their research processes and activities for which data management is critical. The goal has been to develop “use cases” to gather from the faculty perspective information about research activities and

248 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

then for librarians to analyse overlapping opportunities to design service assistance and tools to save researcher time to meet funder mandates. The faculty conversations offered more reliable insights about the value librarians could offer and the role they could play to partner in the research management. The group discussion confirmed concerns about protecting their intellectual property and the trust already established in other work with librarians. The session helped Drexel library leaders articulate and prioritize immediate goals in developing and advocating a data-management programme. These include: 1) ensuring secure access to data among members of research teams during the active life of the research project; 2) archiving data and associated contextual information to replicate findings of completed research that has been published whether by the creating researcher or others with different research problems, and 3) educating students and faculty in concepts and skills to manage data they create for personal and shared access. Since the Lyon conference presentation, Drexel identified organizational challenges and benefits of providing faculty as well as other data producers with campus support to effectively address data management. The value of conversation, across campus and distributed functional operations, uncovered the diverse interests in data management facing institutions of higher education. Drexel is not unique among mid-sized universities that aim to strengthen its research activities during these times of fiscal conservatism. To introduce new research-data management-support services, the Libraries, without added resources, sought to develop and embed its expertise within university strategic priorities. A systems librarian expert in discovery systems, an archivist responsible for records management, and a metadata librarian worked with the dean of libraries to bring library and information science knowledge and experiences to campus discussions. The dean co-chaired a campus Data Stewardship Committee that engaged over thirty faculty and staff from twenty different departments to holistically address what is needed to manage data, in support of research data repositories as well as administrative warehouses distributed across the university. Conversations with stakeholders in research practice, campus security and privacy compliance, risk management, medical data system designs, research award management, procurement, cyberspace security, enterprise technologies, and student enrolment uncovered unexpected partnerships. The Committee’s key recommendation was to “reaffirm Drexel’s uniquely created business and research data and other digital collections are institutional records, subject to protection, preservation, organization, and accessibility for proper re-use” (Nitecki and Matuch 2015). Earlier collaboration between the Office of General Counsel and the Libraries had developed and continues to manage a successful programme to implement best practices across campus related to a university records-management policy. The



19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians 

 249

role of the library to bring together multiple perspectives, with robust information, to solve a common problem and to offer guidance in best practice is recognized by some, but still a surprise to others. Drexel librarians continue to develop their knowledge around data management. A couple years ago, they customized the data-management plan for local use but soon realized faculty need for such help had not been widely recognized. Planning to support a federated institutional repository for research data, including campus and external repositories with an effective discovery system to identify sources for faculty to utilize, librarians began to inventory discipline-based repositories. With solutions shared from other institutions and professional support such as the several library service practices promoted recently by a NISO webinar (NISO 2015) and those developed by ACRL, Drexel librarians are encouraged to align their own work to add data management to core services of faculty and student consultations, information literacy instruction, archival institutional repository and records management. The Drexel case illustrates that supporting data management is a work-in-progress for librarians to advance their value to the academy, and the strategy to engage those most affected in deep conversation is a strategic tactic for this ongoing transformation.

Conclusion Engaging faculty in conversation about their research habits and soliciting their perspective about challenges to manage data before, during, and after their research project is invaluable to librarians interested to address challenges of data management. This approach to seeking stakeholder opinions is not all that new for librarians, but it is not always executed early in processes to create or improve services or to redefine professional roles. Aside from confirmation that faculty are not further along than information professionals in dealing with data – in understanding the nature of data organization in their disciplines, preparing for complying with mandates about handling data, or having standard criteria or even developed intuition for what data to save, what to protect, or what to share – they were keenly interested when asked. The simple approach of starting with conversation about behaviour and self-identified data and information needs, rather than test marketing a solution to a problem, provides deeper knowledge and context. The process elicits passions. That itself brings energy and commitment toward high aspirations, more easily than thoughtful responses to solutions. We might not have discovered clear next steps for ACRL programme development directly from our conversations with faculty, but we generated excitement

250 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

and had enough expressions of what matters to both faculty and librarians, that planners have priorities for developing action plans and a number of activities are under way. The conversations also generated confidence in the librarian as a facilitator, a partner with unique skills and knowledge, and guided by a deep-rooted philosophy to work with others and that data should openly flow. Although the very nature of a case study limits the generalizability of findings to other settings, the insights gained in Philadelphia in early 2013 provided encouragement for transforming, if just a bit, the librarian’s role as well as positioning the profession’s association to become confident leaders in tackling data management in academic settings. The case study describes a process that surfaced faculty habits and pain points. It stimulated awareness of how changes in their processes can result in efficient use of faculty time, reduced risks of losing data and engendering fines for lack of regulatory compliance, and achieving easy discovery of like minds and potential collaborators as well as placement of their data into new scholarly discourse. The case also recognized faculty trust to partner with librarians who bring a passion in knowledge flow and respect of its creators, as well as expertise in organizing, preserving and making available data central to research. Such insights and the processes leading to them will interest those wishing to prepare librarians and other knowledge managers for critical roles in a new world where data however big are openly shared to advance knowledge flow.

References ACRL (Association of College & Research Libraries). 2015. “Scholarly Communications Toolkit”. http://acrl.ala.org/scholcomm/?page_id=23. Accessed on 10 September 2015. American Library Association. 2013. “Press Release.” http://www.ala.org/news/ press-releases/2013/09/year-long-public-innovation-training-opportunity. Accessed on 10 September 2015. American Library Association. 2015. “Resources for Libraries. Transforming Libraries website.” http://www.ala.org/transforminglibraries/libraries-transforming-communities/resourcesfor-library-professionals/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Association of Research Libraries. 2015a. “SHARE: SHared Access Research Ecosystem.” http:// www.arl.org/focus-areas/shared-access-research-ecosystem-share#.U3AGDC9dA4Y. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Association of Research Libraries. 2015b.“SHARE Update. February 2015.” https://t.e2ma.net/ webview/pu6lh/5fce3510d60dc5838c011f2198e892dd. Accessed on 10 September 2015. California Digital Library. 2015. “DMP Tool.” http://www.cdlib.org/uc3/datamanagement/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Erway, Ricky. 2013. Starting the Conversation: University-wide Research Data Management Policy: An OCLC Research Report. OCLC Research, 2013. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC Research.



19 Managing Research Data as a Transformational Role for Librarians 

 251

http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2013/2013-08r.html. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Fiels, Keith Michael. 2014. “Libraries Transforming Communities: A Project for ALA and All Types of Libraries.” American Libraries, 5 May 2014. http://americanlibrariesmagazine. org/2014/05/05/libraries-transforming-communities/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Harwood Institute for Public Innovation. 2015. “How to Turn Outward.”. http://www. theharwoodinstitute.org/how-to-turn-outward/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. IMLS (Institute of Museum and Library Services). 2015. “Sparks! Ignition Grants for Libraries [Grant announcement].” http://www.imls.gov/grants/available/sparks-ignition-grantslibraries. Accessed on 10 September 2015. JHU (Johns Hopkins University) Data Management Services. 2015. “Research Data Management Services at JHU.” http://dmp.data.jhu.edu/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Library of Congress. 2015. “Steve Morris. Digital Preservation Pioneers.” http://www. digitalpreservation.gov/series/pioneers/morris.html. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Lynch, Clifford. 2013. “The Next Generation of Challenges in the Curation of Scholarly Data.” In Research Data Management: Practical Strategies for Information Professionals, edited by Joyce M. Ray, 395–408. West Lafayette, IL: Purdue University Press. http://www.cni.org/ wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Research-Data-Mgt-Ch19-Lynch-Oct-29-2013.pdf . Accessed on 10 September 2015. Middlebury College Library. 2015. “Data Management.” http://www.middlebury.edu/ academics/lib/libcollections/libraries/armstronglib/datamgt . Accessed on 10 September 2015. MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). 2015. “Why Manage & Share Your Data?” http://libraries.mit.edu/data-management/plan/why/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. NISO (National Information Standards Organization). 2015. “Scientific Data Management: Caring for Your Institution and its Intellectual Wealth [webinar 18 February 2015].” http:// www.niso.org/news/events/2015/virtual_conferences/sci_data_management/. Accessed on 9 October 2015. Nitecki, Danuta A. and Kathryn Matuch. 2015. “Formation of University Data Management and Intelligence Infrastructure: A Proposal toward Changing Drexel’s Culture for Innovation, Competitiveness, Risk Reduction, Observance of Privacy & Security, and Cost Savings.” Unpublished report of Data Stewardship Committee, submitted by co-chairs, Drexel University, 20 February 2015. NSF (National Science Foundation). 2015. “NSF Data Management Plan Requirements.” http:// www.nsf.gov/eng/general/dmp.jsp. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Purdue University Research Data Services. 2015. “Welcome to Research Data.” https://www.lib. purdue.edu/research. Accessed on 9 March 2015. Research Data Alliance. 2015. “About.” https://rd-alliance.org/about.html. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Stanford University Libraries. 2015. “ Data Management Services.” https://library.stanford.edu/ research/data-management-services. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Tecker, Glenn, Paul D. Meyer, Bud Crouch and Leigh Wintz. 2010. The Will to Govern Well. Washington, DC: Association Management Press. University of California San Diego. 2015. “Research Data Curation Program.” http://libraries. ucsd.edu/services/data-curation/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. University of Minnesota. 2015. “Managing Your Data.” https://www.lib.umn.edu/ datamanagement. Accessed on 10 September 2015.

252 

 Mary Ellen K. Davis and Danuta A. Nitecki

US Department of Health and Human Services. 2015. “Summary of the HIPPA Privacy Rule.” http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/summary/. Accessed on 10 September 2015. Vines, Timothy H., Arianne Y.K. Albert, Rose L. Andrew, Florence Débarre, Dan G. Bock, Michelle T. Franklin, Kimberly J. Gilbert, Jean-Sébastien Moore, Sébastien Renaut, and Diana J. Rennison. 2014. “The Availability of Research Data Declines Rapidly with Article Age.” Current Biology 24 (1): 94–97. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2013.11.014. Accessed on 9 March 2015.

Héloïse Lecomte

20 Knowledge Management Tools and 20 Processes Helping the Birth of a 20 New Library? 20 Knowledge Management Tools and Processes

Abstract: The opening of Bibliothèque universitaire des langues et civilisations (BULAC) – University Library for Languages and Civilizations – in Paris, France in December 2011 represented a real challenge: 19 libraries or parts of collections have merged into one institution in brand new premises at the heart of the Pôle des langues et civilisations (Language and Civilization Hub) facilities. Who was behind this academic project of national interest? A project team, gathered from 2003 to 2010, merged with librarians running the libraries that were about to be abandoned for a new location and institution. A common ground had to be found for these two very different teams: in that kind of background, knowledge management played an important role in helping to achieve the new library. Change had to be led on a number of fronts during a short period of time: several libraries were about to close and some were situated in historic buildings; the new building was much bigger and located in a completely different area, offices were designed and organized differently; the main professional standards and work methods had to be completely renewed with an important amount of information to be learnt and instructions to be remembered (new union catalogue, processing of collections, new reference services, new preservation practices and standards, new administrative rules and workflows). BULAC had been assigned new missions compared to the former branches, with extended opening hours, wider access to space and collections for more patrons, new services, more partnerships, etc. Such an overhaul did mean a lot of information organizing and sharing, though this issue was not always seen as a priority during the process; through meetings, document sharing, seminars, formal social dialogue, training plans, knowledge management finally came up as a key tool for team building. There were several phases in the almost ten-years-long BULAC project. The need for structured information gradually evolved, as did the tools in use. Now that BULAC has found its own path, knowledge management tools are still in use but the current need is to foster mutual understanding and knowledge sharing to push forward the development strategy for the institution. New technology tools are now in use and the staff’s training plan aims to reach fresh goals, such as encouraging innovation and initiative. Other issues have yet only been partially addressed: retaining the project memory; integrating and making the best use of the former libraries’ archives; structuring knowledge about the spe-

254 

 Héloïse Lecomte

cialized collections of the library so that it’s not only hold by specialists; ensure the sustainability of KM technology tools in use, etc. This paper was presented at the IFLA Satellite meeting in Lyon, France, in August 2014.

Introduction BULAC opened in December 2011, as a unique academic library specializing in African, Middle Eastern, Asian and Eastern European languages and civilizations. Our holdings amount to 1.5 million volumes and feature 350 different languages. They were gathered from 19 different institutions, some of them dating back to the 17th century. Today, 105 staff members work at BULAC. They welcome about 40,000 patrons (more than 600,000 entrances every year) in brand new 15,000 m2 premises. The team behind this ten-year-long project of national and international interest included both ad hoc recruitment and 50 librarians running the branches that were about to close. Change had to be led on a number of fronts. Did knowledge management help to manage change towards the new library, and how? How did the issues related to knowledge management develop during and after the project so far? This case study won’t introduce any innovative KM tools or processes. It rather aims to help the reader figure out how to get the most out of knowledge management in a large-scale-project context, and more broadly, in an academic or specialized library.

A Large-scale Project with Special Issues BULAC project was formed in 2003 (with preparatory steps from 2000) as a “public interest group” in the context of large public investment plans such as U3M (“Universities for the third millennium”) aiming to improve the real-estate situation of French state higher-education institutions and to help them reach a critical size on an international scale. BULAC project is due to the common decision of its nine founders – five universities and four national research institutions – to create a new library gathering the major part of Orientalist and Africanist holdings of the Paris area, which are the most important in France. As a matter of fact, in the early 2000s, these holdings were hard to access for a variety of reasons:



20 Knowledge Management Tools and Processes 

 255

–– very few volumes could be found through online catalogues. This delay in computerizing these former libraries’ Orientalist and Africanist holdings can be explained by the inappropriateness of regular commercial French library information systems to process multilingual material; –– as a consequence, it could become a paper chase for potential readers to figure out where they could find the books they needed: the 19 former libraries belonged to small units of different universities and institutions, which had almost no concerted collections development policy. Apart from that, very few of these libraries had sufficient means to develop homogenous and comprehensive collections, even if they held high quality resources on several topics and from several historical periods. Some materials were even stacked in cupboards or boxes and could not at all be accessed. Some rare and valuable materials were also endangered, as they were stored in unsuitable premises; –– even when the holdings were broad and the means were sufficient (such as for BIULO1 library, which was the biggest library to merge into the BULAC project, with a 50-people team and 750,000 volumes addressing every continent except Western Europe), the premises were very small (fewer than 100 seats in former BIULO’s reading room, which was the biggest!), uncomfortable – but with a “family” feeling, with almost no open stacks, and limited opening hours. In lots of these libraries, the registration conditions were very strict: most of them were restricted to the faculty and graduate students. While the issues raised by the scattering of the Paris area Orientalist and Africanist documentation seemed obvious, it was not an easy task to convince the decision-makers working in the different universities and institutions that were at concern to let go some of their specialized holdings to a big, new, independent library. Apart from the prestige problem, the librarians that ran the libraries holding these collections were concerned about the change of scale: how could close relationships with researchers, which are an enriching part of the job, be maintained in that new context, with thousands of new readers and a new, wider organization chart? This was an important question, among others, that especially BIULO’s and the Iranian Studies Institute’s (IEI) teams kept asking the project team during the designing of the new library (Figure 20.1, p. 254). The project’s chronology can be divided into several phases. First, the new library-to-be was designed from 2003 to 2008. After stabilizing the perimeter, the project team evaluated the current holdings, defined the collection development policy – especially regarding the materials on open stacks (120,000 volumes) – 1 Bibliothèque interuniversitaire des langues orientales (Eastern Languages Interuniversity Library) first created in the 17th century.

256 

 Héloïse Lecomte

Figure 20.1: BULAC’s building (Pôle des langues et civilisations – Languages and Civilizations Hub) – © Grégoire Maisonneuve/BULAC.

set a broad access policy, worked with the architects on imagining what the reading rooms would look like, designed innovative services such as study rooms available with online reservation, some of them accessible 24/7. The team also built a union catalogue for all the libraries and a first IT infrastructure. Within that period, about 30 people were hired in permanent positions especially for the project’s needs. In 2008, BULAC project’s head managers started to prepare the project team and BIULO’s historic staff to merge into a single organization chart, so that everyone could be part of the project. From 2009 to 2011, while the building started to be built, the whole team both prepared for the big move, processing thousands of books, taking care of rare and valuable materials, buying the furniture and layout for the new premises, designing the new workflows; and organized the closing of the several small, old-fashioned historic libraries. For more than a year, departments and services disappeared. The former branches were all closed. A temporary organization with minimum hierarchy was set up to allow the staff to fully dedicate itself to the many operations that were to be led in order to open the new library when due. Forty different projects were identified, each one of them connected to several others, and everyone was allocated to one or more projects.2 2 To learn more about BULAC project’s chronology see Lecomte (2014).



20 Knowledge Management Tools and Processes 

 257

No-one could say that opening a new institution isn’t a special moment both in the personal history of the staff members and in the collective memory of the team. There is no need to tell more about the challenge and the change of scale it caused for the historic teams. The project team tried to respond to their concerns about the relationships with the public and the evolution of their working conditions by imagining attractive, efficient new services to offer to the readers that were adapted to the available financial and human means. During the first period of the project (2003–2008), the collaboration between the two teams was quite distant and could not be considered as a real partnership. That is what the second period of the project (from 2008) tried to improve. Indeed, a few special issues faced by the BULAC project can be underlined in this case study because of what they highlight about knowledge management in this specific change process: –– merging two teams with different work cultures, knowledge and abilities, with part of the team regarded as closer to the library-to-be, gives the challenge an Ancients vs Moderns character and makes change management a key issue in the whole process. Broadly, while the Ancients represented themselves as subject librarians, with a special knowledge about a part of the collection, alongside speaking a rare language and often having been part of a network of teachers, researchers, and graduate students for a long time, the Moderns would rather consider themselves as general librarians, specializing in library management, building construction, project planning, using needs assessments rather than their experience of the community to design the future library’s services. The Ancients kept accusing the Moderns of not understanding the special needs of the Orientalist and Africanist research community and building new equipment on too large a scale. The Moderns suspected the Ancients of not being professional enough to understand the modern needs of the students and researchers, and to be unable to meet the 21st-century challenges of libraries in the digital age; –– gathering very different specialized holdings makes another priority question come out: how to share the knowledge about any special collection when other staff members don’t even speak the language of these materials? Therefore, how to manage and value the whole collection with such fragmented knowledge about it? The development of knowledge management at BULAC appeared as both a strong need in order to build a new and common identity, and a structural difficulty due to its scientific specificity (Lecomte and Mion-Mouton 2014); –– on the other part, moving to a new location and organizing huge and very heterogeneous library resources in terms of physical condition, addressing scheme, etc. makes the whole project a logistical challenge, above all. As

258 

 Héloïse Lecomte

important a matter as it is to proceed with this delicate and very practical part of the job, it was equally important to make knowledge management a priority.

KM Tools and Processes Helping to Take up the Challenge As a matter of fact, from 2008/2009 to 2011, a lot of changes happened in order for the teams to be ready for the opening, that required a change management programme: –– new organization charts to make the two teams work together on both the closing of the former libraries and the opening of the new one; –– new administrative status of the staff to allow the merge of the historic and project teams; –– new working place (area, type of building); –– new personal timetable (extended opening hours); –– new workflows; –– larger size and greater variety of the target audience; –– larger size of the collection; –– broader access policy; –– new corporate identity and style; –– new IT tools (collaborative tools, Library Information System, etc.). Along with creating a proper project structure with a letter of appointment (as of 2003) and a corporate identity, conducting formal social dialogue on the target working conditions, organizing regular general meetings, seminars, collaborative reports, and formalizing the project at all stages, other tools – that can be analysed as knowledge management tools – were part of the change-management process. A variety of KM tools and processes started to be used from 2008 in the different teams (Table 20.1: rows). They can be linked to the different roles of KM in the BULAC project (Table 20.1: columns). Table 20.1 shows that some classic tools (e.g. training, organized document sharing) played a key role, whereas no tool addressed every goal of knowledge management. Furthermore, some goals were virtually not addressed, such as working collaboratively on the target library’s services and identity, when working as a group to bring common purpose for the organization is generally encouraged (Serrat 2014).



20 Knowledge Management Tools and Processes 

 259

Table 20.1: Knowledge management tools in use 2008–2013. KM Tools

Giving the teams common tools to work together?

Allowing the different teams to meet?

Shared business diary (eGroupware)

X

X

Shared reference documents (eGroupware + Windows file sharing)

X

Collaborative document creation and sharing (Google drive)

X

Corporate identity and templates for office documents

X

Helping Reflecting Building the the staff the scope of target library’s anticipate the project? identity in a the future collaborative work-flows? way?

X

X

X

X

Training for project X management tools (Dia, Openproj, etc.)

X

Training for new X Library information system and other new software

X

Public project newsletter

X

X

Monthly cultural conferences for the staff

X

Visits to the building under construction for the staff

X

X

X

260 

 Héloïse Lecomte

Table 20.1: (continued) KM Tools

Giving the teams common tools to work together?

Online knowledge base about future rules and processes at circulation and information desks

X

Total number of tools related to each goal

7

Allowing the different teams to meet?

Helping Reflecting Building the the staff the scope of target library’s anticipate the project? identity in a the future collaborative work-flows? way? X

6

4

3

1

Almost four years after the new library’s opening, these missing points are actually still the subject of much debate inside BULAC’s team, which may show that part of the team didn’t have the opportunity to get involved in the project. From October to December 2011, in spite of several general meetings and weeks of training to new IT tools and workflows, part of the staff asked for the opening to be delayed, on the pretext of technical issues. But an assumption might be made that it was also because they considered themselves not ready to open to the public and had recurring questions about some processes. Should knowledge management have been identified as a function in BULAC’s project organization chart? Such a decision may have created a more inclusive and innovative environment by allowing more appetite and skills to develop, consistent with the future library’s objectives.

After the Thunderstorm: What about KM at BULAC Now? If knowledge management is still not considered a priority nor identified as a function, (though it should be from 2016, as part of an ongoing internal restructuring) it surely meets new challenges in 2015, now that BULAC has found a wide and diverse audience. New KM tools and processes are in use (Table 20.2), addressing two new goals:



20 Knowledge Management Tools and Processes 

 261

–– structuring collective knowledge of processes, including circulation operations, book processing, general administration, etc.; –– fostering mutual understanding and individual knowledge sharing to encourage innovation and initiative, in order to take the library to the future (2016–2018 Plan). Table 20.2: Knowledge management tools in use from 2013, classified by maturity. KM tools

Level of maturity Technology used in 2015 (1–5)

Internal knowledge base about information to the readers and circulation operations

5

Google sites

Open individual and department diaries

5

Google agenda

Local curated base used to share news and 5 contents about BULAC’s professional environment, with a monthly newsletter

Scoop.it

Internal website: information pages, institutional diary, links to professional tools

4

Google sites, Google agenda

Internal training cycle about professional issues and cultural themes (e.g. history of languages, history of oriental books)

4

–

Welcoming weeks for newcomers

4

–

Corporate identity and templates for office documents

4

Libre Office (templates)

Reference documents sharing

4

Google sites

Data, confidential documents and on-going documents sharing

4

Windows file sharing

Collaborative working on documents, processes, etc.

3

Google Drive

Internal knowledge bases for each department

2

Google sites

Structured archives

1

Windows file sharing

The least mature tools (Table 20.2) are the trickiest to build: comprehensive knowledge bases by department and structured and managed electronic archives. These would help prepare for the future, by allowing cross-training and skills transfer, by keeping BULAC project’s memory in order to remember why the decisions have been made, by integrating and making the best use of the former libraries’

262 

 Héloïse Lecomte

archives, and by structuring individual knowledge about the special collections. Taking this step towards a proper knowledge management system is a requirement to take BULAC librarians to the next level: being nationally and internationally qualified as experts (in their subjects, in multilingual cataloguing, etc.). This means not only being considered as a good professional inside the community, but also being able to share and disseminate their knowledge beyond, in any network where the very special and technical knowledge they hold is valuable. Other knowledge management tools could be set up to help reach the different goals cited, especially involving the team in the definition of BULAC’s objective and actions in the near future e.g., structured team seminars, skills and abilities survey and mapping, external mentoring and internal cross-training especially for language specialists, emerging content sharing in an informal way (focus groups, wikis).

References Lecomte, Héloïse. 2014. “Le projet BULAC : temps forts et chronologie de la structuration de l’équipe”. http://cdn.knightlab.com/libs/timeline/latest/embed/index.html?source=0AjI V0I2t5EfBdGREY1dHeGF3MmdnSE5abXBiSjJkdUE. Accessed on 10 March 2015. Lecomte, Héloïse and Fanny Mion-Mouton. 2014. “350 langues, 80 alphabets dans une seule bibliothèque … Défis et enjeux.” Paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress. http://library.ifla.org/id/eprint/887. Accessed on 10 March 2015. Serrat, Olivier. 2014. “Toward a Library Renaissance.” Paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress Satellite Meeting Confluence for Knowledge in KM, 15 August 2014.

Mary Lee Kennedy

21 Knowledge Collaboration in 21 Higher Education 21 Knowledge Collaboration in Higher Education

Abstract: In organizations, individuals collaborate on work when they share a common goal. In higher education collaboration takes on various hues – students collaborate on group projects, faculty seek the benefits of collective intelligence in the development of their own ideas as they explore their research programmes, and staff collaborate on delivering products and services in support of research, teaching and learning. At Harvard Business School (HBS), and at many other business schools around the world, this means supporting knowledge creation from a global perspective. Harvard Business School has always had an international perspective, with the first non-US students attending in 1909. What follows is a description of three knowledge collaboration efforts developed by the Knowledge and Library Services (KLS) team in support of HBS’s mission to develop leaders that make a difference in the world. This paper was presented at the Knowledge Management programme of the 2008 IFLA World Library and Information Congress in Quebec City, Canada.

Exchanging Knowledge with Practitioners Teaching cases form the basis of the curriculum at Harvard Business School. They represent the fundamental principle of practice-based, participant-centred learning. Teaching case development requires field and information research and significant involvement by practitioners in order to establish the context in which students deliberate possible solutions to the business or organizational issue. Case writing involves working with organizations and leaders throughout the world, the ability to work in multiple languages, and the ability to write well in order to engage learners and position teaching points. The case is the primary instructional tool for the classroom. At Harvard Business School, engaging practitioners in knowledge creation is thus a natural part of the faculty’s research and course development program. KLS took this research approach one step further when it reviewed the editorial mission of Working Knowledge. Working Knowledge is an HBS web forum for innovations in business practice. The web publication now focuses on the nascent ideas of faculty in order to engage its four million readers from around the globe in a dialogue about them (Harvard Business School 2015).

264 

 Mary Lee Kennedy

The version of Working Knowledge launched in 2006 continued with the tradition of plain English for practitioners. However, it also focused on making it easy for practitioners to choose to read an executive summary, the full article, or the original research. It provides easy access to the faculty member’s work and contact information. We also provide an easy way for the reader to forward the article to someone else, or to email the editor. It opens the possibility for dialogue, for sharing ideas and experiences between faculty and practitioners. Our experience indicates that busy professionals are not likely to engage in social networking forums with strangers unless there is a common interest or bond that ties them together. While executive education programs at the school use social networking forums for educational purposes, we took a more traditional approach designed to meet faculty members’ requirements (i.e., ability to manage the amount of interaction required of them on a day-to-day basis) and to provide ways for practitioners to share their knowledge and feedback with the faculty. This approach is best represented in the discussion forum led by emeritus faculty member Jim Heskett. The purpose of the forum is to posit a question that Working Knowledge readers comment on over a specific period of time. Once the forum closes, Prof. Heskett summarizes the comments and provides a concluding statement. The Forum is one of the most popular features of the Web publication. Forums run for four weeks and gather comments from, on average, 60 readers around the world. In general, faculty find this opportunity to deliver their new ideas to a broad practitioner audience very worthwhile. Often they are contacted by individuals who they would not have known otherwise, finding leads for future research as well as other ways of disseminating their ideas.

Enabling eResearch The sciences have conducted collaborative research for a very long time. The most famous case is the work done on the Human Genome project (Oak Ridge National Laboratory 2014), and of course the work on the Hadron Collider. (CERN 2008) The virtual collaboration of many scientists contributing their knowledge and research in the effort to solve a complex problem is the very essence of what we



21 Knowledge Collaboration in Higher Education 

 265

mean by eResearch. eResearch can require a significant investment in underlying information technology – often known as a cyberinfrastructure (Atkins 2003).1 KLS sought to enable eResearch for two audiences: the students, and the faculty working on a School initiative. The first is represented by our Knowledge Center on Business at the Base of the Pyramid. The focus of the Knowledge Center is to support the course learning objectives by providing a focal point for a project and paper on the topic. Designed by KLS it provides an information context in which students can explore and develop their assignment thesis. Students are provided with a primer on the topic, access to selected information resources, and to data sets developed specifically to support course learning objectives. The collaboration between faculty and KLS in designing the Knowledge Center has led to several positive outcomes: many faculty now want to adopt this same approach for a part of the course design, students papers and projects are of a higher quality, and KLS has demonstrated that through the combination of education and information expertise they are now an integral part of the course development process. With the Knowledge Center as a positive step forward, KLS now seeks to bring researchers and practitioners together in a broader context. How will we solve the challenges of healthcare management? Poverty? Leadership? These are difficult challenges requiring cross-disciplinary skills, and experts from around the world. Our next foray will be in pursuing something along the lines of the work enabled by Hub Zero at Purdue University a powerful, open source software platform for creating dynamic web sites that support scientific research and educational activities (Purdue University 2015). This $20 million infrastructure allows for a broad audience base to contribute research, educate students, and involve practitioners. It is a good fit for a knowledge-based exploration of a topic. Initial discussions have begun to engage faculty from various universities in the United States. Serious discussions around intellectual property rights, data management, and priorities will need to occur before a decision is made. Regardless of whether this specific instance is developed, the need for collaboration on management and leadership topics clearly exists. KLS sees it has a role in enabling this.

1 Cyberinfrastructure is a term originally defined in the Atkins report, Revolutionizing Science and Engineering Through Cyberinfrastructure, 2003. It refers to a comprehensive and integrated system of hardware, networks, software, and middleware, designed to support advanced data acquisition, storage, management, integration, mining, and visualization over the internet.

266 

 Mary Lee Kennedy

Connecting a community Creating collaboration spaces can be very purpose driven as described above in the examples on Working Knowledge and the Knowledge Center. It can also be more indirect – by creating the means within which collaboration can occur. On 8 April 2008 Harvard Business School celebrated its 100th anniversary. On the occasion of the centennial the School was both reflective and looking towards the future. The HBS community of faculty, students, alums and staff was drawn together in as one group to celebrate the past and also to consider topics needing our attention going forward. For some time KLS has had an Oral History programme focused on the great intellectual leaders at HBS. However, our experience tells us that the collective knowledge of the community can only really be understood through the expression of that experience by the members themselves. Certainly this inflection point in the history of our School was a perfect opportunity to engage the entire community. The Institutional Memory programme (Harvard Business School 2010) includes four main components: –– the development of an interactive timeline highlighting key events and enabling user-contributed events; –– an in-depth multi-media exploration of four eternal questions in business education; –– a series of narratives captured in audio, video, and in text by alums, faculty, students and staff on a variety of subjects including leadership, business education, and their experiences at HBS; and –– a photo gallery where the School and users can contribute images. Programme management involved a cross-disciplinary team from the School including faculty, administrative offices responsible for the MBA programme, External Relations, the Dean’s Office, Marketing and Communications, the Web and Intranet Services team (also part of KLS), and the IT team. Bringing this programme to life required significant commitment on everyone’s part – this was the common goal that held the programme together. The contributions from the community have been tremendous – a perusal of the section on Community narratives testifies to their interest in giving back and connecting with others who are grappling with similar issues. Most of the contributions come from events held on the campus, but narrative has been submitted on the 1–800 number (global), as well as via email. The next project for engaging the HBS Community involves running a Prediction Market at the October 2008 Business Summit. The goal at this event is to understand the Summit participants’ perspectives on a series of topics as defined



21 Knowledge Collaboration in Higher Education 

 267

by the programme of events. KLS is piloting a Prediction Market over the summer to remove as many kinks as possible from the support model required to successfully capture the collective knowledge of the Summit members during their three day event at the School. Working in conjunction with the faculty, this effort at tying practice and research together is another example of furthering the fundamental principle of business education and research at HBS.

Conclusion Collaboration occurs when individuals work on a shared goal. In Higher Education collaboration occurs within and between students, faculty, practitioners and staff. Harvard Business School’s Knowledge and Library Services (KLS) enables the exchange of ideas, expertise and information through various collaborative services and products including those described above: Working Knowledge discussion forums, Knowledge Centers, and the Institutional Memory programme. While collaboration is between the actors in the collaboration spaces, it takes significant collaboration behind the scenes to draw the actors in – with direct requirements (as with students completing a project), with a commonly held value (as with scholars working to address a complex problem), or with indirect enablers (as with the HBS Community exchange on the value of business education). There is no formula for successful collaboration, yet there are basic elements to fulfil: actors must come together with a jointly held purpose and it is important to understand up front what that purpose is; the design of the collaboration space requires a cross-functional team with strong project management skills, including a commonly understood vocabulary. Success is defined in terms of the original intent of the collaboration while also recognizing secondary results can also contribute significant value.

References Atkins, Daniel E. et al. 2003. Revolutionizing Science and Engineering Through Cyberinfrastructure. Report of the National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure. Arlington: National Science Foundation. http://www.nsf.gov/cise/sci/ reports/atkins.pdf. Accessed on 18 May 2015. CERN (Centre Européen de Recherche Nucléaire). 2015. “The Large Hadron Collider.” Accessed on 18 May 2015. http://home.web.cern.ch/topics/large-hadron-collider. Harvard Business School. 2010.“The Institutional Memory Program.” Accessed on 18 May 2015. http://institutionalmemory.hbs.edu/.

268 

 Mary Lee Kennedy

Harvard Business School. 2015. “Working Knowledge: The Thinking that Leads: About Us.” http://hbswk.hbs.edu/aboutus/Pages/default.aspx. Accessed on 19 October 2015. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 2014. “Human Genome Project.” http://www.ornl.gov/sci/ techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml. Accessed on 18 May 2015. Purdue University. 2015. “Hub Zero.” http://hubzero.org/. Accessed on 11 October 2015.

Contributors

Contributors

Acadia, Spencer: Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, Texas, USA. Bultrini, Leda: Agenzia Regionale per la Protezione Ambientale del Lazio, Rome, Italy. Byrne, Alex: Library of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Ceynowa, Klaus: Bavarian State Library, Munich, Germany. Chin Liau, Yi: Singapore National Library, Singapore. Colaiacovo, Enrico: Proteco LLC, Milan, Italy and Doha, Qatar. Davis, Mary Ellen K.: Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) of the American Library Association, Chicago, Illinois, USA. Degkwitz, Andreas: Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Flicker, Anja: Würzburg Public Library, Würzburg, Germany. Hock Kia, Siang: Singapore National Library, Singapore. Kennedy, Mary Lee: Knowledge and Library Services, Harvard Business School, Boston, Mass., USA. Koenig, Michael: Long Island University, New York, NY, USA. Koury, Regina: Eli M. Oboler Library, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, USA. Lecomte, Héloïse: Bibliothèque universitaire des langues et civilisations, Paris, France. Lux, Claudia: Qatar National Library, Doha, Qatar. McCallum, Sally: Library of Congress, Washington, DC, USA. Näveri-Ranta, Hannele: Helsinki University Library, Helsinki, Finland. Newman, Wilda: Knowledge Associates Resources, LLC, Columbia, MD, USA. Nitecki, Danuta A: Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Ong, Ian: Singapore National Library, Singapore. Paul, Thomas M.: Würzburg Public Library, Würzburg, Germany.

270 

 Contributors

Raju, Reggie: University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. Renard, Rebecca Hope: District of Columbia Public Library, Washington, DC, USA. Scheeder, Donna: Library of Congress, Washington, DC, USA. Semenza, Jenny: Eli M. Oboler Library, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho, USA. Semertzaki, Eva: Centre for Culture, Research and Documentation: Bank of Greece, Athens, Greece. Sempéré, Julien: Service commun de la documentation, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. Serrat, Olivier: Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines. Stoddart, Linda: Haute École de Gestion, Geneva, Switzerland. Formerly Office of the Chief Information Technology Officer, United Nations, New York, USA. Tise, Ellen: Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Turner, Elizabeth: First Command Financial Services, Fort Worth, Texas, USA. Vitiello, Giuseppe: NATO Defense College, Rome, Italy. Walkley Hall, Liz: Flinders University Library, Adelaide, Australia.