Crossing the Cultural Divide: Teams and the IUPUI University Library

1. Crossing the Cultural Divide: Teams and the IUPUI University Library David W. Lewis Dean of the IUPUI University Library Living the Future 4 University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ April 26, 2002

2. Prelude: David’s Two Observations

3. Observation 1: 25 years ago the most important thing libraries did was keep millions and millions of small pieces of paper in the correct order. The organizational structures and the culture that made it possible not to loose very many of those millions of pieces of paper was required then. Today these structures and that culture have become counterproductive.

4.   Observation 2: The purpose of libraries is to provide the members of the communities or organizations they serve with an information subsidy. Without this subsidy information is not used to the extent that will provide the most benefit to the organization or community. It is the subsidy, not the mechanism that currently provides it (the library) that is important.

5. IUPUI University Library’s Story Today I will tell the story of the IUPUI University Library’s five year journey as a team-based organization. The focus will be on the strategies that have evolved to more successfully deal with our technology intensive environment and the expectations of our involvement with student success and retention.

6. Underlying Assumption My underlying assumption is that all libraries must cross the cultural divide that separates organizations which are internally focused on control and continuity from those that are outward looking, fast moving, and innovative. Without cultural change libraries will not be able to adapt to the many disruptive technological changes that are taking place in their environment.

7. Theoretical Underpinning:Disruptive Change Clayton M. Christensen, The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail, New York: HarperBusiness, 2000.

8. Clayton M. Christensen: Sustaining versus Disruptive Technologies • Sustaining technologies improve the performance of of established products along dimensions of performance that mainstream customers in major markets have historically valued. • Disruptive technologies bring a very difference value proposition to the market than has been previously available. Generally, disruptive technologies initially under perform established products in mainstream markets. But they have other features that are valued by a few fringe (and generally new users) users.

9. Clayton M. Christensen: Sustaining versus Disruptive Technologies • Sustaining technologies - Established organizations are generally good at change involving sustaining technologies. • Follow the best customers • Service models are not fundamentally changed • Quality improves • Added cost justified by improved service

10. Clayton M. Christensen: Sustaining versus Disruptive Technologies • Disruptive technologies - Establish organizations generally fail when change involves disruptive technologies. Organizations at the periphery succeed. • Design product or service for new, rather than established, users • Cheaper, faster, easier — even if quality is not high at the outset • Service models disrupted • Faster rate of development

11. Change in Libraries • Change from Paper Library to Automated Library (1965-1995) was a Sustaining Change • Change from Automated Library to Electronic Library (1995 to date) is a Disruptive Change From Michael Buckland, Redesigning Library Service: A Manifesto, Chicago: American Library Association, 1992.

12. Disruptive Change in Libraries • Collections • Open Archives (ePrint servers) are challenging journals as means of scholarly communication • Web archives (like American Memory) make large collections available without institutional affiliation • eBooks will happen soon (libraries might not be players) • Collections are not hand crafted one item at a time as they once were • Collections purchased with partners • Collections purchased by large entities (states) on behalf of citizens not libraries

13. Disruptive Change in Libraries • Bibliographic Control • Bibliographic control purchased rather than made one item at a time (Marchive, PromptCat, Serials Solutions) • Access to items not owned as, or more important. than access owned items • Catalogs are for machines, not people (SFX and other linking systems) • Portal battle — library catalog versus Goggle, library interface versus Science Direct (Elsevier), or library interface versus state interface (INSPIRE, etc.) • Trade-off between collections and bibliographic control

14. Disruptive Change in Libraries • Reference • Alternative reference providers • OCLC Remote Reference Collaboration • LSSI Chat Reference Service • Mass customization of services is expected by users (MyLibrary) • Alternative expert advice is available on the web • Instruction • Involvement in curriculum development rather than “library instruction” • Need to have measurable impact on student success and retention

15. Performance Oversupply “Once the performance level demanded of a particular attribute has been achieved, customers indicate their satiation by being less willing to pay a premium price for continued improvement in that attribute. Hence, performance oversupply triggers a shift in the basis of competition, and the criteria used by customers to choose one product over another.” — Clayton M. Christensen

16. Performance Oversupply - Library Collections

17. Performance Oversupply - Library Collections

18. What happens when an organization confronts disruptive change?

19. “It is simply impossible to predict with any useful degree of precision how disruptive products will be used or how large their market will be. An important corollary is that, because markets for disruptive technologies are unpredictable, companies’ initial strategies for entering these markets will generally be wrong.” — Clayton M. Christensen Librarians love to plan. In the old world this was a critical skill. It may now be a waste of time.

20. “The dominant difference between successful ventures and failed ones, generally, is not the astuteness of their original strategy. Guessing the right strategy at the outset isn’t nearly as important to success as conserving enough resources… so that new business initiatives get a second or third stab at getting it right.” — Clayton M. Christensen Libraries rarely have, or can acquire, flexible resources.

21. “Managers confronting disruptive technologies need to get out of their laboratories and focus groups and directly create knowledge about new customers and new applications through discovery-driven expeditions into the marketplace.” — Clayton M. Christensen Need to be close to users so you can watch what they do (rather than listen to what they say). Librarians hate to leave their buildings or roam too far from home.

22. “Blindly following the maxim that good managers should keep close to their customers can sometimes be a fatal mistake.” — Clayton M. Christensen All organizations are depended on customers and investors — their value network. Companies make decisions in the context of this value network. Since disruptive products bring a different kind of value old customers don’t see the need for them.

23. Can we consider that buying books may not be the best use of our resources? • Can we act on what learn from freshman when what they teach us runs it runs counter to what the faculty say they want? • Can we trust small groups develop products or does everyone have to buy-in to everything? • Are we willing to develop exploratory systems and services assuming many will fail?

24. Organizational Structures for Confronting Change

25. Organizational Structures for Confronting Change

26. Organizational Structures for Confronting Change

27. Organizational Structures for Confronting Change

28. Structures for Confronting Change - Lesson from Christensen • Since libraries can rarely create autonomous organizations to manage change... • Changing culture is required!! Need to match the library’s values to the new environment

29. Libraries Organizations and Disruptive Change

30. Changing culture is hard!!! • War and famine • Change what individuals need to do to be successful in the organization and in their careers • Change the rules in the middle of the game

31. Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis

32. Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis • Urban campus of Indiana University • Founded 30 years ago from extension programs of IU and Purdue in Indianapolis • Health Sciences campus; most graduate programs have professional orientation • More sponsored research than any campus in Indiana • Strong commitment to serve the Indianapolis/Central Indiana community • Campus tends to be entrepreneurial and collaborative

33. Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis • Students: 27,000 headcount, 16,000 FTE • Mostly commuting, many non-traditional (average undergraduate is 26 years old; works 30 hours per week, and has 5 hours per week of dependent care responsibilities) • Retention is a major concern (six year graduation rate is about 25%) • Awards Indiana University or Purdue University degrees • Largest range of academic programs of any campus in Indiana

34. IUPUI University Library

35. IUPUI University Library • Supports all programs except: health sciences and law • Budget: $7.8 million • $4.0 compensation • $2.7 million for materials • Staff: 90 total • 30 librarians (with faculty status) • 15 professionals (mostly technologists) • 45 clerical • Collections • 600,000 volumes • 20% of expenditures for electronic resources • Leading collection in Philanthropy in the nation

36. IUPUI University Library • New building in 1993 with focus on technology • Technology innovations as a result • Web interface to all library applications in 1993 • One of first libraries with many public computers with non-library applications • Early adapter of electronic reserves • SFX beta • Chat reference

37. IUPUI University LibraryAdvantages • Not encumbered with historical collections — no old paper • Library system (OPAC, etc.) run from Bloomington • Campus expects us to use technology as route to excellence • Campus expects us to contribute to student success and retention • Good support from campus leadership • Responsibility centered budgeting - provides fiscal flexibility

38. IUPUI University LibraryAdvantages • New building (opened in summer of 1993) and jump to technology that accompanied the new building, broke the library from past in dramatic way • Created change in culture because of technology and because the library became a leader

39. IUPUI University LibraryDisadvantages • Aging librarians tied to the campus by tenure and 18/20 retirement plan (golden handcuffs) • Tight market for technologists • Need to be both collaborative with the Bloomington campus and independent from it • Campus is underfunded • No one can figure out who we are

40. IUPUI University Library Librarians

41. IUPUI University Library Priorities 1. Increase retention — actively contribute to curriculum redesign • Instructional Teams for Freshman Learning Communities (20 a year five years ago; 125 for the past three years) • Center for Teaching and Learning • Gateway Initiative - redesign of big intro courses • Electronic Portfolio 2. Develop strong technology base for delivering library collections and services • Can’t afford to build strong paper collections • Required for distributed teaching and learning • Serves our students

42. Mission Statement: The IUPUI University Library honors tradition, but looks to the innovative application of technology and new forms of engagement with our various publics as our path to excellence. Vision: To be the innovative leader among urban university libraries

43. University Library Strategies • Teams with overlapping team assignments • Recently developed of client-focused teams for our services group • Flat hierarchy • Three times a year “organization weeks” • Birkman Assessment Tool • Commitment to developing talent internally • Focus on assessment and performance measures

44. Teams and the University Library • Reorganized into a team-based organization in 1997 • Top town decision made and executed by senior management • Technical Services and Public Services dissolved as large powerful groups • Hierarchy flattened • Initial focus on instruction through the development of “instructional teams” • Most librarians on multiple teams

45. Overlapping Team Assignment • When we first organized in teams we did this to fill out the teams • Much overlap between technology teams • Much overlap between the Reference Team, the Instruction Team, and the Collections Team • Some overlap as coordinating mechanism (Digital Libraries and Reference, Digital Libraries and Cataloging, Cataloging and Special Collections) • Most librarians has liaison responsibilities, but they were not accommodated in the structure

48. Overlapping Team Assignment • Worked very well for technology teams, they have become a self managing group • Coordinating overlaps works • Reference/Instruction/Collections overlaps caused a great deal of stress • Most of dual team assignments were held by “line” librarians (many untenured) who got caught between demands of multiple team leaders • Liaison activities, which were often very rewarding for librarians, “did not count” • Everyone wanted off the Instruction Team because it was the director’s high profile project and if you were involved it sucked up all of your time

49. Client-Focused Teams • Instituted May 2001 • Disbanded the Instruction and Collection Teams • Created four teams focused of groups of schools (the significant academic units) • Liberal Arts Team • SETN Team • Professional Programs Team • University College Team • Client teams responsible for instruction, advanced reference, and collections for group of schools • Liaison became common responsibility, especially instruction • Largely resolved issues with instruction

50. Client-Focused Teams • Each Team appointed a person to coordinate collections, reference, and instruction • The coordinators for collection and instruction meet periodically • Reference Team kept responsibility for desk services • Reference coordinators were members of the Reference Team • Reference has been this year’s area of conflict