Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Core Value: Accountability [January, 2011]

My work-related goal for this year:

Use Things software for my to-do lists on most days (4 or more) each week. Track how many weeks I meet this target.

Things is a Mac program for managing projects; Next Actions and other to-do items related to your projects; errand lists; phone-call lists; Areas of Responsibility within your life; etc. It's based on David Allen's Getting Things Done work/life management system. I started using Things over a year ago, but haven't been as consistent as I want to. I find that, when I get really busy, I start to-do lists, or jot down things I need to do, all sorts of places--note pads, legal pads, notebooks, Sticky Notes on my computer monitor, the little pad I keep in my purse, my Backpack home page, etc. I then have to decide whether to keep a list going (wherever I started it up) or transfer that list, or those to-do items, to Things. Before I know it, I have multiple lists, as well as errant to-do's scattered all around.

Things does a beautiful job of keeping all your lists in one place. It lets you move to-do items from one list to another, helps you track whether you did something, allows you to schedule a to-do, and more. As best I can tell, it's capable of anything I would ever want to do with to-do lists. Probably the best feature is that you can put work-related, personal, and household projects and to-do lists all together in the same place. I just need to use Things more consistently than I have been. I have a copy for my desktop Mac and an app for my iPad; and I can sync one with the other.

This goal fits the Core Value of Accountability, as described in the library's Strategic Plan, in that the Core Value asks us to "demonstrate commitment to accomplish work in a(n) ... efficient ... manner" and to "efficiently monitor progress on projects."

Now that I've put my goal on this blog, and publicly stated that I'm going to do it, I know I'll be shamed into doing it much more likely to reach my target this year.

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Facebook

1. Facebook account:
I already had an account.

3. Things the library could do with Facebook:
I'm deviating a little bit from the directions here. My suggestions are broad areas, rather than specific things to do. 

They relate to two themes: 
(1) for faculty librarians, using Facebook to address the other two spheres of our responsibilities, outside of our library-related work: scholarship and service. Because we're required to make contributions in these areas, promoting what we do in our scholarship and service also promotes the Library as our home department.


(2) for all librarians, letting people get to know us as "a whole person"--our interests, our concerns, our activities. 

Teachers are encouraged to include, in their classroom sessions, information or anecdotes about themselves, to personalize their teaching and to relate themselves to students on a more genuine level. Librarians should do this, also, to create opportunities for more social connections with our users and with our librarian colleagues (those inside and outside the library).


Facebook's social nature is a perfect way to enhance the social nature of the library, whether as a physical space or a virtual space. If users and colleagues know more about all of us, and have more ways to connect with each one of us, that can lead to more connections and interactions with the library.

• Discuss or promote our scholarship
Library faculty could do this from our personal Facebook account, from some other Facebook forum, or both.

• Discuss or promote our community involvement or other non-library-specific service
Post about groups in the local community that we're involved with, in an informal or a formal service capacity. Use Facebook to let people know about professional service work we're doing that might surprise them, because it's different from our usual library roles that are familiar and widely known. 

• Promote libraries, reading, and information literacy by posting about things you've read, enjoyed, or found interesting
Post not just in the usual way we might think of as librarians, but in ways that let people get to know us better and see the whole person. The social aspects are in the forefront of these posts. Then, adding a URL to the library catalog, or an Open WorldCat URL, etc., would indirectly/subversively promote libraries. 

Friday, January 7, 2011

Core value: User/Quality Focus [December 2010]

1. Something I intend to do, to increase my user/quality focus:

This is actually something I've been working on for awhile, and intend to continue. The topics I'm writing on, for two scholarly article manuscripts, fit the characteristics of user/quality focus as defined in the library's Strategic Plan. One manuscript is related to instruction, and it describes a "pedagogical exploration" that I undertook in order to finds ways to increase the relevance, for students, of my instruction sessions (especially one-shot sessions). Another manuscript describes my Lumbee bibliography work--from my 1994 book-length bibliography to the current bibliography Web site. It, too, relates to user/quality focus, because the Web site makes the bibliography references more widely available to users. The work I'm doing (with help from several library colleagues and student assistants) to make the Web site database-driven and to add all the items from my 1994 book to the database (and, thus, to the Web site) will also improve the site for the user.

2. Suggestions for things the library can do to enhance this core value:

• Institutionalize the SACS standards that the library is responsible for meeting.
All of the standards we're responsible for meeting affect our users. To be found in compliance with them, we must assess our work in relation to each one (thus, determine what our current level of quality is). If we institutionalize the standards, that means we discuss our efforts in relation to each standard regularly and at many levels (from individual librarians, to committees, to teams, to library faculty meetings, to library-wide meetings). We also use the data from our assessments that relate to each standard, to plan and to make decisions at many levels. If we institutionalize the SACS standards, we will automatically be maintaining and enhancing our user/quality focus. If we institutionalize the standards, we will also find it easier to be sure we're keeping in compliance with them. Anything that's done regularly or habitually is easier to do, as opposed to not really getting geared up for it it until we start planning for the next SACS reaffirmation of accreditation.

• Ask, "What's best for users?"
In our meetings and discussions, we sometimes talk about what's the easier or faster or simpler way to accomplish a task or goal. Or--we talk about what committee, task force, or person that task or goal should be assigned to. Those are necessary discussions, and we can't accomplish things without having them. I'm not arguing that we can't arrive at a way of doing something that's easy, fast, or simple as well as best for users; or that what team/group/person undertakes a task doesn't relate to what's best for users. But, if we want to enhance our user/quality focus, one way to do so might be to keep the question, "What's best for users?" at the forefront. If we answer that question first, and keep our answers to it ahead of other considerations, I believe we'll ensure that we're making the best decision for users.

3. Link to a useful resource related to User/Quality Focus
For some time now, I've been very interested in Positive Psychology. An offshoot of this field is Positive Organizational Scholarship, which extends Positive Psychology to the workplace. Jane Dutton, at the University of Michigan, has done extensive research and writing in this area. Her writings on positive (or high quality) connections at work certainly offer promise for enhancing our user/quality focus. If we have high quality connections with each other at work, the energy created by those connections will improve our decision-making, our work, and our services for users. It will also energize us in our connections with users as we deliver services to them. In her book, Energize your Workplace, Dutton says,
...The energy and vitality of individuals and organizations alike depends on the quality of the connections among people in the organization, and between organizational members and people outside the firm with whom they do business. . . . [high-quality connections are] marked by mutual positive regard, trust, and active engagement on both sides. In a high-quality connection, people feel more engaged, more open, more competent. They feel more alive. High-quality connections can have a profound impact on both individuals and entire organizations.
. . . HIgh-quality connections do not require personal knowledge or extensive interaction. Any point of contact with another person can potentially be a high-quality connection. One conversation, one e-mail exchange, one moment of connecting in a meeting can infuse both participants with a greater sense of vitality, giving them a bounce in their steps and a greater capacity to act. [Kindle locations 109-16]
Here's a link to Jane Dutton's page at the Center for Positive Organizational Scholarship at the University of Michigan, Ross School of Business. See item 2, "The power of positive (high quality) connections."