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."
No comments:
Post a Comment