Camping In Style at #libcampnw

The Rise of the Unconference 'format'

Now, unconferences, teachmeets, mashed sessions… these have all been gaining in popularity in recent years as an alternative to traditionally scheduled and arranged conferences, seminars and events.

They tend to be free (though donations gratefully accepted as is baking) and may take place at the weekend. And I’ve never been to any so I had a hankering…

Last year I had an ‘almost’ moment with librarycamp11 in that my schedule finally overcame me at the last and I ended up pulling out to write up something I had due on the Monday instead. Reading all the blogs and tweets from it I really regretted this.

Thus I was determined to put this near miss right at the next obvious opportunity.

Fun and Frolics in the Madlab

And hence last Saturday afternoon found me in Manchester for #libcampnw in the wonderfully named venue of the Madlab.

All afternoon a group of very diverse library, archives and information workers cheerily cantered up and down stairs to different sessions only stopping to grab more sumptuous cake and gossip on the way (and to look at the Board Of All Knowledge on what session was taking place where when). An extremely informal and very convivial time was had by all.

The Session Content

Sessions you say? What were the sessions on? Well, on whatever anyone put forward basically that attracted an audience that wanted to gather together in a huddle and discuss it! Some sessions attracted very large enthusiastic numbers of the available punters (e.g. on marketing in libraries, on the development work on the new CILIP Body of Professional Knowledge), others were far more petite (e.g. on equality issues or happiness in libraries or all the ‘small but still important things’ like toilets that don’t usually get discussed).

Quick write-up of the sessions I attended

Personally I went to equality issues, cross sectoral working, staff training.

Equality issues

Now we were a petite group, and we started in the same conversation and then I hold my hand up that we ended up having two separate conversations as three folk had one and two of us drifted into another. But they were both highly stimulating conversations that had folk exchanging contact details at the end.

So as I remember it we started all together with the results of the recent CILIP Equalities Audit looking at equalities findings within the organisation about the membership profile, and then it broadened out to discussing the sector and whether the results would differ at all and re how you defined the sector.

And then two of us kind of hived off into a discussion about how to promote LIS work as a career option in places we don’t perhaps reach very well and how to reach into schools to promote it as an option and all the different kinds of jobs, promote more within our own libraries, promote through other related places with cross-societal footfall and strong education and learning programmes such as museums. We discussed uses of positive discrimination to try to change the profile of the profession to one more akin to that of broader society and whether that gave a more welcoming image or pigeonholed people in a way they would not wish. We discussed collecting statistics and uses made of…

Helpfully the 'other' parallel converation going on next to me on the subject has been written up since too by thebradfordlibrarian and Theatregrad has also blogged about the sessions she attended so I now know bits that I slightly half-missed at the time about things I was in and things I wasn't (grins!).

Cross sector working

This was a combined session on cross sector working and working in non library jobs.

We had a diverse membership for the discussion ranging from public and private sector library folk to consultants to archivists to Wikipedia to library systems supplier to student.

A lot of it was about what opportunities existed to work collaboratively to e.g. source content or systems re procurement and to work in a lot closer way instead of everyone in their respective silos. Various initiatives between different bodies were discussed.

It kind of came down to many have very similar concerns and goals but very few of us are directly connected, all working in different systems and sectors, and thus it is immensely difficult to make national or global offers which would have instant recognition in a brand manner as an out-facing profile to help illustrate the worth and value of what we do. We need to work on this harder.

There are collaborative projects, but often they’re not known widely outwith a certain sector never mind to an external audience, and they may be very localised, or they may be time constrained, or they might have been going a long time and be fairly large and wide-ranging but not have a huge profile outwith their own communities.

Staff training

This was another combined session I think (where there were too many sessions pitched to run some were combined) on staff training and internal communication – though to be fair we didn’t really get to internal communication!

A lot of it ranged about creative solutions to training budgets that did not exist or were perhaps extremely small and how to go about getting the training you felt you or your staff needed.

How to sell the need and benefit for it internally to get it agreed, ways of going about that didn’t necessarily involve time away or expensive courses where there were issues around budget or cover or getting rest of work done.

So we covered all the usual from job shadowing and visits, running in-house, developing yourself, having external trainer in to run, doing half hour very focused sessions at certain times, blended learning, electronic options, discussion with colleagues, getting it written into your appraisal objectives for organisational buy-in, pitching it to boss…

It was useful having a mixture of people there who were themselves trainers as well and getting their viewpoint that generally they love invites from places with defined ready-made communities e.g. professional groups so they don’t have to try and find their own audiences and do all the practical arrangements too as well as deliver the content. The other thing that came across was the difficulty where there is impasses between someone wanting training in x to happen and someone in more authority disagreeing on the need.

Outcomes Beyond The Day?

Concrete things do come out of it. Two of my colleagues also on the Project Board for it who were there proposed a session on the CILIP Body of Professional Knowledge which attracted a good turnout and a lot of debate – the feedback from that session has been disseminated to the Project Board already to help formulate our work.

And I had a few idea’s on various things triggered by all the debate and sessions on other things too which I know I’ll explore.

In conclusion…

I’m afraid I whizzed off early before the last sessions as the only very cheap train back to Glasgow meant I needed to leave early. But it was a really good afternoon of lots of enthusiastic people who would not normally meet from lots of different environments discussing whatever they personally felt like discussing on the day. Definitely energising.

Blogs are starting to appear from folk who attended totally different sessions to me so that's a good way of seeing what happened in the sessions I missed too.

So, many thanks to all the individuals who organised the event and to those cheery souls who turned up for it from all points of the compass on a Saturday afternoon and made it such fun.  Really glad I got and roll on the next one...

And now I've got around to doing the blog entry for it (hurrah) I must do something with that pocket of scribbled telephone numbers, business cards, event notifications, Twitter names etc. that I picked up.

The cake wrappers I can confirm are safely binned though! Promise!

The Joys of Networking

Law Librarian Networking

Last Thursday was the annual Scottish Law Librarians’ Group networking meeting.

Format

Traditionally this involves members suggesting topics in advance and the participants being split into rotating groups to discuss each topic and compare and contrast views, knowledge and practice with each other. All the views will then be consolidated together for an SLLG Newsletter article later in the year. After the topics have been discussed (strict time limit of six minutes each!) everyone hits the nibbles and socialises for a bit so it’s a good chance to catch up with people you don’t actually see often.

SLLG Membership

The information practitioners who comprise the membership of SLLG are drawn from a variety of places – lots from law firms, academic subject librarians whose remit includes law, various from government and the courts, and also individuals from the likes of police, oil and health who have legal interests and may operate in niche areas. Various suppliers to the sector are also members e.g. representing bookshops or publishers.

Topics

At the meeting last Thursday (seems way back in time already!) there was lively discussion on such issues as competitive intelligence (more of a law firm issue), social media use, introducing and integrating ebooks into service provision (practical issues and concerns, who’s offering what, platforms for, licensing issues, what other sectors do), outsourcing, and impending changes in law firm governance north and south of the border such as Alternative Business Structures.

Acronyms ahoy - LIBDAY8 and NLD12

LIBDAY8 and NLD12

The Library Day In A Life Project allows librarians and information workers in a huge variety of contexts to share a snapshot of a day, or a week, in their working lives.

As such it promotes the diversity of the sector, gives insight into available jobs, and gives those considering entering the profession a flavour of the types of work it can entail.  It started as a 'day' but generally it's now become a 'week'!  And for #libday8 within the week also falls National Libraries Day 2012 on 4th February handily enough which promotes the value of all kinds of libraries.

Dealing With (relative!) 'calm'

The last couple of weeks for me have been full-on diving around the UK for lots of different purposes, so in a way better suited to Library Day in A Life as that is more normal for me.

LIBDAY8 however falls on a much calmer week when I'm largely in one place and at my own desk (minor miracles of life!) catching up on more regular activity.

Participation...

I've never partcipated in this before as I usually end up meaning to and listing activity till about (coughs) Tuesday and then the week passes in a flash and I realise I don't have the content to do it. I've simply forgotten precisely what I did when and the bus has passed and the sector is onto the next thing.

Scheduling and Approach

So what I’m going to do at the end of this week is one very general post of the key activities of each ‘day’ of this week rather than do daily entries or tweet it as I go. Because there's huge amounts of #libday8 content this week from huge numbers of people and I know I prefer blogs as structure for it to TweetAMinute which gets overwhelming quickly. 

Therefore I'm deciding on participation but with some volume control works best for me. I'm building up a list each day of the key activities in draft format so come end of week I will know what I did when.

And if it all works to plan this time (grins) I'll even link myself to the LibDay8 webpage in celebration!

Diversity Is A Glorious Thing

But I will  also add a few separate blog posts on some of the specific things I’ve been involved in over the last couple of weeks. Simply because if everyone is concentrating on #libday8 content at the same time it gets a bit same-y perhaps.

Head Down for the book review Part One

This week is Determined Effort to make significant headway in reading a professional monograph for which I have promised someone a Book Review for their professional journal. I’m late, so as part of the January 2012 Determined Attempt on the 2011 Miscellaneous Still Outstanding pile this is designated in my mind Book Review week!

So, before this blog looks like a western with tumbleweed under the usual cudgel of the diary and schedule (too busy doing to talk about), a few musings on volunteering to do book reviews for somewhere and the process.

Hopefully next week will be the incredibly exciting (or not!!) Part Two of this post when I’ll talk about the rest of the process in the past tense being finished or substantially so!

THE BENEFITS

Generally speaking these are:

For you -

• Source of lots of new professional reading on the latest developments in a subject.

• Usually you get the book free to keep in return for doing book review.

• The fact you’re Review’ing it nudges you to actually read it.

• You have to really consider what you think of the text and arguments made in it.

• There is at least one new concrete result of your reading (the Review itself).

Wider –

• It hopefully helps promote awareness of good new texts to audiences.

• It helps folk decide on what they want to purchase.

THE DRAWBACKS

For you –

• You still have to invest in the process – the time involved.

• There’s probably a timescale you’ve been given for delivery to bear in mind.

Overall  

Doing something for someone else eventually tends to  force self-discipline and prioritisation to get it done. Which makes it a great incentive.

Just buy it for yourself and perhaps many months later it’s still not made it up the priority pile because it’s there after all, so obviously you’ll get to it sometime, but not a ‘sometime’ with a date attached! Of course in reality busy lives ‘sometime’ often never comes…!

APPROACHES

Some things to bear in mind

Before you volunteer

• Is the work of enough relevance and / or interest to you that you really want to do this?

• Would you have automatically purchased a copy anyway (without conditions attached)?

• Can you do a couple of minutes first before volunteering just checking a few websites to inform yourself of key factors? For example -  pagination. Is it akin to a novella or an epic? What does that mean in terms of likely time required? Cost - could you actually afford it yourself?. Can you pull up a table of contents?  Does it still look as inviting? Does the level look right for you? Is it an author/s you know already? If so what does that tell you about how easy to read it might be?

• Is there any indication of what the timescale is for delivery and how does that fit in with everything else you know you have to do / want to do in the same period? This book review does not exist in it’s own separate vacuum. It needs to integrate with the rest of life.

• Is there a specific format / arrangement the Review is required in?  Do you have a copy?

• Is there a defined word count for it?

HEAD DOWN READING PHASE

Eventually it is likely if you do not plan how you’re going to fit this in you will look at when you’re supposed to submit and wince a bit. Possibly because it’s suddenly close, possibly because it’s already somehow passed!  If you haven’t been coughed at by the person you agreed to give it to in the first place it’s more likely it’s passed but it wasn’t urgent and can go in the next one.

So, bear in mind…

• To keep this under control (i.e. that it’ll happen in a decent timeframe) you have to schedule it.

• Look at your diary and figure out where a good week is to get the reading done and how (or a substantive part thereof if it’s an opus). So, for example, this week I’m on long trains an awful lot, a couple of Manchester trips, a couple of Edinburgh ones. That helps for me. Defined periods of time known in advance when I can concentrate on it away from many distractions.

• Know that for a certain period e.g. a week It Is Priority over all the other things you’ve been meaning to do that are unscheduled but swimming about the back of your head. Ignore them and do this. Head down, blinkers on, get on with it in the gaps between what you already have scheduled that you know you have to get done that is more important.

• The important thing is a start date and then reading a bit every day till you’re done. Do not make advance decisions about precisely how much you’ll have read by when because that’s a lot more likely to fail.   What you utterly need to avoid is an irregular start / stop rhythm, that just gobbles up energy, find the energy to start Once Only and then continuing takes much less. Don’t have to re-start it every four days. Pretty soon that won’t happen.  Again, if you decide it’s ‘x chapters a day’ or ‘x amount of pages a day’ that’s really blunt, your day is not the same, some days you will have more on than others, more claims on your time, you will feel more or less tired which will affect how well you can concentrate. Don’t treat yourself like a machine because you’re not and it won’t work. Be flexible and realistic but keep it going.

• Finish each day at the end of a defined segment of text and have a marker in so you know precisely where you’ve got to.

• Have a notebook of some kind beside you and just jot down interesting sections and thoughts they trigger and what you feel about, and in a way that you can easily find the precise section again. Do this regularly. It’ll make writing up at the end a whole lot simpler. I tend to use chapter headings and wait a bit afterwards and then jot a few notes on each chapter. For some folk scribbling as they read works well, for others that might take them out of the text too much or perhaps style-wise they like to let information settle and percolate a bit in their minds and think it through a bit first.

• Keep a note of how well you’ve done overall since the overall start date each day and concentrate on that, not how far you’ve still to go or if you got less done today than yesterday. So in two days this week I’ve read six chapters, I have eleven chapters to go, however last Sunday I hadn’t even read page one and it’d been sitting here for – coughs – almost five months precisely because I hadn’t scheduled it till then and had far too much on. If I compare Sunday to today then I’m seeing mass progress. Progress is always motivating for benefits of  continuing.

Codification of knowledge operations

The pile of bus reading continues…

In the article lean knowledge work in October 2011 Harvard Business Review Staats and Upton argue that knowledge operations can be codified in many aspects making them into lean systems similar to those that tend to be identified with manufacturing processes.

This would give measurable benefits in terms of increased speed, better quality, reducing costs, and  in reducing repetition and so increasing job satisfaction.

Much of the article is a case study that illustrates key points the authors wish to make around six principles they identified.

I’m just going to comment on a couple of things within the article.

The Nub of the Argument

This falls into three parts. They argue that “a substantial amount of knowledge assumed to be tacit doesn’t have to be; it can be articulated and captured in writing if the organisation makes the effort to pull it out of people’s heads… all knowledge work includes some activities that have nothing to do with applying judgment and can be streamlined… Even when knowledge is genuinely tacit, creating systems and rules to guide workers’ interactions can lead to more-effective collaborations.”

Putting the Effort where the Value Is

I’m cautious about the above. I think the key bit about it for me from that quote is indeed ‘if the organisation makes the effort’ and doing it in a way that aligns it to business benefit so time is only being spent on area’s where it is actually going to improve organisational performance rather than be an abyss for taking up additional time. So I’m not hugely arguing against  the theoretical basis of it, but I am wondering about the extent to which it would be practical or desirable. For the tasks with oft-repeated elements a more functional approach to streamlining that would free up time for other things would be valuable for however.

And What Chimed With Me Specifically

There’s some interesting discussion about the need to periodically review structure and content of all jobs.

They say “Many knowledge jobs are unstructured and broad. They tend to expand gradually as one activity after another is added. People can end up with too much on their plates and too much time devoted to low-value tasks.”

This resulted in “task creep, inadequate prioritisation of assignments, and a lack of understanding of what made up a full workload”.

Over-committed people thus ended up under-performing as it was impossible to get everything done they were committed to in the timescale that had been set for it. Workloads were thus reduced. “This meant that not all the work that had been planned could be scheduled, and managers had to make hard choices. However, employees’ productivity and satisfaction increased.”

What are we Doing Specifically and Why is it Important?

All of this makes sense to me. We tend to add new services and tasks in but a lot more seldom to review and delete existing ones or look at things in the round. This can lose focus in the process. Important to review what tasks are important (and why), what’s nice to do (if possible), and what’s just not earning it’s keep in terms of value back. And keep to that if you want any chance of keeping to preferred timescale and budget on things.

Cross-training approach for leadership?

My bag usually contains the odd article for reading in bus transit mode on way to and from work.

I’ve been reading a Harvard Business Review reprint article from the October 2011 issue by Zenger, Folkman and Edinger entitled ‘Making Yourself Indispensable’.

The Argument

This argues that “Doing more of what your already do well only yields incremental improvement. To get appreciably better at it, you have to work on complementary skills”. It also argues that what is sets people out in organisations is not being good at lots of things, but outstanding at a few that matter to it.

The authors then identify sixteen leadership competencies with strong associations to being valued by businesses. To each of these they assign a number of related competency companions (associated behaviours). 

They argue for a cross-training approach to improving leadership competencies by 1) identifying strengths objectively (what others think, not what you believe), 2) deciding on a strength to focus on “according to its importance to the organisation and how passionately you feel about it”, 3) selecting one of the competency companions associated with that behaviour and working on improving that; 4) developing it in a linear way.

Aligning strength, passion and importance

I particularly liked the comment in this (my bold) that “we recommend that developing leaders focus on a competency that matters to the organisation and about which they feel some passion, because a strength you feel passionate about that is not important to your organisation is essentially a hobby, and a strength the organisation needs that you don’t feel passionate about is just a chore.”

They suggest various questions to ask yourself when seeking to identify the competency to focus on including

“Am I energised, not exhausted, when I use it?”

“Can I imagine devoting time to improving it?”

“Would I enjoy getting better at this skill?”

So what you’re supposed to do is look for area’s of convergence on the sixteen competencies between the ones you are most competent at currently, the ones you are most passionate about, and the ones that matter most to your organisation and use that as a grid to decide which competency to focus on and then identify a competency companion associated with it and plan how to develop that further.

How easy is alignment?

I think the overall argument it makes is correct in the need to align what is important to the person, the business and what the person has flair for. I’m not hugely convinced it’s quite as simple to do.

It may be working through this process there is a clear result, but equally it has to be possible that it throws up a somewhat mixed picture and there are various paths that could be gone down in result if you decided to follow it and you would have to trial and evaluate to decide which to go for.  Or perhaps there would simply be no three-way convergence.

Having had a very rough and ready think through mine it’s slightly out of convergence. But it’s certainly an interesting article to ponder…

Barriers to using current research evidence…

A while back (well, last November!), I had a lovely day out in Newcastle for NE CILIP Mini Umbrella which was wonderful fun, a really lively and interesting event.  I didn’t then find time to do anything about it afterwards (which I'm feeling guilty about). So I’m going to do the odd blog on specific things mentioned at it that really chimed with me and where the thoughts led me.

Clinical Librarianship

First one relates to the presentation by  Rachel Steele on the Pilot NHS Clinical Librarian Project for Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust.

Rachel was talking generally about the development of clinical librarian roles and the benefits of this for staff in enabling them to improve patient care and the Pilot project within her Trust.  There  were benefits around integrating health library services into actual clinical settings, it improved evidence-based practice by enabling users to be better educated in resources available to them and how best to utilise them and critically appraise the results. It also enabled the librarians to get a better understanding of the patient care context.

She quoted Hill in defining a clinical librarian as someone who seeks “to provide quality assured information to health professionals at the point of need to support clinical decision making.”

 and Evidence Based Practice

Rachel had a slide discussing clinical librarianship and evidence based practice.  In it it was pointed out that ”the main barriers to using current research evidence in clinical practice are time and skill”, she also had a quote which said “research that should change clinical practice is often ignored for years”.

It seems to me that these issues reverberate far beyond the health field, even if ‘evidence-based practice’ is often largely associated with health as a context / phrase.

The Rate of Change and Professional Practice

The rate of change in all fields, LIS included, is fast and constant, we seek to just keep up with what we’re already doing for our users much of the time. Because we provide a service based around the needs of others sometimes we forget that ensuring we also retain time and skill (our own) to fulfil our development needs is equally valid - because it helps the service we provide to be better.

Wider Views Give More Scope Than Narrower Ones

It’s important to find the time to maintain a wide view. Things superficially outside our own sectors are often the most refreshing and actually throw up the most ideas (why go to endless things 85% based around what you already know? -  it’s maybe what you think is expected or will be agreed to a lot easier, but is it actually the most useful for you? If not, then why not at least argue the need for something different).

Is there a practical application and how to ensure it happens?

It’s important to then actually try to do something with insignts and knowledge gained, in order to demonstrate there is an actual gain if that is possible (back to evidence-based practice again!), not just file it away back under the total sway of the InBox and whatever falls into it next. How many things do we go to or read and then actually do something different in direct result of? Or does it just slip the mind and down the To Do list as unspecified unscheduled activity? Which will never happen left like that...

I often think events etc need action learning sets to encourage what seemed a good idea on the day to survive being back in normal life long enough to get implemented. And it will only happen if it is also really and truly something that we want to do and believe in in addition.