Murray Shepherd, Virginia Gillham, Mike Ridley
| The Authors |
Murray Shepherd, Murray Shepherd is University Librarian, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Virginia Gillham, Virginia Gillham is University Librarian, Wilfred Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Mike Ridley, Mike Ridley is University Librarian, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
| Abstract |
Article type: Case Study, Theoretical with Application in Practice.
Keywords: University Libraries, Canada, Organizational Culture, Co-Operation, Partnering, Organizational Change.
Content Indicators: Research Implications* Practice Implications** Originality** Readability***
Library Management
Volume 20 Number 6 1999 pp. 332-337
Copyright © MCB University Press ISSN 0143-5124
The TriUniversity Group of Libraries consists of the libraries at the University of Guelph, the University of Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier University. These publicly funded universities are located in Southern Ontario approximately 100km west of Toronto. Waterloo and Wilfrid Laurier are both located in the city of Waterloo, and are only a few blocks apart. Guelph is located in the city of Guelph, 20km east of Waterloo. Wilfrid Laurier University, the smallest institution in the collaboration, is also the oldest, having been established in 1924 (although based on a college founded in 1910). Primarily an undergraduate institution with a research focus, WLU has academic strengths in business, social work and music. The University of Waterloo was founded in 1957, as a breakaway institution from Wilfrid Laurier (then known as Waterloo Lutheran University). Waterloo is world famous for its programs in computer science and has major strengths in such areas as engineering, mathematics and psychology. The University of Guelph was founded in 1964 (but is based on founding colleges dating back to the late nineteenth century). Guelph has national strengths in agriculture, veterinary medicine and applied life sciences. The TriUniversity Group of Libraries (TUG) has a combined staff of almost 400 FTE, a budget of over $25 million and a library collection of more than 7.5 million volumes. The primary user community is 45,000 students and 1,700 faculty. TUG is also a major information resource for the citizens and businesses of Canada's Technology Triangle (CTT) including Cambridge, Guelph and Kitchener/Waterloo.
The initial TUG agreement called for a "a seamlessly integrated program of library collections and services". The agreement included three major themes:
Presented here are some of the processes that can be used to make collaboration valuable and successful. Early in the collaboration, senior management of the three libraries recognised that there were "cultural" differences among the three. To further discover these differences they encouraged an open examination of values, personal systems and attitudes. Over time, management gained the understanding that they needed to anticipate and prepare for the effects of change. The developing collaborative strategic agenda suggested organisational changes that would penetrate each institution's inner values. They anticipated that conflicts would result and understood the need for preparation.
Planning took the form of increased support for training in human relations and life skills as well as in technical abilities and computer proficiency. The biggest long-term investment has not been in hardware, which will wear out, or in software, which will be replaced, but in people, who will endure and leave a legacy. Knowing that collaboration will save time and money in the long term is not enough to make it work. A substantial investment in human resources is required.
There are four critical areas of influence in creating a human climate for effective inter- institutional collaboration:
Despite the geographic proximity of these three libraries, few of the staff knew each other or had worked together prior to 1995. Library leaders created events that had a goal of bringing staff together. Note that "library leaders" are not necessarily senior management or line managers although they certainly contributed. Anyone who led a team in the collaborative spirit is considered a library leader.
An example of relationship building occurred in the fall of 1995, when the combined staff members of the three circulation (access or issue) departments, about 80 full-time staff members spent a day together "work- shopping" ideas about collaboration and change. These were front-line staff, sometimes overlooked in the strategic planning stage of co-operative ventures. Several interesting and important ideas emerged from these discussions, laying the groundwork for the collaboration that followed. Since the time of this workshop the circulation team has worked towards TUG-wide circulation harmonisation practices, which required a level of inter-institutional teamwork and group process work unprecedented in the three organisations. With the benefit of hindsight, leaders can see the importance of that initial workshop in creating key relationships that would become critical in the development of other harmonised policies and practices. It has also become clear during the intervening years that institutional values must always be factored into discussions relating to changes in policy and practice.
The complex procedure of selecting and implementing an integrated online system for TUG also required careful acknowledgement of the human relationships involved. The system selection process included more than 30 people from all three institutions as key decision-makers and co-ordinators. There were also senior technical staff members from three separate information technology departments helping in the evaluation, selection and eventually, the installation of a large, complex, collaborative library system. Many more library staff members from the three universities and affiliated and federated colleges were involved in demonstrations, feedback sessions, planning and testing. It was critical that the processes build effective relationships. By establishing sound working procedures based on key principles of collaboration (accepted criteria, shared understanding, empowerment, and accountability) the libraries were able to draw staff together around a critical decision and enable effective working relationships.
A critical component in building relationships is trust. Trust is the basic constituent, the "cement" necessary for effective collaboration and teamwork. Trust is earned over time in situations of mutual interest and need. Trust is gained by being trustworthy. Creating opportunities to allow trusting relationships to emerge is central to a collaborative strategy. Conflict can be a normal outcome of co-operation. Resolving conflict is a means of testing relationships and forging even stronger bonds.
TUG collaboration is not happening "to" the staff of the libraries; it is happening "with" them. It is by an inclusive process with emphasis on widespread participation and consultation that TUG is moving forward. Staff members are entrusted with work that is important to them and important to the success of the enterprise. From the beginning TUG sought the active involvement of library staff, members of the user communities and the university administration. The leadership team sought the advice of circulation clerks and presidents, part-time staff and business officers, librarians and faculty members. By involving as many individuals, as much as possible, as often as possible, TUG has been able to build commitment and understanding. Commitment has shaped the initiative to meet the needs of all users: students and library staff, learners and teachers, administrators and auditors.
The "getting acquainted" stage was an opportunity to meet, build relationships, explore new ideas and express concerns. Staff members were provided with the opportunity to learn from each other and to gain self-confidence in their competence. The key outcome was trusting; the development of a level of trust that has become the foundation for all subsequent work, innovations and initiatives. By investing in staff involvement, front-line staff, as well as librarians and administrators, at both the conceptual and the operational stages, TUG has nurtured a commitment from users, staff and senior administrators. Motivated staff in an empowering environment allows the collaboration to withstand difficult times and hard decisions. Staff members have considerable freedom in choosing how they do the work. They know that it is important, because the senior administrators listen and are influenced.
The importance of learning is demonstrated by learning behaviour. Senior library management has been in learning situations with front-line staff; they have modelled the attitude that learning is natural and essential for all staff. Several senior library supervisors, managers and executives have attended courses and seminars together with staff members. Learning is part of the job.
At various stages of the collaboration, TUG has employed external consultants, process facilitators and instructors to assist staff. There was initial scepticism to the need for consultants; however, their involvement has proven invaluable. Experts have provided a "reality check" to TUG plans and processes. Most importantly, the involvement of consultants and facilitators has allowed TUG to open itself up for scrutiny. It allowed the consultants and the staff to examine the collaboration critically[2]. Staff members grew together around common ideas and shared experiences; this was an important reinforcement of the strategic direction taken by the libraries.
In February 1998, a TriUniversity Group of Libraries Collections Workshop was held, bringing together, for the first time, approximately 30 librarians and staff involved in information resources management. This two-day event provided an opportunity to review what has turned out to be the most difficult area of collaboration. While the substance of the workshop was collection management, it also provided a chance to critique and re-commit to TUG initiatives. In this sensitive case, involvement from the university librarians was minimal; it was largely a professional staff-directed initiative. It resulted in a renewal of the faith in the collaborative agenda and accelerated activity in TUG collections and information resource matters.
The learning will continue. TUG is constantly exploring new territory in the area of multi-institutional collaboration. More people throughout the organisations are creating opportunities for collaboration and for learning. Seminars, workshops, institutes, joint and separate, formal and informal, take place regularly throughout the year.
Developing team-building ideology and putting team practices in place in a collaborative environment are difficult, time-consuming ventures. This is not the traditional work of administrators. It is the work of leaders. It requires a commitment to a new approach to getting work done. It is difficult for any one organisation to make these adjustments and changes; it is even more difficult to co-ordinate three organisations in making a harmonious transition to team building.
The university librarians are committed to leadership and resist the temptation to control. Most university library managers have learned excellent command and control management skills from accomplished mentors. They have successfully honed these skills over time. This management style is based on fundamental and honourable principles:
Leading by example has also meant dealing with disagreement and discord among the three university librarians. The university librarians do not speak with one voice; they do not agree on every issue. Working through disagreements openly has helped to develop more than tolerance for diversity. The process of finding a positive outcome from disagreement builds on strength. The action shows an acceptance and encouragement of divergent thinking. An important new element in TUG leadership has been the creation of the position, TUG program co-ordinator. The role is one of facilitating, co-ordinating and assisting the important communications processes that the TUG university librarians were unable to continue to do effectively, as inter-institutional collaboration grew. The co-ordinator is an extension of the threesome, not an executive director, nor a fourth university librarian.
The empowerment invested in the teams that lead the TUG initiatives has encouraged commitment and ownership. Senior management trusts these teams. A sense of stewardship is emerging in which the care of the whole collaboration is considered. When an issue arises, the first question is more likely to be: "What does this mean for TriUniversity group of libraries; not what does this mean for my department or my library?".
Library leadership affected and was affected by other sectors of the universities. There was little to prepare the universities or the libraries for the consequences of the collaboration. The university librarians were fortunate to discover, in the process, that those administrative units on which the libraries depend for services were willingly supportive. Business offices, computing, physical plant departments and others made accommodation to routines and practices to help to make the collaboration work. These are valuable relationships that must be nurtured. Presidents and vice-presidents are openly positive about the benefits of this collaboration.
People within the communities see value not in what they get out of it, but in what they are able to put into it. Personal, institutional and collaborative values begin to merge. Designing community is not a typical management responsibility. In inter-organisational collaboration local need is still real and immediate. This is not one organisation; it is three libraries linked together. The local cultures are respected and enhanced by working together. There is still legitimate concern among some staff members about TUG as a shadow over their individual concerns. Maintaining a balance between collaboration and local interest is a key aspect of developing a TUG community that will be compatible with those of the three universities.
In this context it is easy to underestimate the difficulty of making the transition to teams and to collaboration. During the change of perspective from "me" to "us", from "I" to "we" and from "them" to "us", there are many opportunities to revert to the "way we always did it". Sustaining the culture of the collaboration requires vigilance and maintenance. Teams need to be re-energised and re-focused. "Values" clarification is an important continuing element, and requires frank and open discussions about values, sometimes an arduous and discordant process. Developing a strong sense of TUG community over time is a prime objective.
Zuboff, S., 1988, In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power, Basic Books, New York, NY.