drewsnews

I began the GSLIS program with the idea that I was not going to be a “traditional librarian type.” Though the idea, of working to help others interested in knowledge, appealed to me, I felt that the typical library environment as I’d known it had gotten a little stale and needed some changes. I also had an idea that libraries needed to adjust to serve the needs of increasingly media-diverse communities. L2 naturally appealed to me when I first read about it in a Casey article for 701. For open assignments, I chose to read articles on L2 and wrote my management paper on innovation, citing several L2 articles.

I was set on taking this class after reading about it in the Course Descriptions manual, and took LIS753 mainly because it was a prerequisite (that’s not to say I didn’t enjoy LIS753; that class was terrific, too). My attitude on the first day of LIS768 was “Finally, here we go!” It felt as if the pace of my LIS education picked up, seeing on the slides all the different ways that L2 can manifest itself. Pursuing answers to the question “What can we do to better reach new patrons while improving our service to our current patron base?” for the entire semester made it go by quickly.

It’s also exciting when my task involves keeping aware of any new developments in information technology and then trying to find uses for them. This gives me the opportunity to exercise my creativity (however lacking it may be), and I can enthusiastically pursue new methods of carrying out tasks in the hopes of contributing something new and useful to society and to the profession. This was the impetus for my Twitter networking – searching for trail-blazers in library science and other professions and following their Tweets to see what they recommend. I’m looking forward to attending library conferences in the future and maybe running into some of these Tweeps, (and, of course, my LIS768 classmates)!

Abstract: An examination of library mission statements reveals that many aim to be central figures in the advancement of their communities. To establish and maintain a central role, libraries should adjust to serve the spontaneous, increasingly diverse information needs of their patron bases. While populations expand and roads congest with traffic at an increasing rate, libraries and other organizations with similar missions must collaborate and, if possible, following in the footsteps of London’s Idea Stores, collocate.

Description: This paper argues in favor of libraries partnering with related organizations, positing that the partnerships should be in accordance with the library and partner organizations’ mission statements, and would help to increase patronage to all parties involved, while at the same time increasing the convenience for patrons. The paper hypothesizes that patrons will appreciate the convenience and efficiency of collocation that minimizes their time on the increasingly crowded road, especially in a more spontaneous, on-the-go culture.

Literature to support the the paper’s arguments and hypotheses includes Linda K. Wallace’s book Libraries, Mission, and Marketing, which discusses the strategies and thought that should go behind a library’s mission statement, including examples of library mission statements. To support the arguments that libraries must question traditional operations and be selective in partnering with organizations, it references business philosophy from Danny Meyer’s Setting the Table and Jim Collins’ Good to Great, respectively. Finally, it presents A Library and Lifelong Learning Development Strategy for Tower Hamlets as an example for how all libraries should pursue their strategy of being the heart of their communities.

In Good to Great, Jim Collins derives from the successes of thirteen thriving businesses to deliver his ideas on how to attain greatness. He stresses “first who, then what”: that in collaboration, we need to first focus on partnering with those who have the same core values, before we decide together on what exactly it is we will be doing. We need to “get the right people on the bus,” he says (“Packard’s Law”). Like the workers of a business and their colleagues, libraries and partner organizations might be more likely to complement one another and achieve successful partnerships if they share similar core values.

One way to assess whether or not an organization would make a good partner is by first examining its mission statement. Mission statements should evidence whether or not organizations may work well together, as the mission should embody the organization’s core values. If the core values of a potential partner are similar enough to those of our own institution, it may be a good decision to work together. A fundamental shared focus serves as a strong starting point for organizations as they collaborate.

Organizations that may share common interests with libraries include coffee shops, fitness centers, media rental services, schools, movie theaters, recital halls, art galleries, museums. With the library as the centerpiece, collaboration and collocation with these organizations can foster a terrific environment for inspiring and delivering new ideas.

Collins, Jim. “Packard’s Law.” Video/Audio – First Who, Then What. Jim Collins. Web. 27 Nov 2009. <http://www.jimcollins.com/media_topics/first-who.html#audio=77>

Made at: bighugelabs.com.

I think that too often libraries are located and structured inconveniently for patrons, increasingly so, as we grow accustomed to more prompt, instantaneous service tailored to our diverse needs. Thus, I’m researching the relationships among a library’s design, placement, and purpose. I hope to learn of alternative approaches to improve service and perhaps conjure new solutions.

~Drew

Literature regarding design:

Idea Store. “A Library and Lifelong Learning Development Strategy for Tower Hamlets.” ideastore.co.uk. 2002. Tower Hamlets Borough Council, 1 January 2002. Web. 7 Nov. 2009. <http://www.ideastore.co.uk/public/documents/PDF/A_Library_and_Lifelong_Learning_Development_Strategy_for_Tower_Hamlets.pdf>.

Miller, Rebecca K. “From Bodleian to Idea Stores: The Evolution of English Library Design.” Library Student Journal 3.1 (2008): 1-20. Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text. EBSCO. Web. 7 Nov. 2009.

Literature regarding placement:

Galluzzi, Anna. “New Public Libraries in Italy: Trends and Issues.” 52-59. 2009. Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text. EBSCO. Web. 7 Nov. 2009.

Literature regarding purpose:

Collins, James C. Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap – and Others Don’t. New York: HarperBusiness, 2001.

Meyer, Danny. Setting the Table: The Transforming Power of Hospiatality in Business. New York: HarperCollins, 2006.

Wallace, Linda K. Libraries, Mission, and Marketing: Library Mission Statements that Work. Chicago: American Library Association, 2004.

I had already signed up for Goodreads a few years back. In order to remember what books I have, I went there. 790 days since I’d last logged in, according to the opening page. I guess I got tired of updating my books status in the face of some of my friends who go through several a week. I downloaded the Goodreads .csv file and uploaded it to LibraryThing, to synchronize its listings. It placed the books into a lookup queue, where I presume LibraryThing will browse Amazon.com and Library of Congress’ collection databases, match the ISBN and then post the book info on my LibraryThing profile. There are 775 listings queued ahead of me, and it estimates at worst 2 hours and 13 minutes until mine get uploaded.

Before I thought about synchronization, I uploaded the names of 15 books that I own. I then went to the “recommendations” section and browsed. All of Vonnegut’s books were listed amongst the recommendations, as were a couple books that I checked off as owning. Upon viewing my member profile, I noticed the “Members with your books” section on the right. By the member’s screenname/handle was the number of books that the both of us own, followed by the number of total books in that member’s collection. I chose to use Feodor Dostoevsky’s portrait as my avatar.

I also synchronized my membership with Twitter. If I want to update my LibraryThing from Twitter, I must Tweet “D LThing [ISBN or Title] #tag1, #tag2, etc.” or “D LThing [ISBN or Title] #collection1, #collection2, etc.” (without the brackets). I might have to look back at the instructions the first few times, but I could get the hang of it after a bit. Librarians Who LibraryThing now has 6,811 members, a huge lead over Science Fiction Fans, who boast 3,514 members.

Lesson learned: competitors are aware of the importance of synchronization, thus providing synchronization means for new users or users who wish to take their data elsewhere.

http://www.librarything.com/profile/Morning_Drew

I’m curious about the library as a place, how it relates to library location placement and library architecture.  I’ve been thinking about this since viewing the slide in our first class, the one with the library that also had a fitness center and coffee shop built onto its physical structure.  I would analyze and critique literature on the purpose of the library, identify alternatives to traditional library location placement that may help the library to better fit with the conclusions from my criticisms of library purpose, and, ponder library architecture possibilities that would complement its placement and help it to embody the library’s mission of reaching out to patron needs.

My first experience in virtual communities was a chat room CoP, I guess similar to Usenet, that listed all participants, some who’d chatted together before, as evidenced by their postings.  I was with a couple of friends on the same computer, in 1996. I think we visited a general, non “passion-based” community of interest. It’s likely that the other users were new or relatively new to chatting, too, but some were evidently return visitors, based on the way they were greeted (e.g., “Welcome back”). I suppose our community of interest was the idea of a chat room itself, since there was no contextual label for the room.

My friends and I were “linking” commentators, curious to see what chat rooms were like and immediately making postings to the discussion. It was exactly as the chat room slide in Michael’s Virtual Communities presentation. Participants would post their sentences, and sometimes several would post at the same time.  There might be 5 different sentences posted by 5 different participants who are responding to different participants’ previous postings.

Nobody posted any photos and I don’t know if the room provided such an option.  Also, nobody chimed in via microphone and I don’t recall if there was an option for that, either.  There was no option to contact a single poster and privately chat, it was all in the open forum, auditorium style, so if you did try directing a question to a single poster, others could interrupt or they’d have to wait. I don’t recall if the chat room posted which of the participants was the moderator.

I do remember us getting a message from the moderator warning on interrupting and on the content of our posts, and if we interrupted with a smartass comment again, we’d get “the boot”. I guess this was my first direct experience of hostile interactive behavior, too, and it was as the instigator. I don’t think it qualifies as flaming; our actions were more along the lines of cyber-sabatoge, and “cyber-rape” sounds too harsh when taking into account what we were actually doing.

~Drew