Implementing change and reorganization in the acquisitions departments at the University of Alabama and the University of Florida
The Authors
Robin Champieux, Blackwell, Lake Oswego, Oregon, USA
Millie Jackson, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
Steven Carrico, University of Florida Libraries, Gainesville, Florida, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to describe the motivations, creation, and implementation of workflow and organizational redesigns within two academic library acquisitions departments: the University of Alabama (UA) and the University of Florida (UF).
Design/methodology/approach – Both institutions utilized a combination of goal identification, staff contribution, and Blackwell's workflow consulting services to build and implement new acquisitions workflows.
Findings – A comparison of the projects reveals two paths to conducting a reorganization of acquisitions in academic libraries, but with the same goal: doing more with less staff while promoting a more cost-efficient model of operations.
Originality value – In evaluating these analysis projects at UA and UF, common successes that are applicable to future undertakings were identified.
Article Type:
Case study
Keyword(s):
Academic libraries; Organizational restructuring; Organizational change; United States of America.
Journal:
The Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances
Volume:
21
Number:
4
Year:
2008
pp:
113-121
Copyright ©
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN:
0888-045X
Introduction
Library reorganizations are nothing new. Libraries evolve and make changes to their institutional structures as needed. As entire library departments form, dissolve, and merge, workflows are changed, realigned, or eliminated. Organizational and workflow changes seem to happen most frequently in the area of technical services – or at least it is the impression held by many library staff. In response to learning about a recent reorganizational change in library acquisitions at the University of Florida (UF), a respected colleague declared, “you people are always reorganizing!” Indeed, his impression is legitimate. Emerging technologies, a proliferation of formats, budget reallocations, and shifting goals and strategies have necessitated continuous change and, hopefully, improvement.
The proliferation of personal computers and the advent of the web produced an enormous amount of change in libraries, particularly within technical services and acquisitions departments. An additional force of change was the surge in readily-available electronic resources. E-resources have become most patrons' format of choice; thus, acquiring, licensing, and providing access to an escalating number of e-journals and e-books has added to the traditional workloads of acquisitions. In addition to requiring change in acquisition processes, this transformation demanded reorganization. It forced libraries to examine and reexamine their operations. Karen Schmidt recognized this impact, noting, “the expansion of integrated systems, the availability of networked information and the introduction of new services to users have led to reorganization and redistribution of tasks” (Schmidt, 1998a).
Literature review
With the arrival of computers and web technology, acquisitions reorganization became such a prevalent topic in the last decade that several articles appeared in a special issue of Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory (Schmidt, 1998b). In an effort to maximize efficiency, libraries set about implementing changes in various ways. Bordeianu, Lewis, and Wilkinson discuss the planning, methodology, and implementation used to merge serials and acquisitions staff into one department at the University of New Mexico. They summarize the positive outcomes especially for communications and team building, “all of these improvements led to greater cooperation among staff” (Bordeianu et al., 1998). Conversely, Pitts et al. (1998) illustrate how the University of Washington decentralized part of the serials workflow at two branch libraries. Fifteen months into the project branch staff “observe faster and more complete delivery of issues”. Gleason and Zeugner describe the reorganization of acquisitions at the University Libraries at Notre Dame University. Through the process staff became more aware of the impact new technology has upon methods of performing tasks, “staff members know what has happened and are thinking more creatively about what might happen in the future” (Gleason and Zeugner, 1998)
McGinnis and Kemp at Texas Tech reveal how the Library implemented an Electronic Resources Group (ERG). This innovative, cross-functional team composed of staff from four departments stretches beyond the classic organization of acquisitions. They note how this team improved communications and “in addition to offering organizations a flexible approach to use for a variety of projects and situations, using teams also can strengthen an organization by building the knowledge and skills of workers” (McGinnis and Kemp, 1998). Guest editor Mary Page made a finishing observation on the articles presented in the special issue that is still quite pertinent today, “the lesson from these authors is that libraries that encourage respectful discourse, that provide staff with proper training and equipment, and that reward innovations are the libraries that are most likely to be successful in these interesting times” (Page, 1998a).
Background and projects
A. Blackwell
Blackwell's workflow consulting services evolved out of the acknowledgment that vendors are contributors and stakeholders in customer assessments and reorganizational efforts. Blackwell's services are congruent with a variety of acquisitions models and support the creation and delivery of data to streamline the process of acquiring content and making it available to patrons. Blackwell's view and knowledge of the major integrated library systems has produced an understanding of capabilities, best practices, and guidelines for implementing change. To ensure relevancy, libraries using these consulting services are not bound to Blackwell's products or services. Rather, Blackwell's consultants focus on customer needs and goals regardless of their own company's capabilities.
B. The University of Alabama
The Acquisitions Department at The University of Alabama (UA) is part of the Collection Services Division. The department acquires and receives all formats for Gorgas Library and four branch libraries. An Electronic Resources Unit works with Acquisitions and concentrates on licensing and acquiring electronic resources for the University Libraries. The Acquisitions Department consists of Monographs, Serials and Gifts, with a staff of eleven; Electronic Resources has two staff members. In June 2007, a new Associate Dean for Collections joined the University Libraries. In the first weeks, staff shared a desire to create workflows that are more efficient and to examine cost savings. Meetings were held with librarians and staff in each department to determine issues they deemed most important.
Due to personnel changes and the conversion from NOTIS to Voyager in 1998, Cataloging and Acquisitions had already reorganized some of the copy cataloging functions (Bace and Ratkovich, 2004). Also, paraprofessionals in Technical Services participated in a continuous quality improvement workshop to examine workflows. While some changes were implemented, many were not due to an unexpected death and further personnel changes. Shelf-ready processing was moved from Cataloging to Acquisitions. Use of PromptCat for DLC/DLC records was implemented but discontinued with the launch of OCLC Connexion. Staff reverted to searching for records title by title instead of importing PromptCat files. A FastCat unit was then created in Acquisitions for titles with DLC/DLC copy. This resulted in some copy cataloging being completed in Acquisitions. EDI invoicing was also implemented to facilitate the exchange of financial data.
Processes remained paper intensive although some selectors had already switched to electronic notifications. Procedures included sorting and distributing paper slips, even to those using e-notifications, searching each order in OCLC and downloading records, printing a copy of the record in Blackwell's Collection Manager, and filing, marking, and retrieving the printouts for receipt. In Fall 2007 all selectors were receiving e-slips for Blackwell's orders. While they are not unusual practices, no clear reasons could be given for continuing them (see Figure 1).
Blackwell's workflow analysis
During September and October 2007, librarians, staff and students in the Division created descriptions of their workflows and tasks. The AD for Collections shared pertinent descriptions with the Blackwell consultant for analysis. Blackwell delivered suggested workflow revisions to the AD for examination, and the consultant met with UA staff in November 2007. Blackwell recommended that the Library utilize the automated WorldCat Cataloging Partners Service for the bulk of its English language, monographic acquisitions, utilize Voyager and Collection Manager to record and track orders electronically, and cease creating single title purchase orders.
Initial issues to overcome included a lack of trust in the process and resistance to using and trusting technology for tracking information. Staff also had to adjust to new leadership in the division. Change was slow due to the illness of a key player and the absence of a head of cataloging. Although meetings and discussions followed Blackwell's first visit, little change occurred until a new head of cataloging joined the Library in January 2008 and the head of acquisitions recuperated from an illness.
Use of PromptCat records was reintroduced in the Winter 2008. An analysis was completed and the profile was broadened to accept PCC records as well as DLC/DLC records. UA next agreed to pilot a new service from Blackwell, WorldCat Cataloging Partners (WCP) at Time of Order. WCP at Time of Order and Time of Invoice appeared to be services that would streamline UA's processes. The implementation has taken several months of work and consultation between UA, Blackwell and OCLC. It is still in the process of being completed. Testing is ongoing, and it is hoped that procedures will be finalized by the start of the new fiscal year in October 2008.
In May 2008, the Blackwell team returned for two days of continued discussions and training. At this time, staff began to recognize how the planned changes would benefit ordering and receiving. Key players in the department, the Blackwell team, and the AD of Collections mapped the new workflows and addressed outstanding questions. This session was profitable and resulted in the implementation moving forward.
C. The University of Florida
The Acquisitions & Licensing Department at UF is part of the Technical Services Division and its primary mission is to acquire materials in a variety of formats that support the academic and professional programs of the university. The department coordinates the ordering and receipt of materials for the main campus libraries only, as the Health Science Center Library and the Legal Information Center have separate technical services that include acquisitions. For many years, the department consisted of four units: Monographs, Serials, Gifts & Exchanges, and Paying. The design of the workflows within the department was arranged entirely for the acquisitions of print materials. By the middle of the 1990s, electronic resources had become increasingly available, and the department expanded the responsibilities of an existing unit to support this new workflow. The Serials Unit absorbed the electronic resources workflow. This was a logical step in that many of the first e-journals purchased were offered in conjunction with the print format; however, the workload of the Serials Unit not only grew but also became progressively more complicated as staff now had to deal with the licensing of e-journals and database packages, as well as providing links and insuring access to the e-resources. These expanded responsibilities began to overwhelm the unit. In response, the department underwent a small but significant reorganization.
The reorganization created a new unit, the Electronic Resources Unit (E-Resources), and did away with Gifts & Exchanges Unit (see Figure 2). Another unit, the Technical Support Unit, was created a few months later. In the new scheme, the Serials Unit became the home of the library's Exchange Program and the processing of gift and exchange journals. By inputting all serials into one pipeline for processing in the Serials Unit – regardless whether they are acquired through payment, gift, or exchange – processing speed and efficiency was increased without the overhead of a separate unit. At the same time, the E-Resources Unit took responsibility for handling all the electronic resources acquired by the UF Libraries including e-books and e-journals. Not only did the reorganization allow staff in the Serials and Monographs units to focus exclusively on print materials and streamline their workflows, forming a separate E-Resources Unit with a designated staff was an important step in improving the effectiveness of acquiring and managing electronic resources.
Blackwell's workflow analysis
In April 2008, a two-person team from Blackwell visited UF to begin an analysis of three key areas responsible for inputting monographs selections, ordering, and cataloging/processing at UF: the Collection Management Support Unit, the Acquisitions and Licensing Department and the Cataloging and Metadata Department. Prior to the Blackwell team's visit to UF, they reviewed organizational charts and brief workflow descriptions of the three areas. The Blackwell team worked with unit managers, the division director, and the chair of acquisitions to identify goals for the reorganization process. Goals were set that included the need to improve efficiency and further streamline procedures across departments; the elimination of unnecessary tasks and duplication of work; and instill a flexibility that would accommodate future changes as needed. The Blackwell team then systematically focused its attention on individual units of activity and interviewed every staff member in the units.
Blackwell's final report suggested many methods to improve ordering procedures at UF. The recommendations included the following: use electronic notifications and do away with paper slips; have selectors mark titles in the vendor database and add appropriate order data; implement automation to check duplicate holdings; when budgets are depleted, tag records in the vendor database for ordering in the next fiscal year rather than creating manual records in Aleph; increase the amount of ordering and invoicing via EDI; and most importantly, suspend elaborate and unnecessary printing and bibliographic verification steps being performed by the CM Support Unit. Finally, in the receiving area, Blackwell's report suggested that UF discontinue outmoded and costly activities such as marking books with location property stamps. Another recommendation to “implement OCLC's WorldCat Cataloging Partners 100 percent service”, was tabled for future consideration due to budget constraints.
Post-consulting implementation and outcomes
A. The University of Alabama
Blackwell's recommendations are being implemented in test format. Profiles and files are being revised with OCLC to make the loading of Time of Order WCP records more manageable. The Library also updated its shelf-ready profiles to add branch location information to spine labels, and reduced the number of property stampings. UA is refining profiles for firm and approval titles to ensure that spine labels are processed correctly, as anomalies have occurred when specific call numbers and subject perimeters appear in profiles; adjustments have been made accordingly. UA also anticipates adding linked barcodes to shelf-ready profiles to facilitate the receipt of materials. The time savings exceed the cost of the barcodes.
Although some of the work has changed, staff reassignments are still ongoing to accommodate the new workflow. Reorganization of staff in Acquisitions and Cataloging and Metadata will take place in Fall 2008 (see Figure 3). Two staff positions in cataloging will not be filled due to changes in workflow and anticipated changes in the organization. OCLC usage has started to decrease – a goal for UA. Unnecessary searching has also been eliminated or reduced, and will begin to result in cost savings for OCLC charges.
B. The University of Florida
Blackwell's report was submitted to UF's library administration on May 9, 2008, at a time when the UF Libraries were in the midst of a massive reorganization that stretched across divisions resulting in an entirely new organization chart (University of Florida Smathers Libraries, 2008).) Spurred by the university and its desire to conform to a business model with more cost-effective measures, Blackwell's report came at an opportune time. As the library examined and altered its organizational structure, particularly at cross-divisional modes of communication and partnership, Blackwell's recommendations helped focus a comprehensive review of the acquisitions, cataloging, and collection management procedures within and between the units.
The reorganization at the UF Libraries is quite ambitious as it encompasses structural changes at the top with a determination to improve efficiency at the grassroots level of all library operations. The library has incorporated many of the Blackwell consultant's recommendations, beginning with the simple yet essential step of requiring selectors to mark titles in Blackwell's database, adding appropriate holdings and fund information. There was trepidation; as resistance from selectors was anticipated; however, early feedback has been positive and proactive. With this simple change, many of the activities previously handled by the Collection Manager Support Unit are no longer necessary. Accordingly, the four-person support unit was reduced to two members, with a focus on special projects, and the handling of foreign and specialized orders.
Conclusion and guidelines for change
In evaluating these analysis projects at UA and UF, common successes that are applicable to future undertakings were identified:
Engaging staff
At both institutions, the Blackwell team led discussions that questioned procedures and policies, including workflows that crossed units and divisions. A valuable result of the consultants' work with the University of Florida and the University of Alabama was that it prompted library staff to independently examine and review operations to discern outmoded, inefficient, and labor-intensive methods of performing tasks. For example, at the University of Florida the consulting team concentrated on monographic selection and ordering, but the project prompted additional units to review and update procedural manuals and documentation. Similar changes have occurred at the University of Alabama. In addition to reviewing and updating procedures in Serials, Acquisitions converted to using electronic slips and online ordering with their main foreign vendor, and have plans for EDI invoicing in the coming year.
Goals and benchmarks
The two projects benefited from working with leadership and staff to set goals and benchmarks. At UF, the goals of streamlining procedures and reducing staff overhead are being realized in the wake of the project all the while improving the turn-around rate of ordering and receipt: once new workflows are fully implemented, UF is anticipating at minimum 16-day time savings in monograph ordering. At UA, one crucial goal was to decrease usage and fees associated with OCLC Connexion, and since the project implementation the library has seen a reduction in unnecessary searching and is anticipating reduced charges in 2009.
Support from leadership
Identifying practices and sometimes positions that do not support efficient workflows can be a painful process, but it must be a participatory process with open lines of communications between library administration, supervisors and staff. Historical and personal ties to outmoded workflows can be powerful forces of resistance to change. At the University of Alabama and the University of Florida, change was managed with explicit support from library leadership. At UA, the AD of Collections communicated to staff her expectations and commitment to cost-savings and improved patron access. In the case of UF, the large library reorganization ongoing at the time of the Blackwell's consulting project was an excellent catalyst, as support from library administration for improved workflow and shifts to staff assignments was strong and consistent.
Perhaps the most productive aspect to the combined work of the Blackwell consulting teams and the efforts of the two acquisitions staff is this: by streamlining procedures and improving workflows both libraries have increased efficiency and processing speed, resulting in a savings to wages and operation costs. Moreover, materials are available to library patrons sooner. For administrators reviewing the success of such projects, these are tangible and impressive results. Of course, projects such as the two described above are ongoing and both institutions are committed to continuous improvement. As Page eloquently stated a decade ago, ”the only way any of us can keep up these days is to adapt, change, then do it again” (Page, 1998b). The authors would add, do it with a plan, set goals, engage staff, and finally above all else, do not be afraid to try new things.
Figure 1University of Alabama Technical Services Department: before re-organization 2007-2008
Figure 2UF Acquisition & Licensing Department: before the 2007 re-organization
Figure 3University of Alabama Technical Services Department: after re-organization 2006
References
Bace, M.A., Ratkovich, P. (2004), in Eden, B.L. (Eds),Personnel Turnover as Impetus for Change, Innovative Redesign and Reorganization of Library Technical Services: Paths for the Future and Case Studies, Libraries Unlimited, Westport, CT, pp.343-54.
Bordeianu, S., Lewis, L.K., Wilkinson, F.C. (1998), "Merging the acquisitions and serials department at the University of New Mexico: a case study", Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 22 No.3, pp.259-70.
Gleason, M.L., Zeugner, L.A. Jr. (1998), "Ways of change: an acquisitions department in the 1990s", Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 22 No.3, pp.303-9.
McGinnis, S., Kemp, J.H. (1998), "The Electronic Resources Group: using the cross-functional team approach to the challenge of acquiring electronic resources", Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 22 No.3, pp.295-301.
Page, M. (1998a), "Special issue on reorganization in acquisitions departments", Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 22 No.3, pp.257-8.
Page, M. (1998b), "Special issue on reorganization in acquisitions departments", Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 22 No.3, pp.257-8.
Pitts, L.M., Hart, P., Sutherland, L. (1998), "Serials receipts decentralization for two branch campus libraries at the University of Washington", Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 22 No.3, pp.271-8.
Schmidt, K. (1998a), "Facing transformation", Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 24 No.1, pp.73.
Schmidt, K. (1998b), "Special section: library reorganization for the future", Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 22 No.3, pp.257-309.
University of Florida Smathers Libraries (2008), University of Florida Smathers Libraries web page, available at: www.uflib.ufl.edu/pio/Smathers_Libraries_Reorg03062008.pdf; and Blog, http://libreorg.blogspot.com/ (accessed July 3, 2008), .
About the authors
Robin Champieux is the Director of Sales and Customer Experience at Blackwell. She has a BA in Anthropology and a Masters in Library and Information Science from Wayne State University. Before joining Blackwell, she worked in the David Adamany Undergraduate Library at Wayne State University and interned with the National Library of Medicine. Robin also holds a Graduate Certificate in Archival Administration and has worked for Portland's Stanley Parr Archives and Record Center. He is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: robin.champieux@blackwell.com
Dr Millie Jackson is the Associate Dean for Collection at the University of Alabama. Prior to this, she was Head of Collection Development at both Florida State University and Grand Valley State University.
Steven Carrico is the Chair of the Acquisitions and Licensing Department at the University of Florida Libraries. He has worked at the University of Florida for fourteen years and previously held the position of Gifts and Exchange Librarian. Currently, Carrico is working on several projects including the library history of Alachua County and Gainesville, FL.