C&RL News December 2020 538 Recently at Joyner Library, the main library for West Campus at East Carolina Univer- sity (ECU), three heads of service completed a project to revise the library’s liaison competen- cies. The head of collection development, the head of research and instructional services, and the scholarly communication librarian took the competencies from a task-oriented document and turned them into one that allows liaisons to choose what and how they want to learn. The new document is built around learning statements, is goal-oriented, and serves liaison librarians much better than the previous docu- ment. This article will cover the creation and use of the new liaison competencies document.1 ECU in Greenville, North Carolina, is part of the University of North Carolina System and employs just over 2,000 faculty. ECU has an FTE of approximately 27,000 comprising undergraduate, graduate, medical, and dental students, and, in 2017-2018, conferred more than 7,000 degrees.2 It is a doctoral university with high research activity, according to the Carnegie rankings.3 First iteration Research and instructional services and col- lection development got together several years ago to create a checklist document. Easier tasks were designated Level 1, while more difficult ones were rated Level 2. The reason it was a checklist was that liaisons could run through the list and check off tasks, completing the appropriate level. Much of the first iteration of the liaison com- petencies was an expression of feeling through what were reasonable expectations for liaisons. As a result, this first list was too short-sighted and task-oriented. It was concerned with levels of accomplishment. Full-time collection development librarians could expect to master Level 2 tasks, while all others need only apply themselves to the Level 1 activities. There was no room for personal expression or intellectual curiosity in how the competencies were written. Although it was made with liaison input, no one asked the liaisons if they wanted competencies. That decision was made at a higher level. This first iteration was overly concerned with making tasks achievable at both levels. Need for competencies A few years later, the department heads want- ed librarians to engage with their liaison duties in more meaningful ways and to build upon their existing knowledge in order to grow. Al- though the library had a liaison competency document, it was in need of an overhaul. Early in 2018, we met with the associate director for collections and scholarly communication to Cindy Shirkey, Jeanne Hoover, and Katy Webb Doing the work Crafting and implementing liaison competencies Cindy Shirkey is liaison coordinator and collection strategist at East Carolina University’s Joyner Library, email: shirkeyc@ecu.edu, Jeanne Hoover is head of scholarly communication at East Carolina University ’s Joyner Librar y, email: hooverj@ecu.edu, Katy Webb, formerly of East Carolina University, is now director of Yale Access Services and Bass Library at Yale University, email: kathryn.webb@yale.edu © 2020 Cindy Shirkey, Jeanne Hoover, and Katy Webb mailto:shirkeyc@ecu.edu mailto:hooverj@ecu.edu mailto:kathryn.webb@yale.edu December 2020 539 C&RL News discuss the need for new competencies and to form a working group. The working group conducted a review of the literature and also looked at competencies from schools in the library’s state system, as well as some stand-out schools, like Cornell. The most impressive document came from the Uni- versity of North Carolina-Greensboro (UNCG). They used learning outcome language, and they split their lists up between learning objectives and best practices.4 In the past, librarians at ECU used this document to craft personal goals for their collection development duties. The work- ing group wanted to give examples to be clear about the work that was to be done. Although the competencies were newly created, they were not created in a vacuum. The Association of Research Libraries’ “SPEC Kit 349: Evolution of Library Liaisons” outlines the many roles and responsibilities of liaisons, as well as describes case studies in academic libraries and reviews position descriptions.5 The research and instructional services department had reviewed and discussed a number of ACRL documents in the prior goal cycle, including the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, Roles and Strengths of Teach- ing Librarians, and Guidelines for Instruction Programs in Academic Libraries.6-8 When the department reviewed these guiding documents, they talked about ways they could improve as instructors and as a program. The research and instructional services team conducted an inter- nal survey based on the documents to gather impressions. Discussions followed, and goals were made for the following year. The entire process was meant to benchmark the program and compare to the ACRL documents with an eye to the future. In all of the departments, a need had been expressed for formal competencies that could be used in goal-setting and training. This was especially apparent when new people were hired and during periods of personal and departmental goal-setting. Creating a living document with competencies was seen as a meaningful way to incorporate a myriad of train- ing documents and those that had been created on a national scale. Put another way, these local competencies codified what the librarians had been doing, but also set expectations for what should and could be done in the future based on stretch goals developed from other institu- tions and frameworks. Second iteration After the initial review, the group met to draft new liaison competencies guidelines. A shift was made from UNCG’s Best Practices to the terminology Example Goals, because the doc- ument was meant to be used for training, goal setting, and the like. The format of the Exam- ple Goals uses similar language to the required SMART goals for personal and departmental objectives. SMART goals mean that the goals are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound.9 The majority of liaisons at ECU have other duties, like instruction, as the main portions of their job. Previously, only scholarly communi- cation and collection development had been represented in liaison competencies, which missed key pieces of work, like reference and instruction. The head of research and instruc- tional services also came up with the teaching and learning competencies for this newest itera- tion of competencies. This was seen as a way to include all aspects of the duties for the majority of liaisons, since many have both teaching and collection development responsibilities. Once a draft of the document was com- pleted, the working group sent it around to the research and instructional services, collection development, and scholarly communication teams for review. The new set of competencies was well-received by the departments. The new competencies allowed them to have more flex- ibility, which helped with the reception of the new competencies. One area where some discussion occurred was on the topic of copyright. Some liaisons have reservations about the depth of knowl- edge needed around copyright since the library has an in-house copyright officer. The final copyright competency under scholarly communication includes wording to direct questions to the copyright officer, as appropri- ate. As noted earlier, the aim was to make the C&RL News December 2020 540 competencies flexible, based on the liaison’s position and interests. The suggestion to refer questions to functional liaisons (such as the copyright officer) if the liaison was unable to answer, helped the adoption of the competen- cies be more successful. The working group also built buy-in and received feedback by having a combined meet- ing with all three of the teams. Simultaneous meetings of all of the librarians and staff from these departments is rare, and feedback was positive. In addition, this meeting was attended by administrators who were interested in the outcome of this project. During the exchange, they took a backseat to allow feedback to be shared among the frontline librarians. With the new competencies, the heads of the departments that oversee liaison activities in the library are allowing liaisons to learn in ways that are best suited to them as individuals. The competencies are still a blueprint of what needs to be known, but librarians can pick and choose among the goals—or even come up with their own goals—in order to meet the expectations of being a liaison. The top of the new document outlines what the competency entails, then lays out some example goals. These example goals start at the most basic level and then get a bit more advanced. Other topics that were included in the document covered teaching, assessment, providing outreach, as well as creating and maintaining LibGuides, tutorial videos, and other learning objects. Every effort was made to try to encompass the entire range of work that a librarian might come in contact with in the areas of reference, instruction, collection devel- opment, and scholarly communication. Because this was something that the library had been building toward and the older competencies were widely accepted, the new, more fleshed- out competencies were widely considered to be a helpful change. Current and future uses The competencies were developed to help build on the expertise of current liaisons and provide a guide for new ones. In 2019, liaisons were asked to review the competencies and incorporate them into their goals for the up- coming academic year. Since the format of the competencies incorporates the SMART goal format, liaisons were easily able to add com- petencies to their annual goals. Additionally, the document helped liaisons identify goals they may not have pursued otherwise. In addition to building goals, the new competencies are being used to inform the scholarly communication boot camp series led by the scholarly communication librarian and head of collection development. The scholarly communication boot camp was established to increase knowledge and create discussions around scholarly communication-related top- ics, such as open access, open educational resources, copyright, and data management. Previously, the learning outcomes for the boot camp sessions were not well-defined. The competencies are now being used to inform the boot camp sessions and to help identify key learning outcomes. Additionally, they provide an avenue to identify gaps that can be addressed during future boot camp sessions. The newly established competencies have been used to hire and train new librarians, in particular, liaisons. Having unified language about liaison duties means that the competen- cies can be used in job descriptions for hiring committees. The document also provides con- crete ways that new librarians can learn more about their liaison duties and the university. The competencies not only help new liaison librarians, but also their managers. Training takes time and the competencies provide an outline of topics that should be addressed with new librarians. Previously, the library lacked a consistent plan for training new librarians involved with liaison, instruction, or scholarly communication work. Conclusion Liaison librarianship is an area that contin- ues to evolve as new services are developed or expanded to meet the needs of faculty, staff, and students. To help address this changing area, a comprehensive list of top- ics was developed that was geared towards (continues on page 549) December 2020 549 C&RL News Reflections As is the case for almost everyone on the team, this collaborative project was not for- mally part of my job description. I took on this task as a member of a college com- mittee. It was essential that we all worked together to keep pushing the project for- ward when our attention was often drawn back to our primary jobs. When I joined the team, I disrupted the process they had begun to develop, which initially made for more work, but built a foundation we can now easily add to. By adding a layer of controlled vocabulary, which we defined in the project’s manual, and refining it with data and form validation, we can add a new resource to the map quickly and re- view its place in L4L’s networks. Over time our library’s website has become an ad hoc place for sharing and distributing information beyond the typical scope of the library. By hosting the map, I am not only making our update process smoother, I am sharing it from a place that the campus community trusts. I am not a cataloger and do not create metadata daily in my job, but I understood enough about these processes to bring these skills to the project. In return, through work- ing on this project, I learned more about the students and communities the college serves and how initiatives like the Lab and L4L support students. While the map has yet to fully be realized as an ongoing L4L service, the process of creating it taught us how to assess partnerships and resources, while reinforcing continued collaboration between the library and L4L. Note 1. Elizabeth Lightfoot, Jennifer Simmelink McCleary, and Terry Lum, “Asset Mapping as a Research Tool for Community-Based Partici- patory Research in Social Work,” Social Work Research 38, no. 1 (2014): 59–64, https://doi. org/10.1093/swr/svu001. liaison work. Liaisons can use these com- petencies to identify areas to expand their skills. Further, competencies can be custom- ized to fit the needs of different institutions, as well as be applied to any liaison model. The competencies have been used to devel- op goals and to train new liaison librarians. Notes 1. The old and new documents can be found at this institutional repository link: https://thescholarship.ecu.edu/handle/ 10342/8550. 2. East Carolina University, “Institutional Planning, Assessment and Research,” https:// www.ecu.edu/cs-acad/ipar/ (accessed Janu- ary 17, 2020). 3. Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, “Institution Lookup,” http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/lookup /lookup.php (accessed August 3, 2019). 4. University of North Carolina-Greens- boro University Libraries, “Liaison Roles and Responsibilities,” https://library.uncg.edu /info/library_liaison_responsibilities.aspx (accessed August 3, 2019). 5. Rebecca K. Miller and Lauren Pressley, SPEC Kit 349: Evolution of Library Liaisons (Chicago: Association of Research Libraries, 2015). 6. ACRL, “Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education,” http://www. ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework (accessed August 3, 2019). 7. ACRL, “Roles and Strengths of Teach- ing Librarians,” http://www.ala.org/acrl /standards/teachinglibrarians (accessed Au- gust 3, 2019). 8. ACRL, “Guidelines for Instruction Pro- grams in Academic Libraries,” http://www. ala.org/acrl/standards/guidelinesinstruction (accessed August 3, 2019). 9. Chartered Management Institute, “Setting SMART Objectives Checklist 231,” Management House, https://www.managers. org.uk/~/media/Files/Checklists/CHK -231-Setting_Smart_Objectives.pdf (accessed August 4, 2019). (“Doing the work,” continued from page 540) https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svu001 https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svu001 https://thescholarship.ecu.edu/handle/10342/8550 https://thescholarship.ecu.edu/handle/10342/8550 https://www.ecu.edu/cs-acad/ipar/ https://www.ecu.edu/cs-acad/ipar/ http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/lookup/lookup.php http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/lookup/lookup.php https://library.uncg.edu/info/library_liaison_responsibilities.aspx https://library.uncg.edu/info/library_liaison_responsibilities.aspx http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/teachinglibrarians http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/teachinglibrarians http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/guidelinesinstruction http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/guidelinesinstruction https://www.managers.org.uk/~/media/Files/Checklists/CHK-231-Setting_Smart_Objectives.pdf https://www.managers.org.uk/~/media/Files/Checklists/CHK-231-Setting_Smart_Objectives.pdf https://www.managers.org.uk/~/media/Files/Checklists/CHK-231-Setting_Smart_Objectives.pdf