owens.p65 The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams 571 The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams in Two Academic Libraries: Intended Results versus Actual Results Using Total Quality Management Irene Owens The current trend in examining library administrative structures to ac­ commodate change is common in library literature. The team approach, used within the construct of Total Quality Management, is examined in this case study, after which the case study is compared with a similar change that took place at Duke University. This article seeks to ascer­ tain the degree to which the goals of the change are met and/or ex­ ceeded. The implications for change from hierarchal to team manage­ ment hold many possibilities that extend beyond those received by tra­ ditional means, benefitting the full-time staff and customers, as well as student assistants. Student assistants make up a large portion of the part-time academic library staff and offer a sometimes “untapped” re­ source. The inclusion of students in comprising teams may be a refresh­ ing and productive change in management structure. The article ques­ tions a real change from hierarchy to teams and also suggests that librarianship may need to redefine the meaning of “profit” in a nonprofit environment. he study of modern manage­ ment began in the for-profit sector and since its beginning has generally affected what has happened in the not-for-profit sec­ tor. The fact that academic courses that specifically address not-for-profits con­ tinue to be offered, particularly in schools of business, implies that significant dif­ ferences still exist between the two ap­ proaches. One of the major differences listed by William H. Newman and Harvey W. Wallender III is that for-profit organizations tend to know much more about their customers than do not-for­ profits and, therefore, there is a weak cus­ tomer influence on not-for-profits.1 Two trends that represent differences between the not-for-profit and for-profit sectors have to do with their relative emphasis on benchmarking—the search for industry’s best practices that leads to su­ perior performance, marketing, and to­ tal quality management (TQM). Gener- Irene Owens is an Assistant Professor in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Texas at Austin; e-mail: iowens@gslis.utexas.edu. 571 mailto:iowens@gslis.utexas.edu 572 College & Research Libraries November 1999 ally, the for-profit sector places greater emphasis on the incorporation of mod­ ern practices than the not-for-profit sec­ tor does. Case Study The purpose of this article is to develop a case study from the author ’s research conducted in 1996 at a southwestern uni­ versity, where a change was made from hierarchy to teams within the context of TQM. The article then compares the case study from that research with a similar change from hierarchy to teams, also within the context of TQM, at Duke Uni­ versity as reported in an article by John Lubans.2 Because the researcher prom­ ised anonymity to the southwestern in­ stitution and to the participants in the survey and interviews, they are referred to here as university X. A key problem in using teams rather than hierarchy is that organizations do not hire, fire, and promote teams but, instead, hire, fire, and promote individuals. The shift from hierarchy to teams in both libraries involved the adoption and incorporation of TQM principles. A quick look at the development of management theory reflects the results that were his­ torically related to various approaches. Frederick Taylor, father of the scientific management approach, placed a great emphasis on efficiency. Henri Fayol, of the classical movement, wanted his ap­ proach to result in more clearly defined roles for managers. Fayol also identified universal principles (unity of command, division of work, authority, discipline, unity of direction, centralization, etc.) with the ultimate result of building a unified theory of management. Max Weber emphasized optimally tight and appropriate hierarchical structures. Elton Mayo, Mary Follett, and associates stressed the collective importance of groups, individuals, esprit de corps, and productivity. The contingency school of management stressed the eclectic and situational use of multiple managerial approaches, and W. Edwards Deming stressed a focus on processes, outcomes, and quality. This research consolidates these various managerial approaches in addressing the problem of organizational change that seeks to move from an em­ phasis on hierarchy to teamwork. Theory and Background The use of hierarchy, a means of layer­ ing the staff of an organization into cat­ egories of work responsibilities and ac­ countability, has been in existence for at least three millennia. A major criticism of hierarchy is that, although it was ap­ propriate for the Industrial Age, it is no longer a good structure for dealing with the increasing amount of change faced in the late twentieth century’s Informa­ tion Age. Another criticism of hierarchy is that it allocates too large a percentage of decision making (and therefore power) to the top of the pyramid. One of the means by which the prob­ lems of hierarchy are being addressed is that of instituting a team approach in the management of academic and other li­ braries. On the other hand, Elliott Jaques noted that a change from hierarchy to some other structural form is not needed for today’s Information Age but, instead, what is needed is a better understand­ ing of how hierarchy should work. Ac­ cording to Jaques, the need is manage­ rial hierarchy that understands its own nature and purpose. Hierarchy is the only structure that allows an organiza­ tion to employ large numbers of work­ ers and to preserve accountability for the work they do.3 A key problem in using teams rather than hierarchy is that orga­ nizations do not hire, fire, and promote teams but, instead, hire, fire, and pro­ mote individuals. This is not to say that hierarchy is not without problems. One of the most pronounced problems is too much layering. When too much layering is used, it can bring out the worst in hu­ man nature (greed, insensitivity, coer­ cion, and self-importance). Additionally, Jaques stated: “The trouble is that com­ The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams 573 panies need two to three times as many pay grades as they do layers, and once they have established the pay grades, which are easy to describe and set up, they fail to take the next step and set up a different managerial hierarchy based on responsibility rather than salary.”4 The result is too many layers. Despite the drawbacks of hierarchy, however, at­ tempting to throw out the structure is not the answer. Rather, the hierarchy can serve as a platform for the evolution of team approaches. John R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith stated that teams require both in­ dividual accountability and team account­ ability. Just as Jaques advised correction to the structure of hierarchy, Katzenbach and Smith suggested ways in which the team approach may be better understood and used more effectively. For teams to work successfully, values must be used to bring out the best in human nature. According to Katzenbach and Smith: Team work represents a set of val­ ues that encourage listening and responding constructively to views expressed by others, giving others the benefit of the doubt, providing support, and recognizing the inter­ ests and achievements of others.5 In addition to using values to help teams work more successfully, there is a need to have what Katzenbach and Smith call a “collective work project,” where members work together and share the common commitment to, and purpose of, a project. Katzenbach and Smith thus see performance results as the hallmark of teams. Using the perspectives of Jaques and Katzenbach and Smith, it would appear that the proper use of hierarchy and the proper use of teams can be made to complement each other in a management structure. However, other factors must be considered. Herbert White issued a ca­ veat by stating that teams are not always the best approach for all tasks and, more important, that teams can be structured to exclude persons that may not fulfill individual preferences and prejudices.6 In addition to deciding which is the better approach to use (hierarchy or teams) and when it is decided that a change is needed, managers must face the challenge of implementing the change. In having to decide whether a change in structure is needed, managers and em­ ployees are having, at the same time, to keep abreast of the myriad changes that occur daily in the Information Age. An additional problem is that managers and employees may view change differently. Thomas R. Harvey reported that the man­ ner in which change is accepted by em­ ployees may depend more on how it is introduced than on any other factor.7 Harvey provides a step-by-step guide for introducing change so that, among other things, managers can defend the reasons a change is needed and the ways it will benefit both the employees and the orga­ nization. Total Quality Management One of the ways that libraries have in­ troduced change has been through the implementation of TQM. TQM focuses on the examination of “processes” by which services are delivered and aims to achieve better-quality service for custom­ ers. It also attempts to flatten the organi­ zational structure by permitting and en­ couraging staff to play a larger role in the decision-making process. One of the requirements of TQM is that there be flexibility and empowerment, both of which may be accomplished through teamwork. A specific team approach, the self-directed work team (SDWT), has been used in various ways in several aca­ demic libraries. Susan Jurow and Susan B. Barnard have discussed implementing TQM and have offered examples of its effects on libraries.8 The SDWT is considered by Kimbrell Fisher to be the most advanced form of empowerment.9 Fisher has defined em­ powerment as having four important variables: authority, resources, informa­ tion, and accountability. According to 574 College & Research Libraries November 1999 Fisher, to feel empowered, people need formal authority and all the resources (such as budget, equipment, time, and training) necessary to realize their author­ ity. They also need timely and accurate information to assist in the decision-mak­ ing process. The Learning Organization The learning organization is an impor­ tant concept associated with group pro­ cess and is usually included in the TQM approach in management. Peter M. Senge in The Fifth Discipline stated that the learning organization is one where people continually increase their capac­ ity to create the results they truly desire.10 In the learning organization, the hierar­ chical structure is reduced and decision making is decentralized. The learning organization is also a conduit for think­ ing through the entire system. Failure to conduct a “systems thinking approach” results in shifting problems from one part of the organization to another, never hav­ ing looked at their root causes. Method and Approach In qualitative research, the case study, one of the ways of reporting such research, is an inductive method. Patterns, themes, and categories emerge from the data, rather than being developed prior to the collec­ tion of data. Christine Marlow suggested two main strategies for constructing cat­ egories for the analysis of these data: in­ digenous and researcher constructed.11 Indigenous categories use the emic ap­ proach, identifying the categories used by those being observed or adopting the native’s point of view. On the other hand, researcher-constructed categories, the etic approach, are derived from patterns that are identified within the data. Although the categories may be meaningless to the per­ sons under study, they provide a good overall picture of the phenomena being in­ vestigated. With the decision to attend an aca­ demic library conference in May 1996 fo­ cusing on the shift in management from hierarchy to teams within the context of TQM, the author chose to conduct a study of results obtained from the shift and, later, to add more insights into this type of change by comparing the case study to an earlier change at another aca­ demic institution. This study explores selected aspects of these changes by ad­ dressing the following questions: • What were the results of the change from hierarchy to teams in an academic library? • What were the reasons for the change? • What were the expected outcomes of the change? • What were the actual outcomes of the change (both internal and external) to the organization? Based on these research questions, a survey instrument (questionnaire) was developed that included the following questions: • What were the reasons and in­ tended duration of the change based on organizational objectives? The latter part of the question was used to prompt re­ spondents to think of the change in rela­ tionship to goals and objectives already established within the library. • What were the expected outcomes of the change? • What were the actual outcomes of the change? • What were the benefits of the changes, both external and internal? This question was used to see if additional in­ formation could be generated on the re­ sults of the team approach. A fifth section entitled “other com­ ments” was added to elicit from respon­ dents other data on their insights concern­ ing the change from hierarchy to the team approach. Participants were assured that their identities and responses would be kept confidential. This format was used to en­ courage respondents to answer as freely as possible. The survey instrument was completed by staff volunteers and in­ cluded all levels of staff (from the previ­ ous administrative structure) who made up the teams and one student assistant. http:constructed.11 http:desire.10 The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams 575 The researcher feels that this broad rep­ resentation of staff provided a wider range of experiences and perceptions. Case Study Report and Analysis University X is located in the southwest­ ern United States. The library began reor­ ganizing in 1993–1994, based on a restruc­ turing blueprint. The plans included hiring a consultant, providing training by the university’s Human Resources Depart­ ment, and introducing some of the con­ cepts of TQM, including emphasizing quality principles and focusing on custom­ ers while flattening the organization and providing support for staff. In addition, a new budget process was initiated and the information and reference services depart­ ments were restructured. The restructur­ ing of information and reference services served as a refocus for customer service, an objective that was accomplished by con­ ducting needs assessment and customer surveys. Process improvement (PI) projects were started during this phase. First, team leader training was conducted and then intensive team training, which included customer service, project management, valuing diversity, and interpersonal com­ munication. In 1995–1996, expectations of the changes were addressed including team leader and work-related expectations. In addition, emphasis was placed on de­ veloping internal and external partner­ ships. The reasons for the change as per­ ceived by the respondents in this survey are listed in table 1. The frequency of distribution of the reasons given for change seem to suggest and reflect that, first, training is a very important aspect of change and, second, training had a positive effect on the staff’s understanding of the reasons for change. The changes, as reported, may be catego­ rized into short- and long-term changes. Second, the process of change, for the team approach, is evident in the staff’s un­ derstanding of why the changes were tak­ ing place. From this listing, the researcher wanted to ascertain the following: why the change took place as perceived by the staff; how the extent of training was re­ flected in the changes; what the relation­ ship was between perceived changes and TQM; and, finally, whether the reasons for change had any relationship to the results attained. As shown in table 1, the answers of the fifteen respondents (some of whom gave more than one reason for the change) could be categorized into five separate areas: 1. changes in the organization (new dean and changing financial and aca­ demic environment); 2. implementation needed (strategic initiatives and new online system); 3. responses to change (access versus ownership report and limited resources/ budget); 4. focus on customers (which in­ cluded responses such as improve cus­ tomer access to the collection and pro­ vide customers with what they want and expect); 5. organizational objectives, which in­ cluded responses such as create a vision and mission statement, reduce the lay­ ers of staffing, collect data to be used in decision making, develop organizational objectives, become a learning organiza­ tion, build a flexible organization, re­ spond to changing needs in the future, and identify goals and objectives using input from teams. The staff’s observations suggest that the reasons for the change varied, but that all of them are included within organizational goals and that at the heart of the change is an emphasis on customer service. They also suggest that the changes do address issues associated with TQM as well as re­ lated issues such as the learning organiza­ tion, flattening the hierarchy by using the team approach, and using the learning or­ ganization concept. Expected Results versus Actual Results The results of the survey were analyzed further by grouping the responses based on three TQM elements: empowerment, customer service, and the learning organi­ zation. A line-by-line analysis of the data 576 College & Research Libraries November 1999 TABLE 1 Reasons for the Change: University X Reasons for Change Frequency Length of time delegated to change To maximize services and operations 1 To meet the changing needs of the user 1 Permanent community (students & faculty) To improve customer access to the collection 1 To keep the libraries' role as information 1 provider to customers as an essential role in a changing information market To become a learning organization 1 Continuous To form the most effective/efficient teams 2 Ongoing (team-based management) New dean 1 Implementation of new online systems 1 Reduced budget 2 Access vs. ownership report 1 Build a flexible organization to respond to 1 Ongoing changing needs in the future Identify goals and objectives (using inputs 2 from every team) Create a vision 2 5 yrs. Create a mission 1 5 yrs. Limited resources 1 Continuous Reduce the layers of staffing 1 5 yrs. Focus on the user as the center of the 1 5 yrs. organization Implementation of strategic initiatives 1 Collect data and use the data to make 1 decisions Focus on customer needs 1 Changing financial, academic environment 1 Develop organizational objectives 1 Provide a better organization to meet our 1 Ongoing customer's needs Provide the customers with what they want 2 and expect Total 29 in this category revealed that the major result the respondents (75%) expected to receive from the change from hierarchy to teams was improvement in customer ser­ vice. The results are explained in more de­ tail in the following subsections. Customer Service The data reveal that some level of cus­ tomer service already exists and that the staff strongly desire to increase their level of customer service. One of the ways staff wanted to improve customer service was to respond more quickly to customer needs. In addition, there is interest in us­ ing a systems approach (regarding the or­ ganization as a total system, interdepen­ dent and interrelated) to focus on customer service, and in order to accom­ plish these tasks, there is a need for train­ The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams 577 ing. These concerns were voiced in many ways, from the general statement “im­ proving customer service,” and “position­ ing the library to become more customer focused” to more specific changes that had to do with the structure of the library. These responses included “become more ‘customer oriented’ as opposed to collec­ tion oriented” and “make the services that we provide in the library more oriented toward customer needs, less oriented to­ ward internal convenience/traditions.” There also were expected results that re­ lated directly to how staff might accom­ plish the results they intended, such as “help develop skills to respond to cus­ tomer needs” and “share in decision mak­ ing, respond to change, become involved in strategic planning, and save time and money.” Empowerment Another result the respondents wished to achieve was empowerment. All other “wishes” included equal status; for ex­ ample, “address future needs, work on strategic planning, accept new challenges, include more persons in the decision- making process, develop new skills,” and the specific result of “shelving books more efficiently.” It is clear from the survey that by em­ powerment, staff meant that they would like to become more involved in the deci­ sion-making process. They either had not been pleased with some of their decisions or were not pleased with the process by which they arrived at decisions because they reported wanting to make better de­ cisions. The means by which they wanted to gain decision-making power was to flatten the organization and have full par­ ticipation, again an implication that systemwide participation was needed. The Learning Organization Based on the problem-solving nature of the learning organization, the respon­ dents reflected the need for a team-based work environment that would produce better decisions and use this approach as a means to improve processes (for in­ stance, shelving books for the same or less money). Moreover, the data indicate that staff members intend to continue this process into the future, as well as to plan their future. Perceived Actual Results Was the major result expected by the re­ spondents realized; that is, was customer service improved? Fifty percent of the responses referred to an improvement in customer services and also gave some indication of the processes by which cus­ tomer satisfaction might be gained, as reported by one of the respondents: Use of the in-depth data studies by cross-functional teams have re­ sulted in more efficient ways of pro­ viding services to our customers. Others gave evidence that substanti­ ated these results, including one respon­ dent who stated that by “responding and cooperating better with our customers, [we are] questioning long-held obsolete beliefs and practices.” Furthermore, there were indications that the staff perceived the changes as an ongoing process: “We are more customer focused and continu­ ally assessing our customer needs.” One aspect of customer results may well exceed the above-mentioned expe­ rience. The book-shelving team achieved excellent results. They saved thousands of dollars and were able to improve greatly their rate of reshelving books. Their tremendous success was achieved by examining the process by which books are reshelved, which revealed sev­ eral redundant steps. A significant portion of the data re­ garding the actual results that were at­ tained centered on the “change process.” This is one of the significant findings of this study—that change itself, or the management of change, is a central con­ cern in the change from hierarchy to teams. What was significant about these changes? The survey reflects that change was sometimes difficult and in some cases remained difficult. Yet, the change 578 College & Research Libraries November 1999 was a worthwhile process given the posi­ tive attributes to the improvement in cus­ tomer services. Some of the difficulties of change as reported by one respondent indicated that some staff were not “change ready,” an observation con­ firmed by another respondent: At first, staff did not want to hear about planning for the change, they thought it was a gimmick. The sec­ ond year, they began to see that change was happening. The change was here! They began to take no­ tice. In the third year, they began to ‘come around,’ they saw the ‘tie­ in.’ Projects are continually being supported. We are prioritizing and people are ‘airing their feelings.’ The first part of the above statement reflects the difficulty of the change, the middle part emphasizes the payback that resulted from the staff’s apparent pa­ tience, and the last part represents some level of comfort that staff members are gaining by remaining involved in the change process. Levels of Change One way to judge the effects of change is to assess the results based on the vari­ ous levels where changes were made. The two major levels of change in this study are internal and external; however, there is another level where the external and internal levels overlap. The external level may be viewed by the two constitu­ encies represented, faculty and students; publishers and vendors form a second external group. On the level of internal benefits, the theme of customer satisfaction remains a major focus in the data. The staff are more aware of customer needs and thus better able to meet them. Such needs, they re­ port, were gained from focus groups and needs assessment research. The staff also were empowered to make decisions at the front desks, which meant fewer problems for the customers. Customers no longer had to go from one area to another to have their problems solved. The apparent feel­ ing of increased customer satisfaction was confirmed by another respondent who stated: “Customers do not wait for a guru; on the whole, every employee is work­ ing to be that guru.” The theme of empowerment also is evident in these data. One respondent noted that the teams realized that they used interrelated processes that sparked more sensitive and meaningful commu­ nication: • The staff became more involved and had more varied duties; there was more “voice” for the staff. • The staff became more proactive and creative. • The staff formed more partner­ ships within the library. • The team approach was used as an opportunity to make an intentional fo­ cus on diversity. The team approach also provided an opportunity for staff to operate in differ­ ent settings. The technical services staff worked in public services, and career staff were permitted to participate in manage­ ment-level areas. As reported by one re­ spondent, the negative effect of layoffs (as had been feared) did not occur in this change from hierarchy to teams. From a typically more traditional point of view of the budget, the results of the change from hierarchy to teams reflected that in the team approach (de­ centralization), there was a better under­ standing of the budget process and the allocation of resources. Moreover, it was easier to match resources with strategic needs. A case in point was the allocation of more resources to the reshelving of books to improve that process, although in the end, after an examination of pro­ cesses, there was a savings in money and greatly improved service. Again, a bet­ ter understanding of customer needs echoes earlier findings in the external benefits of the data. Staff were not only able to respond to customer needs, but to respond more quickly. Customers re­ ceived better service as a result of im­ proved processes. The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams 579 Areas where the internal and external benefits overlap include: the formation of partnerships within the library and with faculty and departments; a better understanding of the budget processes that will directly benefit the customers; the development of staff skills that could be applied at workplaces outside the li­ brary; and the adoption of a proactive approach with both customers and pub­ lishers. In turn, the staff saw more clearly how the publishing market affects the work of libraries. Other Comments As stated earlier, this section of the sur­ vey solicited information the respon­ dents felt was worth adding to the ques­ tions they were asked: What were the reasons for the change? What were the intended results of the change? What were the actual results of the change (in­ ternal and external)? Six of the twenty- four respondents chose to answer ques­ tions in this section. The elements of change the respon­ dents focused on included: the change process itself and its difficulties and tri­ umphs; the effect of the change on the budget process and the staff; and the framework the change in structure pro­ vided for addressing the future. One re­ spondent reported this as follows: Getting to a team-based organiza­ tion is a long, protracted and diffi­ cult process, but it will provide [the mechanism] for building an orga­ nization that can survive and thrive in the changing world of libraries. The first part of the statement (“get­ ting to a team-based organization”) re­ flects a part of the difficulty; it is not easy to change from one approach to another. Another respondent confirmed this in­ sight: Change on an organizational level is hard, on a personal level, even more so. But the positives of being able to provide better service to our customers is energizing and out­ weighs the difficulties. The affirmative side of the change is observed in the latter part of the respondent’s remark, which is a confir­ mation of the major focus throughout these data—that improving customer service remains the major reason for the change. Another part of the problem (in addi­ tion to organizational and personal dif­ ficulties) involves the respondent who commented: Overall, with the team-based man­ agement we are to provide more ser­ vice with less staff. With the focus on user self-sufficiency, we were able to automate and upgrade our systems, thus allowing the library to move into the future and be more viable for university funding. One of the strongest points that dem­ onstrated how the change from hierar­ chy to teams positively affected the bud­ get process is reflected in the latter half of this statement. One respondent ex­ plained that focusing more on customer service meant providing more service, a shift that could better substantiate the viability of the library to the university. The library in this instance was assisted by the fact that the university adminis­ tration had both encouraged and sup­ ported the change and also had sup­ ported the library with training and guidance from the university’s Human Resources Department. The institution also benefits when the work experience provides students with a connection to the university and has a positive effect on student retention rates. Despite the difficulties experienced by the staff, the “other comments” section also revealed their commitment to con­ tinue to refine the new process, includ­ ing items such as the amount of paper 580 College & Research Libraries November 1999 generated and the amount of time spent training and hiring. In addition, the new structure provided a framework that would take the staff into the future, ad­ dress continual change, and assist staff in meeting the ever-changing needs of the customers, all of which emphasize the learning organization. Major Findings The major focus of this case study, as re­ vealed by the respondents, shows a very clearly concentrated effort by the staff to improve customer service. The research, however, suggests the need for a broader basis of understanding of customer ser­ vice. Customer service as defined in this case study focuses on external custom­ ers to the library. A broader base for de­ fining the “customer” would be to in­ clude the staff as a part of the “customer” category (internal customer). A second important finding of this re­ search is its implications for the use of stu­ dent assistants in academic libraries. Ac­ cording to David Gregory, ARL statistics reflect that student assistants make up 24 to 28 percent of academic library staff.1 Student assistants contribute to institu­ tions in several ways, including making the libraries less intimidating to their peers—sometimes students find asking their peers questions easier than asking librarians. There are also indications in the literature of a few of the shortcom­ ings of these decisions. The institution also benefits when the work experience provides students with a connection to the university and has a positive effect on student retention rates. Moreover, seek­ ing to fulfill the university’s commitment to diversity may be achieved through the selective hiring of student assistants to help the university achieve a more cul­ turally diverse workforce—one that, ac­ cording to Jane McGurn Kathman and Michael D. Kathman, should be a proac­ tive approach where the student em­ ployee group mirrors the composition of the larger student body.2 Finally, accord­ ing to Maurice B. Wheeler and Jacqueline Hansen, student assistants are a source of recruitment to the profession of librarianship.3 They point out that a sig­ nificant amount of research suggests that personal contact with librarians is a ma­ jor determinant in many people’s deci­ sions to pursue careers in the profession. The team approach also indicates how students can both contribute and receive greater benefits in the workplace, as re­ ported by the one student worker in the study: As a student in the library, this [the team approach] has given me the opportunity to learn more working with a team with varying job re­ sponsibilities than I may have oth­ erwise had. It is clear from the data that in some instances, the actual results sought in this change from hierarchy to teams exceeded the intended results. The first result is the importance of taking into consideration the challenges that come with institut­ ing change in an organization. It seems clear that, even though training was available to staff on the issue of change, change still must be addressed on an ongoing basis. The emphasis on partnerships is a new insight. More often than not, the im­ portance of partnerships in the tradi­ tional literature is focused on librarians with their constituencies outside the li­ brary, not among themselves. This study emphasizes the importance of librarians establishing partnerships within the staff of the library. Such partnerships help to establish better levels of communication patterns, goal-setting plans, problem- solving perspectives, and strategies for improving customer services. Despite the benefits of the team ap­ proach, however, it is important to look at the shortcomings that might result for those staff members who seek some level of individual satisfaction in addition to the satisfaction they gain from the team approach. Although the major emphasis of em­ powerment in TQM centers on the li­ The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams 581 brary staff, this study suggests that the library’s customers also have benefited from empowerment. Empowerment for the external customer is in the form of gaining self-sufficiency in using library resources. Comparison of Data: University X and Duke University A comparison (mostly of similarities) of the two schools, University X and Duke University, is based on the survey and on library documents examined that per­ tained to the change from hierarchy to teams. In addition to comparing the data based on the three major components of TQM (the learning organization, cus­ tomer service, and empowerment), this analysis includes researcher-constructed themes as defined earlier by Marlow.4 Such themes are designated as the etic approach in qualitative research; they are derived from patterns identified in the data. Although the themes may be mean­ ingless to the persons under study, they provide a good overall picture of the phe­ nomena being investigated. These themes are mission, diversity, and trust. An additional focus included a discus­ sion of the question, What was the na­ ture of the shift from hierarchy to teams in the two settings? The periods during which the two schools began the discussion of a change from hierarchy to teams are different: Duke began in 1984—1985, and Univer­ sity X began in 1993–1994. However, the reasons for making the change were very similar: technology, improved user or customer services, the desire to become involved or more involved in decision making, budget considerations, and, in the case of Duke, an improved ranking in ARL. In addition, University X had just hired a new dean of the library school. Prior to the change in management, Duke’s staff was using a participative management approach; it is unclear from the data which approach University X was using before the change was made from hierarchy to teams. It is clear that both schools had the support and encour­ agement of university management and used the expertise and training of their respective Offices of Human Resources, and in the case of University X, addi­ tional external consultants. Learning Organization, Empowerment, and Customer Service Both schools used the team approach to examine problems in the library consis­ tent with the learning organization. As a result of examining processes and iden­ tifying a large level of redundancies (handling books many more times than needed to get them back on the shelf), Duke created a new unit for retrospec­ tive conversion from their savings. By using this same approach, University X was able to save thousands of dollars and get the books back on the shelves in a much shorter period of time. The level of empowerment is similar. Both universities identified empower­ ment for staff as being involved in an in­ creased level of decision making. For stu­ dents at University X, empowerment meant gaining self-sufficiency. Duke in­ troduced a third level of empowerment: After the power to make decisions was placed closer to the persons actually in­ volved in the work, the team leader had more time to assist the director of librar­ ies in matters of development and library vision. Both schools also took a systems approach toward addressing the deci­ sion-making process. Customer service, the third compo­ nent of TQM, is closely related to em­ powerment. Both schools already had a focus on customer service and wanted to improve on what they had. Through­ out the data, the respondents of Univer­ sity X made clear their consistent focus on customer service as the major reason for the change. The examination of pro­ cesses to attain better customer service was the same for both schools. Under the rubric of the TQM approach, Lubans listed four factors used to em­ power: coaching, consulting, encourag­ ing, and leading.5 Under the heading of 582 College & Research Libraries November 1999 consulting, he described the approach at Duke: through negotiating with external and internal customers, empowerment was achieved. Moreover, the Duke Inter­ nal Customer Feedback tool was appro­ priated to accomplish this goal. Evidence of all three TQM components is observed in these data. The following subsections discuss three additional themes that emerged in the data: trust, diversity, and mission. Trust The concept of trust arose in the data of both schools and from different points of view. On the part of University X, trust emerged as it related to the relationships that developed among staff as a result of the change from hierarchy to teams. In response to the question, What were the actual outcomes of the change from hi­ erarchy to teams? one respondent stated: “A lot of trust between employees and an improved desire to do a great job.” Another respondent answered similarly to the question, What were the benefits of the change? The staff member stated: “People are more comfortable [with] and trustworthy [toward] each other.” Trust was identified in the data from Duke University in Lubans’s discussion on the barriers encountered in the change from hierarchy to teams. He described this contingency: The potential problem lies in the fact that in the absence of an annual written evaluation, an employee may experience insecurity. This is not so much out of a desire for rec­ ognition, which might be nice, but often because of a lack of trust. A “good” evaluation is like money in the bank if one believes manage­ ment is prone to capriciousness.6 Building trust is a very encouraging outcome of the change from hierarchy to teams as seen in the data from Univer­ sity X. On the other hand, the caveat sounded by Lubans regarding the possi­ bility of insecurity in his assumptions of the barriers to the success of TQM is a point to be taken seriously. The possibil­ ity of creating an environment where job security is an ongoing concern is a real­ istic response given normal staff concern for good, individual written appraisal in the event of a job change. However, it should be noted that at Duke a part of the encouraging process (one of the ways of empowering) includes recognizing and giving attention to high perfor­ mance. Mission In Library and Information Center Manage­ ment, Robert D. Stueart and Barbara B. Moran enumerate examples of college and university mission statements.7 Among these examples, Harvard Univer­ sity notes in its mission statement that five principles should govern the library of the future: unity of vision, steward­ ship, quality, collective action, and coop­ eration. Both schools in this study have sought to make changes that will better serve their respective institutions. Lubans stated that the library staff had been experimenting since 1985 with new organizational structures to achieve a superior stewardship of the resources assigned to them by Duke University.8 A writer for University X made a similar statement that showed regard for plan­ ning for both the present and the future to achieve the university’s mission. Diversity Several organizations are including di­ versity as a part of their mission state­ ments. Traditionally, libraries have em­ phasized diversity through collection development, access to services, and the preservation of the history and literature of various cultures. More recently, how­ ever, this emphasis has broadened to in­ clude diverse staff and a more intentional effort to become more tolerant of differ­ ent approaches and ideas to better meet the overarching goals and objectives of library organizations. Evident in the data are examples of a focus on diversity. In the case of Univer­ The Impact of Change from Hierarchy to Teams 583 sity X, the team approach was used as a means of focusing on diversity. Diversity training was provided by outside consult­ ants. In addition, Diversity Roundtables were offered to library staff on a variety of topics, including the significance of holi­ days of various cultures. In addition, ef­ forts were made to educate library staff on the Library Affirmative Action Committee and to state the university’s and library’s commitment to affirmative action and di­ versity. University X also has its own di­ versity mission statement as well as a Di­ versity Council. At Duke, various ex­ amples were reported by Lubans that point to an emphasis on diversity, first on a de­ partment or system level where staff be­ came more accepting of differences and ap­ preciative of the potential value they rep­ resented. On the level of team leadership, different perspectives were sought out be­ cause differences no longer were shuttered by the dominant culture. Hierarchy What was the nature of the change from hierarchy to teams in the two settings? Did the change actually occur? One of the prob­ lems with hierarchy is that inherent in its design is the placement of the decision- making power at the tip of its symbol— the pyramid. The data substantiate the fact that definite changes were made. In both instances, the power to make decisions was given to those individuals closest to the work. In the case of Duke, where decision- making power was granted to teams, there was an instance where some department heads were allowed to choose not to be­ come team leaders, which left a portion of the hierarchy intact. At University X, in addition to the decision-making power accorded to teams, the Dean’s Council’s name was changed to the Library Cabinet to reinforce the idea that this body is re­ sponsible to the library and not just to the dean. It is, therefore, evident from the data that both schools experienced some change in the hierarchy. But to what degree has that change occurred? Is there an inherent need for some degree of hierarchy? In the final analysis, the degree to which change in the hierarchy actually occurred is prob­ ably best explained by Lubans: We pushed the hierarchy to its pro­ ductivity limits, virtually taking a team-based approach within the hi­ erarchy.9 Conclusions The purpose of this article was to analyze the impact of the change (or perceived change) in management approach from hierarchy to teams and to look at the dif­ ferences between the expected and actual results that the change engendered. These results have been demonstrated in the data; however, there is a need to repeat that the actual results, despite the chal­ lenges of the process of change, exceeded the intended results. For example, Duke reported having the process itself vali­ dated. This was not an intended result of moving from hierarchy to teams. The sur­ vey also indicated that the major compo­ nents of TQM (empowerment, the learn­ ing organization, and the team approach) were accomplished in these settings. This study also points out the chal­ lenge that faces managers in helping staff switch from one approach to another. It is important to better understand the dy­ namics of change and how it can best be managed. There is the additional respon­ sibility of managing ongoing change. Finally, not-for-profit institutions are continuing to take cues from the for-profit sector in management by using strategies such as marketing, benchmarking, and TQM. The time also may have come for librarians/information professionals to reexamine their posture toward the for- profit and not-for-profit separation. Such a change would be consistent with what has happened in at least one other disci­ pline regarding a similar challenge. Soci­ ologist Peter M. Blau developed his So­ cial Exchange Theory along economic lines.10 Rather than view economic in a material manner to mean “exact payment for specified goods” as economists do, the term is defined as a “nonmaterial” entity. A smile or a kind gesture is an example http:lines.10 584 College & Research Libraries November 1999 of a nonmaterial economic entity, particu­ larly as it relates to human interaction. One respondent in this study may have confirmed this viewpoint: Within our organization, the change was good; however, I think the critical factors are overlooked because we are termed as a non­ profit organization, and with this [I feel] we lose vision from time to time. I think we need to push that we are for-profit and realize that profit as satisfied customers. Notes 1. David Gregory, “The Evolving Role of Student Employees in Academic Libraries,” in Libraries and Student Assistants: Critical Links, ed. William K. Black (New York: Haworth Pr., 1995). 2. Jane McGurn Kathman and Michael D. Kathman, “What Difference Does Diversity Make in Managing Student Employees?” College and Research Libraries 59 (Sept. 1998): 378–389. 3. Maurice B. Wheeler and Jacqueline Hanson, “Improving Diversity: Recruiting Students to the Library Profession,” in Libraries and Student Assistants: Critical Links, ed. William K. Black (New York: Haworth Pr., 1995). 4. Marlow, Research Models for Generalist Social Work, 235. 5. Lubans, “I Ain’t No Cowboy, I Just Found This Hat,” 34–35. 6. Ibid., 32. 7. Robert D. Stueart and Barbara B. Moran, Library and Information Center Management (Englewood, Colo.: Libraries Unlimited, 1993). 8. Lubans, “I Ain’t No Cowboy, I Just Found This Hat,” 29. 9. Ibid. 10. Peter M. Blau, Exchange and Power in Social Life (New York: Wiley, 1964).