Introduction
Library development
greatly benefits from continuous input of internal and external intelligence to
be successful (Davies, 2008). Statistics are collected in all Swedish
libraries as part of the government-mandated Official Statistics of Sweden (Statistics
Sweden, 2016). The
impressive array of data, produced and communicated to national authorities
every year, can also be of strategic use locally (Høivik, 2008). In addition, qualitative data is collected
regularly as patrons are surveyed, introducing ideas and user perspective into
the organization.
Quality assurance and
strategic planning are vital parts of systematic public management (Young, 2003). For libraries, it is not uncommon that these
types of systems originate from the parent organization (Broady-Preston
& Lobo, 2011). The University of Gothenburg implemented a
university-wide quality assurance framework in 2001 (Göteborgs
universitet Universitetsstyrelsen, 2001). A new strategic planning system has been in
place at University of Gothenburg since 2013 (Göteborgs
universitet, 2013). In addition, a number of departments (such
as environment, worker’s, and fire safety) have their own systematic processes
and auditing procedures to expand the picture.
All these tools are
useful and valuable for improving and making our libraries more effective (Dean &
Sharfman, 1996). However, they can feel unorganized and hard
to communicate to the staff and stakeholders. Gothenburg University Library set
out to condense the majority of these activities into one process. Effort was
put into building a user-focused and staff-centered bottom-up workflow. The
system was further enhanced with a longer-term strategic cycle, which also
relies on staff input and statistical intelligence.
Methods and Results
Building the Quality
Cycle
The quality system framework, established by the University of Gothenburg
Board, mandated all university schools and the library to set up quality
systems. The nature of the local quality systems was not described in detail,
but left to the different schools to formulate, based on individual circumstances.
Later, a system auditing procedure was put in place to give collegial advice on
the development of the local systems.
The university library
implemented its first quality system in 2003-4, when a set of goals was defined
and assessed throughout the organization (Götesborgs
universitet Biblioteksnämnden, 2003). The system was then developed and improved
upon in 2008 and 2012.
Describing the Quality
Cycle
The process, as it is in effect now, is based on a follow-up/planning period in
January/February of each year (Figure 1).
In the planning stage,
each library team (7-15 staff) defines a few projects (activities) of varying
size which should be completed before the end of the year. The resulting
activity plans are gathered from throughout the organization and published on
the library intranet. To strengthen the strategic relevance, a number of
activities are selected from the current library strategic plan by the library
leadership and assigned to the individual teams prior to the planning. This
means that each team may have one or two activities which must be included in
the activity plan in order to keep pace with strategic goals.
Figure 1
Quality cycle.
Figure 2
Input to follow-up
activities.
To give the staff
teams a current background for their work, the planning period is preceded by a
follow-up and assessment routine (Figure 2). During follow-up, the activity
plans from the previous year are accounted for. In addition, the teams are
asked to study and comment on data from a number of other sources. Each year
has a follow-up theme. Centrally prepared reports are presented to the teams.
The latest user survey may be distributed, or a report of improvement
suggestions from staff or users can be presented. Staff participation often
leads to discussions of the current matter, for instance, why visitor numbers
are down, or the nature of the enquiries at the front desk.
The follow-up period
has proven to be a great inspiration for activity planning, which normally is
scheduled for the following team meeting. It also allows follow-up activities from
auxiliary management systems to be incorporated, making them more accessible to
the staff.
Building the Strategic
Cycle
Some management activities are repeated less frequently than once a year. One
of these is the development of the library strategic plan. A weakness in
quality assurance work is that it does not necessarily make the library
activities more focused or more effective. A long-term direction has to be
established.
The way to handle this
challenge was the creation of a Strategic Cycle (Figure 3). Early in the year
before a new strategic plan is set to take effect, external intelligence is
gathered in a more deliberate way than normal. Vision statements and other
long-term documents are revisited and revised. Later that year, seminars and
group discussions consolidate the material, and a new strategic plan is
drafted. After approval, once the plan has taken effect, the quality cycle is
used to drive the implementation.
Collection of
Intelligence
Intelligence collection is key to the strategic cycle. One useful technique is
benchmarking, which has been performed for a number of different themes using a
method derived from SIQ (Nilsson, Örtelind, & Östling, 2002). The ideal benchmark activity often starts
with a specific need, and the definition of a number of themes of interest.
Libraries are then scanned to find peers with assets in the selected areas.
Identified libraries are contacted and invited to add themes of their own. The
library leadership teams then meet to present their library’s activities in the
selected areas of interest. This often gives a richer understanding of best
practices within the selected themes.
The intelligence
collection process preceding the latest completed strategic cycle produced a
trend cloud, which then was used to develop and focus the plan (Figure 4).
Figure 3
Strategic cycle.
Figure 4
Trend areas from
intelligence collection 2012. Main areas accented.
Conclusions
The implemented Quality and Strategic Cycle at Gothenburg University Library
has contributed to more user-focused and experience-driven library activities.
Staff ownership has facilitated collective involvement in addressing the
toughest issues for our changing library environment. Many more employees are
now actively involved in change processes, and there is a wider understanding
of developments as a result of allowing staff to systematically contribute to
changes in their immediate environment.
There is great benefit
from including assessment results in systematic change processes. Many surveys
and studies of statistical data have precipitated a large number of action
plans throughout the years, but the follow-up and implementation steps have
been more difficult. Statistical data, especially data collected for national
statistics, was rarely used for library development. The definition of a yearly
process into which data and previous findings can be funneled has been shown to
be a powerful driving force for implementing meaningful change.
References
Broady-Preston, J., & Lobo,
A. (2011). Measuring the quality, value and impact of academic libraries: The
role of external standards. Performance
Measurement and Metrics, 12(2), 122-135.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14678041111149327
Davies, J. E. (2006). Taking
a measured approach to library management: Performance evidence applications
and culture. In T. Kolderup Flaten (Ed.), Management,
marketing and promotion of library services based on statistics, analyses and
evaluation (pp. 17-32). Berlin, Boston: K. G. Saur. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783598440229.17
Dean, J. W., & Sharfman,
M. P. (1996). Does decision process matter? A study of strategic
decision-making effectiveness. Academy of
Management Jounal, 39(2), 368-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256784
Høivik, T. (2006). Comparing
libraries: From official statistics to effective strategies. In T. Kolderup
Flaten (Ed.), Management, marketing and
promotion of library services based on statistics, analyses and evaluation (pp.
43-64). Berlin,
Boston: K. G. Saur. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783598440229.43
Nilsson, H. L., Örtelind, A.-B., & Östling, M.
(2002). Benchmarking : att lära av andra – en handbok i benchmarking
[Benchmarking: To Learn from Others – A Handbook in Benchmarking] Göteborg:
SIQ.
Statistics Sweden. (2016). Official
Statistics of Sweden. Retrieved from http://www.scb.se/en_/About-us/Official-Statistics-of-Sweden/
Göteborgs universitet (2013).
Planering och uppföljning. [Planning and Assessment] Retrieved from http://medarbetarportalen.gu.se/vision2020/Planering-och-uppfoljning/
Göteborgs universitet
Universitetsstyrelsen (2001-06-11). Göteborgs universitets
kvalitetssystem. [Quality System for the
University of Gothenburg]
Göteborgs universitet
Biblioteksnämnden. (2003). Kvalitetssystem for Göteborgs universitetsbibliotek.
[Quality
System for Gothenburg University Library] Retrieved from point 7 on
http://www.ub.gu.se/info/organisation/biblnamnd/protokoll/arendelistor/BNarenden031119/BNarende031119.pdf
Young, R. D. (2003).
Perspectives on Strategic Planning in the Public Sector. Retrieved from
http://www.ipspr.sc.edu/publication/perspectives%20on%20Strategic%20Planning.pdf
2016 Carlsson. This is an Open Access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.