de Stricker

"Constructive Bragging" - a fine art deserving more attention

When information professionals perform "miracles" for their clients, they sometimes modestly refrain from touting the accomplishment.  That's a pity - for the organization in question, for the information profesional in question, and for the profession overall.  Good news stories - how the investment in the expertise and content in the information center or library paid off in helping the organization move toward its goals or addressing its challenges - deserve to become well known, and it is our job to make that happen.  But fear not - we can raise awareness without any 'cringe factor'.  I know of one special library whose bulletin is eagerly read by constituents because it regularly brings stories about how a specific situation was addressed by the staff or by the tools made available.  The "you can, too" value is high and the factual nature of the stories secures credibility.  So let's not be modest and think "well, it's all in day's work" ... instead let's think "how can we tell others about this success in such a way as to add to the overall awareness of what is available in that mysterious entity called the library."  Go ahead, brag away.

Value focused selling: Australian inspiration

For anyone queasy about "selling" I have great news.  Through my colleague Heather Carine in Australia (www.carineresearch.com.au), I have had the pleasure of reading Robyn Haydon's outstanding book The Shredder Test (see www.winningwords.com.au).  Robyn's book, detailing how to write a winning sales proposal, is a joy to read - clear, down to earth, and pointed!  For those wanting a powerful step up in the impact of their sales proposals, reading Robyn's book will be an eye opener.  Why do I like it so much?  Because it focuses on what the client needs to hear.  Robyn's book shows how a sales proposal is indeed a service to the potential client in showcasing the ways in which proposed initiatives may succeed.  We information professionals, though we are not selling products or engineering projects, will benefit from the sharp instructions made in Robyn's book through the reinforcement that selling is a service when it is done properly.

Naturally, I swapped Robyn a copy of my Business Cases for Info Pros: Here's Why, Here's How (http://books.infotoday.com/books/BusinessCasesforInfoPros.shtml).  We focus on different client scenarios  but we believe in the same principles ... thanks to Heather for making the connection.

Precious Time: Managing Information Overload

The crushing burden of information overload has just been reconfirmed and quantified (validating previous industry studies such as IDC's "The High Cost of Not Finding Information") by LexisNexis in its 2008 Workplace productivity study (http://www.lexisnexis.com/literature/pdfs/LexisNexis_Workplace_Productivity_Survey_2_20_08.pdf and http://www.lexisnexis.com/media/press-release.aspx?id=1041.asp). I quote from the press release:

• Sixty-two percent of professionals report that they spend a lot of time sifting through irrelevant information to find what they need; 68 percent wish they could spend less time organizing information and more time using the information that comes their way;

• Workers admit that not being able to lay their hands on the right information at the right time impedes their ability to work efficiently; 85% agree that not being able to access the right information at the right time is a huge time-waster;

• More than 40 percent of the survey participants indicate an inability to handle future increases in information flow;

• While an average workday for white collar workers is 8.89 hours, the survey finds that on average, 7.89 working hours are used conducting research, attending meetings, and searching for previously created documents, and;

• White collar professionals spend an average of 2.3 hours daily conducting online research, with one in ten spending four hours or more on an average day.

It is no wonder knowledge workers are stressed if 89% of their time is spent hunting for information or being in meetings (another form of information work). Assistance in managing the flow of information - to free up time so they can apply their expertise in pursuit of the organization's goals - is required ... but how?  Is the solution to be found in technology?

Information professionals offer to help establish a REASONABLE flow of RELEVANT information, using their tricks of the trade.  With every reduction in the typical knowledge worker's time spent in unproductive information seeking, they contribute value. Managing knowledge worker overload is a daunting challenge,  Information professionals are on it.

Vital Heads-Up - or Information Clutter?

In a European bank's window envelope, showing through once the contents were removed, appeared the following:  "Should you receive multiple envelopes sent the same day, please be aware that it is cheaper to pay the extra postage than it would be to collect several statements in one envelope.  We hope you understand."   Hmm … would some recipients think "that makes sense, glad you told me" and the rest think, "why are you telling me this?"

While curious whether the bank's explanation was occasioned by actual or anticipated complaints, I surmise the bank is using the window envelope as a means of communicating with recipients who may not visit its website -- likely featuring a "click here for more information about multiple mailings on the same day".

The simple example illustrates the quandary we information professionals face from time to time:  Will an upfront caveat or announcement show diligence and thus avert subsequent criticism - or will it amount to unnecessary noise for those who are unaffected or unconcerned?

Whenever we prepare to communicate broadly, let's ask:

• Do most members of the potential audience need to hear the message?  What are the risks if the message were not sent out?  How can we label the message so recipients understand whether it applies to them?

• Are there official drivers?  (For example, must it be documented that due efforts were undertaken to inform relevant parties of a matter?)

• Is there a way to be brief but provide an option for more information?  "New data elements in the corporate directory: For details,  …"

In today's environment of information overload, it is a necessary courtesy to communicate in the right amount.

"Do not crush" - Information may be clear and accurate yet still ambiguous!

Every day offers lessons in the nuances of communication from the point of view of the recipent's experience.  As dealers in information, we need to be sensitive to any potential ambiguity arising from such experience.

Familiar with the implications of some tablets being "enteric coated" and thus not intended for cutting or crushing because the active ingredients need to be released in a specific way, I recently asked a pharmacist (I got the bug like everyone else) regarding the huge antibitotic tablets she'd just dispensed, "may I crush or cut them into tiny pieces so I can swallow them?'. The accompanying literature said "do not crush or chew" but referred only to a bitter taste, not to efficacy. She advised that I could go ahead - but it would have been nice if the literature had been unambiguous.  It's if you crush the tablet, the medication won't be effective or else it's if you crush the tablet, the medication will still be effective (but there will be a terrible taste sensation).  Either way, I would have been in a position to decide independently what to do with those tablets (for example, ask for the liquid formulation!).

The information is the drug sheet was not incorrect.  It just did not take into account the experience a reader might have (in my case, having been told previously that efficacy could be negatively impacted by crushing tablets).  When we create messages, our task is to provide the appropriate information for recipients to make a decision.  As in ... "please join us Thursday for a quick demonstration of X new resource; it has come to light that complications have arisen in the past due to a misunderstanding about how to use the content on the intranet".