de Stricker

New Graduates Ask Where the Jobs Are: Let's Help Out

It was recently my pleasure to speak to Cabot Yu's Information Management class at University of Western Ontario's Faculty of Information & Media Studies (thank you Cabot) about "Information Management in the Real World".  Describing organizational environments in which IM skills make a difference, I attempted to paint a picture of careers for information professionals outside the core settings of libraries, information centres, archives, and records and IT departments.  Not surprisingly, one question was "what does a job posting look like for those nonstandard positions?" 

In our discussion, it was mentioned that holders of fresh credentials in information management would be relevant applicants for positions with titles containing such terms as "analyst", "officer", "examiner", or "specialist" in the public sector.  In the private sector, position titles could in addition include such words as "associate" or "representative" to describe, for example, roles in customer service, client and public relations, marketing, and any organizational unit depending heavily on research, environmental scanning, and analysis of data.

The key for job seekers is that professional positions in all domains call for considerable skills in information management.  The challenge is to craft an application and resume that will grab the attention of the hirers - a task requiring casting information management expertise in terms related to the operations and goals of the organization in question.

I can help with applications, resumes, and advice - and I take this opportunity to ask my readers to join me in assisting new information professionals get started in their careers:  If you are in a nontraditional role, would you share how it happened ... and would you share your advice on job seeking "out there beyond the library"?

Thank you from me ... and from the job seekers.

Newly Free for the Taking - Please Do Take It!

The Association of Independent Information Professionals (aiip.org) - of whose board I am proud to be a member - in late 2008 made the decision to provide open access to one of the association's key benefits, the quarterly Connections.  Anyone may now read the articles covering a wide range of topics relevant for information users and for all information professionals - not just those owning their own businesses.  Topics include research techniques, information industry offerings, client relations, marketing, and the like; tips columns round out a rich resource receiving rave reactions and kudos to AIIP for making this bold move to share content with the world.  

The latest issue features writeups of presentations made at the 2009 annual conference (Doug Fine and Stephen Abram are just the beginning).  I encourage my readers to have a look at it and previous ones: http://www.aiip.org/AIIPConnections.

Special Offer: Buy on Amazon at over 4x the list price!

My blog readers may be aware that I have authored two books in the last two years - see www.destricker.com/en/resources1.html and follow the links to the publishers' online stores where the books are listed and sold at approximately $40.  So far, so good.  Potential purchasers may, of course, wish to shop where they frequently shop - on Amazon.

In the case of Is Consulting for You, they would be well served.  Copies are available from Amazon direct at list price and from resellers - at list price as well as below and above.  The highest price today is $188.  Those viewing the options may give their heads a shake and focus on the more advantageous prices.

However, today on Amazon, Business Cases for Info Pros is only available from resellers - at over $160. It would be easy to assume "that's the price". Until a list price offer becomes available, interested  buyers may want to get that item direct from the publisher at $39.50.  

Caveat emptor, indeed.

Sharing Our Experience: The Entrepreneurship Course

On July 9, Pam Casey (www.informationnow.ca) and I had the pleasure of delivering the first rendition of a course on information entrepreneurship through the Professional Learning Centre at Univerity of Toronto's Faculty of Information (http://plc.fis.utoronto.ca/).  A repeat date has been set for November 20, and work is under way to deliver it in Edmonton this Fall.  We were blown away by the interest in the topic and by the positive feedback along the lines of "although I may not set up my own business, I learned so much that is relevant for my work".  Our thanks to Eva Piorkowski (Kupidura) at PLC for including the course among the program's offerings to allow us to share our experience as independents with those taking a look at the career option we chose.

We take the positive reaction to arise from the fact that - whether we think of it that way or not - all information professionals are "in business", selling their services and deliverables to clients who "pay" if not with money then with their time and attention.  Success depends on "making the sale" - convincing clients it is worthwhile investing in our services as opposed to making a different choice among many possibilities open to today's knowledge workers.

One of the key messages in the course focuses on the priceless role of reputation and visibility in reducing the (for some) cringe-inducing need to promote one's business.  The good news is that reputation and visibility may be achieved through activities that aren't scary at all - writing, serving on committees, and speaking - for example, to groups of students or recent graduates.  Regardless whether there is an independent business in anyone's future, it cannot hurt a career to be well thought of in the relevant professional circles.  We got the impression the course participants fully understood the need to practice salesmanship ... every day.

As the economy evolves along with demographics, we may see an increase in the - still relatively small - number of independent information entrepreneurs.  We believe there is plenty of demand and invite anyone curious to give us a call - and take the course, of course!  For those considering consulting, there's always the book to read: http://www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=401.

Get Ready for a Drucker Treat

Some years ago, it was a treat at a Special Libraries Association annual conference to be up front and close to the stage as Peter Drucker spoke about the role of special librarians in the success of their organizations. His down to earth comments resonated with what I have observed throughout the years, and the audience's reaction indicated how much we all appreciated his insights.  Since then, The Essential Drucker has been kicking around my office, yielding inspiration (aha!), confirmation (I thought that's what I was noticing!), and validation (he expresses that challenge perfectly!).

At the most recent SLA conference, I encountered Drucker again in the form of Bruce Rosenstein, author of the forthcoming book Living in More Than One World: How Peter Drucker's Wisdom Can Inspire and Transform Your Life (Berrett-Koehler, August 2009). Focusing on individual development, the book is based on over 20 years of Rosenstein's research into Drucker's life and thought.

See brucerosenstein.com for details on the book and clips from a 2005 interview in which Drucker sums up our continuing work:  "In the past, we always had a desperate shortage of information.  Now we have an incredible overload of data, and the executives of tomorrow will have to learn to transform data into information - which very few know [how to do]". In commenting on "the shift from managing manual workers" he says plainly about knowledge management that "we are doing [it] very poorly". 

We information specialists will always reach for ways to help our employers and clients improve their information related practices and do better with knowledge management. Bruce's book now adds a personal dimension to the legacy Peter left us ... get ready for your next Drucker treat!

Colin Powell: An Information Natural

At former US Secretary of State Colin Powell's keynote address opening the 100th conference of the Special Libraries Association (www.sla.org) on June 14, marching to the front of the huge hall rewarded me in the form of a seat in the second row of chairs: His strong and warm personal presence was close enough to experience "for real" - as opposed to looking at images on the jumbotrons.  My high expectations were exceeded: It was fascinating to hear him speak from the heart about his career experience - and it was a special treat to hear him comment on the information related aspects of his many and varied former and current endeavors.  The anecdotes - as an example, checking facts online while on the phone with an overseas official believing Colin Powell was relying on memory - were amusing and characteristic of a talk that was at once inspiring and down to earth. 

For me, the true delight was hearing that Colin Powell insists on good information, accessible by those who need it, and quickly.  He stressed how it is essential in order to achieve organizational, project, and mission success. (Yes!)

Mr. Powell spoke vividly about the "special collections" that are crucial for any organization - the documents and materials preserving its unique memory and knowledge and thus enabling it to perform its work, to make decisions, to verify facts in support of planning, and so on.  He described the payoff from deploying appropriate information tools and from demanding that everyone use them; and he stressed the impact today's technologies are having on what he called the "speed of events". (It was poignant that the SLA conference coincided with events on the other side of the world shared in many cases only through cell phones and social networking instruments.)  His comments on the need for investment in good information and communication tools - and rigorous use of them - resonated with someone who is regularly engaged in advancing the business case for such investment!

A special personal focus, the General explained, is education through documentation.  I have put on my list of future must-sees the history education centre he mentioned being involved in developing.

I am grateful to have had the opportunity to listen to an accomplished speaker, inspiring leadership figure, and true believer in the higher purpose of information stewardship.  Thank you, General Powell! 

"There's such a thing?" Nurturing Information Imagination

In a few days, a licensed optician will arrive for the second time at my doorstep - this time with a finished pair of eyeglasses ready for the final adjustments.  The frames were examined last week at my dinner table from a selection she had assembled based on a phone conversation and my website photo; the final choice rested on her ability to use  examples of my business wardrobe to demonstrate the suitability of certain frame colors.  

 

In accomplishing the transaction effortlessly at home, and in getting frames I would have passed over had I been on my own in the store, I am the beneficiary of information a colleague offered me as I casually mentioned the wear and tear in my current glasses. "There is such a thing as an optician who makes house calls?"  was my surprised reaction.  Had I thought such a practitioner existed, I could easily have looked for her.  Not in my imagination, no search.

 

In the world of information and communication services, such a dynamic is common:  If it is not conjured up in thought, it cannot be requested.  Knowledge workers are not in a position to look, or ask information professionals to look on their behalf, for materials, tools, and services they are not even dreaming of.  Nor can knowledge workers be expected to imagine and hence inquire about the full sweep of implications arising from our innovative uses and combinations of existing or emerging web services.

 

Information and communication professionals - taking their own wizardry for granted - may be underestimating the there's-such-a-thing?  factor.  (On the other hand, it is a concern for some that we might overdo the "did you know" outreach; but upon reflection, I believe it is better to verify that our knowledge worker clients know of the opportunities we enable than to make the assumption they know.)

 

We cannot insert visions in the minds of knowledge workers.  We can work on building relationships to help them experience how airing concerns, ideas, and plans with us usually results in the discovery of some new advantage they had not imagined.

It's only words ... but "sleep on it" really is good advice!

David Silverman is my hero for posting wonderful pieces (blogs.harvardbusiness.org/silverman) on business writing.  In his April 14 post, he offers eye-opening advice on how many times a piece of communication needs to be revised according to its nature and purpose and the size of the audience.  I highly recommend that item - and while you're there, check the February 10, February 19, March 6, and May 1 posts.  Be sure to look at the reader commentary; it is entertaining and instructive.

 

The fast pace of work may make for limited opportunities to "smith" our prose as much as we might like - and soaring oratory may be unnecessary in many cases.  After all, with our adoption of email and then the instant or twitter message, we have increased our tolerance for formulations that might otherwise be considered a bit rough.  However, the common admonition "sleep on that email before you hit send" is a wise one; misunderstanding is difficult if not impossible to correct after the fact.

Here are two sets of questions I apply in creating or editing any non-casual text:

 

DOES THE MESSAGE "WORK"?

 

1. Having read the piece, are readers likely to know clearly what action is expected from them?

 

2. If the purpose is anything other than communicating low-risk information, is the tone appropriate and at the right level of intensity? 

 

3. Is the level of formality appropriate for the topic and for the relationship between the writer and the readers?

 

IS THE MESSAGE FREE OF ERROR OR DISTRACTING CLUTTER?

 

4. Are there mistakes with real impact - e.g. "not" where we mean "now"?

 

5. Could plainer words convey the meaning, and did fad expressions sneak in - e.g. "operationalize" where "carry out" would do?

 

6. Is informal usage cluttering up the reading experience - e.g. "there are many people who believe" or (ouch) "there's many people that believe" where "many believe" would be crisp?

 

7.  Is there ambiguity?  Sentences starting "This ..." are especially likely to require reformulation:  "A hacking incident uncovered a serious loss of data.  This caused great concern and much extra work."  (In my own writing I simply avoid beginning a new sentence with "this" - problem solved!)

 

Once such questions are addressed - we may each have a personal checklist of pitfalls to avoid - wait!  Look at the item later, with fresh eyes and a bit of distance.  I have been "saved" many a time just by planning ahead for inserting such a delay.  So indeed, in the absence of a different set of eyes ... do sleep on it. 

Speaking of Volunteering: A Sharing of the Wealth

Last night, I met with colleagues to deliver the second event in SLA Toronto Chapter's 5-event "Career Series" (http://units.sla.org/chapter/ctor/events/default.asp), focusing on corporate cultures and the "fit" we may or may not experience in them as a result of our individual work styles and talents. (In response to popular demand, the organizers have scheduled a repeat for May 5.)  One of the attendees was Bruce Harpham, a highly promising new professional who, at www.bruceharpham.ca, demonstrates volunteering in a creative way through expert deployment of "all the new tools". From the get-go he has joined the ranks of those who share discoveries and observations with time-starved colleagues, and I expect his diligent contribution to the profession to be reflected in his career.

After the session, the topic of SLA's upcoming annual - this year the 100th anniversary - conference in Washington DC (http://www.sla.org/content/Events/conference/ac2009/index.cfm) came up in conversation.  It is a worrying concern for habitual conference goers - not to mention presenters - that overall, employer funding for professional events and training appears under pressure, limiting opportunities for some to interact in person with their colleagues across the world. The benefit of professional growth and value brought back to employer organizations in the form of new skills may not sway budget managers, and taking vacation days and footing personally the entire bill for attending a major conference may not be feasible.  (Ironically, I am presenting at the conference a Leadership & Management Division workshop on June 13 focused on business cases; it seems we need that polished business case for conference attendance in the first place.)

If the cost of in-person participation in an event in a major city is prohibitive, it is especially important for us all to get the most out of those "new tools" by networking, pointing to resources, asking questions, discovering how others have tackled a challenge, and so on.  In these interesting times, it is essential to reach out and share the wealth - the wealth of what we know and what we have to offer - with our colleagues. If you haven't already done so, now is a good time to set up that profile on LinkedIn and Twitter and to become an active contributor of comments to relevant blogs - or to follow Bruce's example and create a personal blog.  We'll discuss those and more options at the third event in the SLA Toronto Careeer series on September 8: "Self Promotion, No Cringe: Gaining Visibility Through Giving".

Volunteer: It's your Career

Volunteering has two sides:  Doing it ... and enticing others to do it.  For those who have already volunteered in many roles, the next step is encouraging others to follow suit.

I am pleased to refer to my colleague Cindy Romaine's blog post at http://testingintelligence.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/a-new-era-of-service/ where she explains her reasons for running for elected office in the Special Libraries Association.  The associated comments on her post support the volunteering spirit of "pay it forward".

Readers of my blog are familiar with my views on volunteering.  For newer readers and for those who may be counseling new professionals, let me emphasize the "what's not to love" part:

• You will have someone to guide you - say, a previous committee chair or a unit leader.  But if you don't for any reason - you have the freedom to move in new directions!

• You get to tackle typical or unforeseen projects.  (Recent example of the latter:  Too many signed up for an event - how can we accommodate the wait list in a second session - and what about the ones who can't make the second date?)

• You get to be in front of people who can put in a good word as references and of potential future employers.

• You get to strut your stuff comfortably until you are ready to take on a solo role.  Serving on a committee before you take on chairing one is a good way to begin.

• You get to put your accomplishments on your resume.

Volunteering is a stellar opportunity to grow professionally and to gain visibility.  Indeed, what is not to love?

Social Tools: Invest

The media coverage of the business uses of social tools such as Facebook and Twitter and their siblings, the number of spinoff web services offering various add-on enhancements, and related information is intense.  (It makes me remember the simple old days when a different corporate name was associated with "world domination".)  I participate in social networking tools (LinkedIn, Plaxo, and the two above named) because they are valuable, each in their own way, and because I believe any potential risks are easily outweighed by the advantages if prudence is applied.  But there's more to social tools domination.

Think back on the communication and information related tools and technologies we have used in our work and personal lives:  Each time something new was introduced, we adapted and got used to it and forgot how much work we thought it was to learn its ins and outs.  Nothing new here.  What may be new-ish is the shrinking time interval between the arrivals of new tools.  For those of us without assistance to monitor them and e.g. pump out posts and tweets on our behalf, the time investment seems to be climbing dramatically.  That investment is necessary because our social capital may depend on and benefit greatly from it.

Prominently at the conference mentioned in my last blog entry (and at every other conference I have the opportunity to attend), I see the personal "bookends" in the hallways and in the coffee shops: Long standing relationships between colleagues who have traveled the communication tool road for decades - and brand new relationships being formed right there in the event rooms or on the bus on the way to the gala event.  In both cases, those relationships now continue via Twitter/Facebook etc.

Our success as information professionals depends on our ability to forge and maintain trust-based relationships with our clients and stakeholders.  Existing relationships we can comfortably manage with established communication practices according to mutual preference.  As for the new generations of individuals we need to engage (who, we are told, do not regard email as a cool tool), we have been handed a new set of instruments - and although those instruments may seem awkward as work tools, they do prove themselves.  For example, 140 characters can give meaningful information with a couple of words and a URL or two. 

For anyone not already plunged into in the social tools I suggest: There's always the option of engaging someone to help out!

The Power of Association: Volunteer

Superbly created by Jocelyn Sheppard (redhouseconsulting.com) and her many volunteers, the recent annual meeting of the Association of Independent Information Professionals (aiip.org) gave AIIP members a powerful opportunity to connect and learn from each other.  I was privileged to speak there - see http://www.destricker.com/en/past_presentations.html for the March 27 slides.

The conference was so worthwhile, reinforcing my conviction that information professionals have everything to gain from participating actively in their chosen association.  Throughout - in the meeting rooms and at the conference events - I saw new professional relationships being formed. That is what an association is all about.  I encourage every information professional not already active in a professional association to step up and volunteer. 

Together, we accomplish what we cannot achieve alone. 

Who are We? In Whose Eyes? Career Identities or Brands

As I'm looking ahead to an upcoming SLA Toronto event focusing on determining the type of professional role and work that is most suited to our innate abilities and preferences, material dealing with professional niches and "brands" for information professionals naturally gets my attention.  Here are two samples:  Stephen Abram's "We are a Profession that Makes a Difference" in the January 2009 issue of Information Today and Tracey Caldwell's "Professional associations stand up for librarians" in the March 9, 2009 issue of Information World Review.  Stephen recounts the successes of colleagues who had a significant impact on their constituents by innovating and reaching way beyond their formal roles; Tracey has several professional association leaders comment on the evolving roles of and challenges for today's specialist librarians.

In those and similar articles, the underlying question is "who are we - and who do we want and need to be in future - to our direct clients and employers, to those who may be impacted indirectly by what we do, and to our peers?"  In preparation for another upcoming event, I took the liberty of asking a couple of colleagues for a reality check:  What is the "brand" that comes to mind when you think of my work as an information professional?  (Much to my relief, the answers corresponded to what I had hoped - or half expected, as in the case of the "whirling dervish" part.)

Before we communicate about our services to various stakeholder groups, we may want to establish what perceptions already exist about the function and role we have.  We are likely to find a wide range of impressions depending on the interaction we may have had with any respondent or on the experience he or she may have had with other information professionals - and it would be surprising if some of those impressions didn't differ from what we ourselves thought.  Brands are powerful carriers of connotation for products, services, and organizations - in building ours, we want to make sure it's the "right one".  Are we seen as steadfast partners in success, last-minute miracle workers pulling the impossible out of a hat - or something or everything in between?  Or are we respected but not really relevant?  Yes, the exercise may at first appear to have some tinge of the "how much on a scale from 1 to 10" I always recommend against - but that is handled by focusing on the role, not on ourselves as persons.

Crafting the work related brand we want to have vis a vis our various stakeholder groups is a challenge for many reasons familiar to information professionals.  One of them is the relatively short time frame we have at our disposal - the luxury of nurturing our brands over decades is not available the way it has been, say, for some iconic manufacturers.  For us, it's imperative to work effectively with our clients in ways they find directly beneficial in strategic ways (and yes, it's true we may never have the opportunity to share how much effort was involved in the enabling work we perform in order to deliver stunning results very quickly from time to time).

The catchy theme song in the TV series Crime Scene Investigation is named "Who are you?".  I "hear" it every time I think about how our professional roles are perceived.  We could all benefit from a bit of investigative digging now and then:  We know who we are ... but what brand do we really have - in the eyes of those we strive to serve?

Social Capital: Invest in It

On the evening of March 10, the Toronto Chapter of the Special Libraries Association launched its 2009 Career Development event series (see http://units.sla.org/chapter/ctor/events/default.asp for the events on April 21, September 8, October 6, and November 10).  Our first event dealt with resumes - that brief document with such a huge impact. Judging from the questions raised, I stand confirmed in my belief that a resume is the most difficult document we may ever need to construct.  (At  http://www.sirsidynixinstitute.com/seminar_page.php?sid=96 you may view a public version of the slides.)

During the evening, the concept of social capital came up, reinforcing that it deserves deliberate attention in the context of careers.  Looking back, I see how building social capital paved the way for the evolution of my own career - a key factor was an innate tendency toward assistance to colleagues and association activities over and above the responsibilities of work. Now, I am in a position to advise younger career builders:  "Invest in your social capital - it will pay off, if not tomorrow, then later throughout your working life."

By social capital I mean the reputation we build as we contribute to the communities in which we move professionally and personally and the "brand" or "label" we attach to ourselves through those contributions.  It also involves the "bank account" of trust and rapport we draw on when we need support for an idea or outright help in a specific situation.  We may not think of it as social capital building when we respond to a request with "of course I can do that for you" - but that is the cumulative result.

Here is a sampling of what I tell career builders:

• Sign up:  Offer to perform a task or role in a relevant group or association.  Even better, run for office. Serving in an official capacity looks good on the resume.

• Write up:  Tell the editors of a newsletter / bulletin / blog that you will contribute a piece ... or four.  Summarizing key points from a conference session may be a good beginning ... later, add pieces arising from your own professional pursuits.

• Show up:  Come to the local events put on by your professional associations and engage in speaking to attendees you don't already know.  In so doing you easily broaden your reach and visibility in the community. 

• Link up:  Use the professional tools such as LinkedIn to stay within reach of those who may be needing your skills.

• Pick up:  Consciously endeavor to earn a reputation as someone who picks up the phone, the challenge, the lead.

As those activities accumulate, they earn a rightful place on the resume.  Potential employers may not think "social capital" when they read it, but they do appreciate seeing how, on top of employment achievements, candidates volunteered their skills for the benefit of others. 

I'd like to think I have done for decades as I advise.  But I'm not done yet:  If you feel your resume could use some work, you know where to go:  To the SLA Toronto Chapter Career Committee Chair at ulla@destricker.com.

When Access to Information Specialists Bites the Dust

As an example how elimination of library services is not a rarity, a colleague shared this February 11 article in Editor & Publisher dealing with the upcoming closure of the Wall Street Journal news research library:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003940607

Such an announcement is unhappy news in our profession.  Two snippets stood out for me.

First, as I often get questions dealing with the ROI of information services, I pay attention whenever any measure is ventured.  The librarian is quoted as saying about the reporters' access to various databases that it cannot replace "knowledge about how to research using all the tricks we've learned over the years. We figure that the reporters will probably spend 10 times our compensation trying to do their own research." 

Second, as my work frequently brings up examples of the value of access to information from the more distant past, this quote points to a gap that could prove to be a greater barrier than it may seem: "I'm ... worried about the microfilm. Between where the Proquest historical database leaves off and our PDF archives begins, there is about 10 years where the only physical form of the paper exists on microfilm."  Given typical newsroom deadlines, microfilm may be impractical to use.  I see many illustrations in day to day work how inconvenience in access translates into no access because there simply isn't time.

Information specialists regularly discuss the matter of quality in research and trade examples how their specialized training and experience enable them to dig up nuggets no one else was able to find.  Let's hope, as the WSJ librarian does, that there will be a rehire later this year - for her sake certainly, but mostly for the sake of the reporters.

Creative Class: Me? Yes, You!

At the recent annual Ontario Library Association Superconference I had two key privileges over and above being able to roam though an exhibit hall with hundreds of publishers and information service providers: Chairing a well attended session featuring library technicians who have taken untraditional paths in their careers, and attending celebrated economist Richard Florida's keynote session in which he presented highlights of his work.  The two events were a perfect pair.

At the morning session (see http://www.accessola.com/superconference2009/showSession.php?lsession=400&usession=499 and scroll one page to session 402) the focus was individual:  How does a personal drive to make a difference for stakeholders and clients make a difference in one's career?  Pam Casey, Nanci Abbondanza, and Linda Pauloski engagingly told the stories of how their innate creativeness and desire to "do more" had taken them in career directions they had not envisioned when they obtained their professional credentials. Let me thank those attendees who posed such questions as "if you were 22 now, what would you do?" and in so doing created interesting reflection on the part of the three presenters who made their careers supporting knowledge workers.

In Richard Florida's speech, the focus was societal:  How does personal creativity makes a difference in how communities and economies evolve? (see http://creativeclass.com).  There we were - a huge ballroom full of information professionals - watching a vivid articulation of our economic role:  Though we manufacture no tangible goods and though we perform services unrelated to or somewhat removed from physical objects or processes, we contribute heavily to the economic life of our community.  I found his summary of extensive research fascinating in the way it points for me to the impact of the role of every person whose work is evident in the content of intranets, in the riches of databases, in myriad web based services, in research activities, in the services offered by libraries.

I am such a person, as are you my readers.  At first, we may have thought "creative class" referred to people in the arts or in advertising (etc).  But in fact, we information professionals belong to the groups who, according to Richard Florida's research, feed development in society and economic growth. 

Let us all take his findings to heart and use the supporting evidence in our communications with our stakeholders - as we exercise our own personal creativity.

Where does KM Report? A Montague Institute Member Q&A

Recently, Jean Graef of the Montague Institute (www.montague.com) issued a member Q&A query entitled "KM in the Org Chart" requesting input as to the organizational placement of the KM function within organizations.  She and I had a lengthy conversation as a result, and she did such an excellent job of summarizing my verbal commentary that I obtained her permission to bring her writeup here (slightly adjusted for brevity).  The full summary of responses resides at www.montague.com/abstracts/KMOrgchart.html.

"Stephen Denning is absolutely right:  KM lacks clout (and perhaps also sizzle!).  In the career paths leading senior managers to the position they now hold, they may not have encountered any "Johns Hopkins tragedy" or "good KM husbandry makes billions for company indicents" to cement conviction that it is worthwhile to invest in solid KM practices and due diligence and to enforce and reward them.  Any feeling that "the levees won't break on my watch" is understandable.

It is true that some KM roles evolved out of a corporate information center, but there are instances of business team leaders holding the role.  In the latter case, the credibility factor (he's an engineer like us) is worth watching. My hunch is that a combination of subject matter expertise and information expertise is the way to go ... but that may not be easy to achieve.

The inquiring Montague Institute member was interested in health care organizations - they are probably hard pressed to tie health outcome successes to KM activities and I'm guessing that may be one reason for the interest in the placement of the KM entity (either because it's perceived as a difficult function function to manage or becuase someone is looking to give the function some clout).  Unfortunately, in the view of those of us who work in KM, the activity is awkward to position because it is difficult to see what calamity would result from its absence (whereas no one has any dificulty imagining the consequences of the absence of an accounting department).

After my over 30 years of working in the information/knowledge space, I could point to how concrete pressures (Sarbox'll come and get you if you don't behave) have driven investment in records management, how the cost of litigation has driven email management, and how ediscovery is now the latest flavor of applying technology to the orchestration of activity evidence.  What I'm not seeing as clearly is any improvement in the elusiveness of KM:  What does it "look like" for a knowledge worker to "do good KM"?  How do we demonstrate that good KM is a contributor to corporate success on a par with skill and experience on the part of a professional?

A common refrain among busy professionals (I paraphrase from numerous interactions over the years) is there's no time to use the e-room or wiki or read the alerts; I have trusted contacts to seek out if I need help; I know it sometimes wastes time to be asking around but it still seems the most effective method for me; no KM person can know what my job is and therefore I don't believe any such person can address my work practices ... and so on.  Knowledge workers develop their own methods to get their work done - and this week's deliverables trump any theoretical willingness to participate in e.g. intranet teams and the like.  KM gets pushed off today's table because time runs out."

Do We Know the Cost of Information Imprecision?

I have commented on 'true but incomplete' information in the past.  Here's an example that raises the aspect of cost:  What is the price to be paid when information is unclear and confusing and fails to orient people accurately?

 

 

Having more than three decades of airport navigation under my belt, I take weather delays and the resulting rerouting in stride.  "You need the Service Center, straight ahead" seemed actionable recently in a European airport … but straight ahead turned out to feature a Service Center sign pointing directly into a freight elevator.  To be on the safe side (as opposed to trusting I could just aim in the general direction), I decided to return to the milling gaggle where another employee helpfully added "near gate 35".  A quarter mile later (or so it felt with the carryon luggage I had wisely decided on, knowing the risk of a missed connection), I reached gate 35 and saw nothing but another 'Service Center' sign pointing back the way I had come.  Like a hawk, I circled ... and around two corners stumbled upon a series of counters looking quite service-center-ish.  The lines were packed and an employee told me "the wait isn't as long in the service center downstairs".  That sounded like an option to consider until another triager instructed "you MUST go downstairs for your transfer".  Once down a level, I yet again had to ask a couple of uniformed people in succession in order to find my way (same type of sign pointing to another freight elevator!). 

If the signage designers missed the opportunity to hang a few extra signs near gate 35 and downstairs, employees might have compensated by saying, for example, 'when you get to gate 35 turn right around the coffee stand and then right again into the shopping area and go just past the jewelry store'.  It's an untoward scenario when an airport serving millions of people from all over the world supports the cost of the type of information imprecision I experienced: Adding up the employee time needed to deal multiple times with confused travelers goes only part way.  What about the airlines having to rebook people who miss connections not because of weather but because they are unable to navigate in time?  What about the impact on the travelers themselves?

 

Could it be that information imprecision, vagueness, or ambiguity might cause the organizational equivalent of missed connections and wasted time repeatedly redirecting dazed information seekers?  Airports may not engage mystery travelers to examine the clarity of their signage and the instructions employees give, but I believe most enterprises could benefit from such an investigation:  Just where and how long is the path through the enterprise or intranet maze when someone needs to find something or someone?  How useful is the immediately available information? How often must an inquirer return to an informant for clarification? How much cumulative time is needed to arrive at the correct department, person, or data inventory for proper assistance?

 

 

I want to stress how much I appreciated the employees who helped me in that airport; they were extremely pleasant, courteous, and approachable.  But an extra sign here and there - or, say, a map to hand out showing the location of the service center relative to landmarks like gates and coffee stands - would reduce the need for them to deal with quite so many harried passengers.  Said another way: I'd venture that a one-time investment in information precision (signs, maps) could pay for itself in no time and then eliminate the year-in, year-out cost of making up for its absence.

The Value of "Extra Knowledge"

A recent revisit with classics by Thomas Davenport and Laurence Prusak - if you aren't already a devotee, there is a treat in your future - brought home among many other key takeaways the powerful value of undocumented knowledge.  Here's a daily life illustration:

Someone unfamiliar with winter weather in Copenhagen may check the data and understandably conclude that with Fahrenheit temperatures in the 40s and occasional showers, a light coat and umbrella will do for a visit.  Without the "extra knowledge" from someone who has spent time there, discomfort could result: Ah, that would be insufficient - you need something to protect against the bone chilling dampness, the unrelenting whipping wind, and the miserable sideways rain.  Don't count on your visit to include the few gust-free, dry days Copenhagen gets in January!  We could not expect weather data providers to capture such experiential recommendations systematically.

Vacation packing mistakes are quickly remedied through a visit to a store ... but for organizations working to harness intellectual capital, solutions to challenges involving "clothing up the naked data" are more elusive.  Difficult to capture because it is awkward if not impossible to classify and codify for future access in practical ways, extra or contextual knowledge can nevertheless be worth a fortune in saved time and avoided trouble if it surfaces at the right time.  Just think how often you may have heard statements similar to:

"Where I worked previously, we used that product and found ... "

"Several speakers at the conference I attended last month called to attention how there's more to it than what you read in the literature about ... "

"I hear so many good things about this small company from colleagues in other firms, perhaps we should still  ... "

"Didn't this proposal come up a while back?  If I remember correctly, there was a situation where  ..."

"If you look in the archive, you should be aware that during the fall of that year ... "

"Peter had a workaround for that glitch ..."

"The trick is to use the notes field to hold the ticket numbers, that's how I track how many ... "

"Maybe not the place to hold a meeting that time of year because ... "

Of course, making contextual knowledge surface at the right time and place is a matter of active collegial communication and opportunities for interaction supported by the corporate culture.  I recommend a visit to Amazon for works by Davenport and Prusak - and a quick review of my previous IKM checklist blog entries will provide angles for reading.

"But I thought ... ": Communication styles matter

In the small European country from which I hail, residents of a particular region are known for their extreme conservatism in verbal expression - along the lines of "not shabby, we'll pass it" meaning "superb, truly excellent".  Because the style is well understood by fellow citizens in other parts of the country, it is primarily a source of amusement and jokes.  It is no joking matter, however, when differences in communication styles cause misunderstanding among business teams or between managers and their groups.  I have previously commented about information cultures; they are, of course, accompanied by communication cultures.

Here's a scenario:  A team has just worked weeks of massive overtime to pull off an "impossible" task.  If bonuses aren't in the cards, the exhausted team members look for at least a rousing accolade.  None arrives, and they come away feeling disappointed ... and likely uninclined to put in any such effort again. Over in the corner office, the manager meanwhile is still battling his or her challenges and, while appreciative of the team's delivery, is unaware of the extraordinary effort it took to deliver it.  Two style matters may be at play:  The person delivering the miracle did not go into colorful detail about how hard it was to do the work, and the manager may as yet be unpractised in the art of, and unfamiliar with the power of, praise and appreciation.

Here's another:  A new team member submits a report on time with considerable pride and waits anxiously for some feedback ... unaware that the recipient's style is to take it for granted that submitted reports will be of high quality. (Others know by now that it's great news if no requests for revisions are received.)  It could take some time before the new team member gets over the "what am I, chopped liver?" feeling.

And a third:  A manager brings to the new job a style of communication with the troops that worked well in the previous position but is puzzling to the team members - who don't know quite what to make of it but also don't find a way to bring it up for discussion and clarification.  The manager wonders why the teams don't react as expected and the teams get more perplexed as time goes on.

In such scenarios, we see good intentions but less than ideal outcomes as a result of differences in communication style or assumptions associated with communication.  Just as we work on managing information objects and knowledge, so too does the matter of communication style deserve the attention of information professionals.  It is always wise to pay attention to the ways in which people in an organization express themselves and to seek "local insight" how to interpret their messages.  Such attention is not a large stretch from the skills we apply in the reference interview.

Given the added potential for misinterpretation coming from email and blackberry brevity (a challenge addressed in a previous post) and the lack of time to read documents properly as opposed to frantically skimming them, it's no surprise many books focus on the matter of interpersonal and enterprise communication.  The well known John Gray and Deborah Tannen works come to mind; recently I stumbled on a classic by Tom Rusk entitled "The Power of Ethical Persuasion" whose case studies shed light on how every day brings opportunities for misunderstandig ... or understanding.

The takeaway for IKM professionals:  Let us not asume that our messages are heard and interpreted the way we intended.  Let us not react to messages without considering the background, circumstances, and communication culture.  Better to check "I'd like to make sure I fully understand ..." than to carry around a big question mark.  It's a good idea to make plain to close colleagues the style of how we communicate ("don't misunderstand, if I get agitated it only means I'm excited about an idea" or "if I fall silent, it only means I'm thinking, not that I am unreceptive") - just as we routinely check from time to time with clients and customers to get a sense how they understood or interpreted our latest messages.

But the Locals Know!

On a recent road trip, it struck me how often the provincial and local maps' road number designations did not correlate with physical road signs.  Chalking it up to budgetary constraints hindering the placing of signs, I remembered a phenomenon I call 'but the locals know'.

The map shows we needed to get north onto provincial route 37, transferring in the town of Elmin.  We got to Elmin's major lighted intersection - but no route signs are there.  Ah - a police car happens by and we roll down windows to hear that "route 37, that would be Elmin Shore Road, back 2 blocks to your left".  300 feet down that road, indeed a sign says 'route 37'. 

Later that day, we came to an intersection expecting road number signs.  None to be seen - but I espied by noting their shape the back of such signs kitty corner.  Go straight and make a U turn and so indeed we can see the road number signs.  So ... We believe the locals know ... but they are not sharing their knowledge with non-locals through signs.

Translating road sign experience to organizational work raises many questions.  As an example:  If new people came to do work, would clear road signs be there for them ... or would they have to rely on local knowledge?  Making clear signs and relying on local lore each have a cost - up front or as it happens.  What is the greater cost - making up the sign or dealing with the questions?

As Technology Evolves ... How Do We (Want to) Protect Memory

In my youth, I was a prolific letter writer detailing to family and friends the ins and outs of my studies and work. It was amazing to see the cache of letters my father had collected when I went through his papers in Copenhagen in 2002 - every letter from me since the late 60s up until about 1987 was there, constituting "how I presented to my family". What happened in1987?  Telephone rates from North America to Europe dropped.  When it became possible to go from anxious 3-minute calls to leisurely chats because the per-minute cost fell into a manageable range, there was no further reason to sit at the typewriter.  It never occurred to me to consider any kind of legacy or history aspect - I have told friends tongue in cheek how "historians will be at a loss" as to the details of my work after 1987 ... until the web search tools pick up a different trail about 2004 and on, of course.

Organizations dating from before the web may have a similar experience as they used aging media until the web era. If some evidence of current work in an enterprise is largely contained in, say, documents captured in repositories and featured on its intranet and public website, there are well known methods to keep them.  But what about preserving "how we presented to the public any day in 20XX and how all the underlying discussions fed that look?" The Way Back Machine may not be sufficient.

Questions for information professionals planning organizational vaults to protect memory include:  Beyond legal requirements, what do we want to remember - and what do we want the world to be able to discover about us in the past?  How can we feature the value of what we have kept?  How can we trace the evolution of our presence?  How can we ensure our legacy materials are there to support future research?  How could technology developments affect future access by researchers to our collection?

Let me know what you think!

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 10 of 10

Summation:

In the previous nine posts, I have touched briefly on common components in the overall landscape of information and knowledge management within organizations - and I do hope I have achieved my goal of providing food for thought and discussion.  I'll round out the series with a few observations I have found to be true relative to IKM work no matter what the type, size, and sector of the organization:

• The various ingredients of IKM - tools, systems, practices - share a feature with calcium supplements:  Consumption alone does not yield bone density.  The supplements have to be properly absorbed through measures such as weight bearing exercise.  No matter what we purchase and how much we spend on infrastructure, information gadgets, and content, their presence alone is not a predictor of successful outcomes.  Measures need to be taken to incorporate them properly for the overall benefit of the enterprise organism; said another way, the organizational culture has to be accommodating for IKM initiatives to work well.
• Change is sometimes painful ... but stick it out through the initial hurdles, and what was once difficult becomes the norm.  Just as the runners say, "I'm out here in the rain before dawn because I really, really want to race in the marathon" so all those leading change in IKM practices need to keep the prize before their eyes:  We made the business case, we got going, we're going to stick with it through the challenging early days until we get to where the new is normal (unless, of course, unexpected extrinsic factors suddenly dictate otherwise).
• Maintaining enthusiasm over time for "doing the right things right" through carefully devised strategies and practices is a daunting challenge because day to day reality has a habit of intervening in the best laid plans.  Frequent and regular checkups are necessary to be sure we are still "with the program" adopted a year ago.  Here, too, a health analogy applies - well expressed in the adage "what we do between Christmas and New Year's Day does not matter - what we do between New Year's Day and Christmas does!" 

I welcome reactions and suggestions for future posts from readers - comment here, or send me an email!

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 9 of 10

A Library or Information Center

A note on terminology:  Discussions have gone on for as long as we can remember about the best way to name an organizational unit providing information services.  The concern that "library" would connote dusty books drove a trend toward variants of "knowledge center" - with the occasional anecdotes that employees did not understand the meaning of the new name and mistook it to refer to, say, an employee training center ("oh you mean the library - why didn't you say so?"). The discussion's longevity underscores the never ending need to raise awareness among employees about the services a library / information center offers. 

In choosing an approach to information support for knowledge workers, executives may regard a library or information center as one element in such support; other options exist.  Here are some considerations I have touched on in past articles and presentations:

IF THERE IS NO LIBRARY / INFORMATION CENTER IN THE ORGANIZATION

9a.  Is it known know how knowledge workers are getting the information they need?

9b.  Are the productivity implications of current independent practices known - for example, could the information gathering task be carried out by others while employees focus on interpretation?  (It is possible the subject matter at hand is so specialized that only domain experts are able to research what sources  are "out there" and mine them.) 

9c.  What is said by employees who came from organizations where they could consult with information experts?

IF THERE IS ONE

9d.  Do knowledge workers understand the full range of services offered, and to what degree and for what reasons do they make use of them? 

9e.  How do department managers ensure their team members take advantage of the research expertise in the library? 

9f.  Has an assessment been done to ensure alignment between employee needs and library services and to review library activity emphasis in light of the evolving operational and business environment? 

Next in the series:  Summation

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 8 of 10

The Intranet:  How well does it support employees?

Having evolved into key tools generally taken for granted, intranets could be regarded as indicators of the priority and attention given to IKM.  Here are some typical comments heard when employees talk about the corporate "information shop", reflecting the organization's overall approach:

8a.  The diligence and quality devoted to the public website is reflected in the intranet - it is a welll designed tool that saves me lots of effort and time.  My colleagues and I are motivated to supply suggestions and content to the intranet team.

8b.  I was amazed once I finally discovered what was hidden in the intranet underneath some of the menu options - I wonder if others had the same experience of being confused by what was on the screen.  Now I have bookmarked the good parts so I can get to them easily.

8c.  With rapid growth in the company, the intranet hasn't quite kept pace - it seems the unit responsible for it is preoccupied with other priorities.  Frequently, I don't find what I need and end up asking colleagues for help.

8d.  I don't use the intranet much - it's focused on administrative functions.

And here are some typical comments made by information professionals, again reflecting various approaches to IKM:

8e.  Our active role in the ongoing development and enhancement of the intranet ensures that what we learn from employees about how they experience the intranet is translated into improvements.

8f.  One of our high-value activities is populating the daily news portion of the intranet with key developments employees need to know about - in logical clusters so individuals can zero in on items relevant for them.

8g.  Even though our licensed content is featured on the intranet, we are finding that orientation and "guided tours" are critical in helping employees become aware of the nature of the content.  We do a lot of outreach and offer personal support to ensure the organization gets value out of its investment in content.

8h.  IT policy precludes a button for the information centre on the top page of the intranet - it's not uncommon to hear an employee say he or she never knew the information centre piece existed.

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 7 of 10

Making the business case for new - or old - money

Many colleagues over the years have shared comments to the overall effect of "there is general agreement that it is desirable to do well in the area of information and knowledge management … but there is reluctance to commit significant funds". Such a sentiment is not surprising given how difficult it is to prove a concrete return on investment when expenditures are made for information content, services, or activity. In "Business Cases for Info Pros: Here's Why, Here's How" (http://books.infotoday.com/books/BusinessCasesforInfoPros.shtml) I provide guidelines for constructing the arguments in favor of information related investments - and naturally, I would love to hear from anyone who adopted them! The excerpt shown below (numbered as in the other checklists) illustrates situations where the normal submission instruments used in an organization's budget cycle probably won't cut it:

Some investments - for example, replacing aging or failing technical infrastructure - justify themselves because the negative consequences of not investing are obvious. Whenever something new is contemplated that is not in the category of "must do - or else", business case documents are called for. These generic examples reflect common organizational scenarios familiar to information professionals:

7a. Due to a significant number of employees taking early retirement, there is a shortage of corporate memory. Business teams have found themselves repeating earlier work because lessons learned from previous efforts were not identified in a timely manner. We need a strategy and a tool or system for capturing key information objects produced in the course of the organization's work.

7b. Due to the fact that the organization's business teams are spread over multiple locations or different floors, the teams sometimes arrive independently at similar project ideas and miss out on potential synergy. We need a reliable mechanism for ensuring each team knows what the others are planning - without adding to the information overload everyone is already experiencing.

7c. Over time, as reliance on email and rapid electronic exchange of document drafts has grown, proliferation of files has become a major problem. Thousands of files crowd shared drives, and there are loud complaints that "we can't find the documents we need - and if we do find a document, we can't be sure it is the final official version". Everyone's time is wasted as individuals send out blanket "does anyone have a copy of" requests. We need a policy and a convenient repository where official copies of non-trivial documents are safeguarded and searchable.

7d. The Intranet was simple and easy to navigate when it was first rolled out years ago. By now, it is widely regarded as a frustrating experience because its original structure has been compromised through ad hoc development.  We need a complete redesign - with a view to sustainability of structure.

7e. The customer service agents are without a "bible" of official information they can give to customers with confidence. As a result, each customer interaction takes much longer than it ought to take, and the agents are saying they don't feel certain they are giving out the best information. We need a central database of "correct answers" for the agents to consult as they deal with callers - along with a mechanism for updating it when new information becomes available or when agents discover new, useful insights.

7f.  As the organization's business emphasis has shifted and as new end user oriented tools are readily available on the internet, a new assessment is needed as to what information should be purchased and licensed. We need an audit of the current practices and of knowledge workers' actual needs so that we may plan and fund an appropriate information support strategy.

But ... could full blown business cases be necessary even when the request is "only" for an additional position or part time assistance -- or indeed for NOT reducing the budget for information related activity? Most certainly. Giving decision makers insight into the reasons for and benefits of investment is a business requirement - and the process of preparing a business case offers an opportunity to think in business terms about every activity currently being funded (for example, could existing budgets be shifted from current to new efforts?).

Next in the series: The Intranet

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 6 of 10

Records

How are we doing when it comes to managing the physical and virtual embodiments of our organizations' activities - to meet legal and compliance requirements as well as to meet the need for preserving access to corporate memory?  And who is in charge?  With increasing awareness of the risks associated with inadequate records programs, the professional domain of Records Management is deservedly receiving heightened attention.  Wikipedia describes records management as "the practice of identifying, classifying, archiving, preserving, and destroying records".  (I hope "preserving" includes the concept of ensuring future generations' access to materials even though they may be "too old" for the law to mandate their retention - but that's another subject.)  Here are some questions all organizations would want to answer with a resounding yes:

6a.  Is there a formal policy to guide how records are dealt with?  Is it updated as technology advances to create new challenges?

6b.  Are employees generally aware of the fundamental records management and retention requirements applicable to the organization? 

6c.  Do employees understand the definitions of what constitutes a record among the many types of information objects they typically handle - and the lifecycle of those records?  Are employees' workspaces free of files that are also held centrally?  Do employees know what types of information objects should not be retained? 

6d.  Is records management a key topic in new-hire inductions?

6e.  Is a Certified Records Manager in charge of the records policy and program - even if the organization does not employ a full time CRM?

6f.  Is an analysis carried out periodically to assess the requirements and future options for records management, given the organization's evolution?

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 5 of 10

Do we pass the test for "quality content" in emails?

Given the reliance we have on the email tool and how much corporate memory is tied up in messages, it can be thought provoking to step back for a moment and consider the quality of the content we entrust to it.  Aside from quick text messages and email exchanges with trusted colleagues - where we assume the margin of forgiveness is wide - are there risks associated with our emails?  Plenty, as the many articles about email etiquette illustrate - and we may be grateful that it has become the cultural norm to give an email writer the benefit of the doubt.  Consider:

5a.  On the naked screen, brevity may appear brusque - but lack of brevity may hinder reading and understanding.  It could be a good idea to include as a matter of course "call me if you would like me to fill in more background" or something to that effect.

5b.  Long chains of previous  mail soon become very difficult to follow - and much good intentioned content may be effectively lost.  A concise summary of previous commentary would be a courtesy to readers - though admittedly potentially time consuming to prepare.

5c.  Given the lack of control over a message's further life, are we confident its content will stand up to unintended distribution?  (As it's sometimes said, "let's not put in an email anything we wouldn't want to see on the front page of the national newspaper with our names attached".)

5d.  Is there sufficient context that the thrust of a message will still be clear months from now - in other words, could the lack thereof lead to misunderstanding down the road?  (As in, "Yes but that comment was made before it was known how …")

5e.  Do we take the time to edit our messages for clarity and logical flow?  The "best" element in a message may not have occurred to me until I was almost finished … by not pausing to reconsider how to take the reader along my thought path, I could make it much harder for him or her to follow along.  If the less important items clog the first screen and my golden nuggets are hidden at the end … it wouldn't be surprising if the reader got an impression different from the one I wanted to convey.

5f.  Do we take advantage of the opportunity not to commit an exchange to email?  "Your message gave me much to think about and I wonder if we could discuss the matter over a coffee" may be the wisest and most productive reply!

5g.  If time doesn't permit a thought-through reply, do we ensure senders that there will be one later?  Letting someone know when to expect a response is common courtesy, and it relieves the sender of any concern "Did the message not get through?  Why am I not hearing back?

Next in the series:  Records

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 4 of 10

Email Management (You knew this was coming!)

We can't function without it - but we sometimes dread looking at the inbox. It's a fast and efficient communication vehicle - but we have discovered it gobbles up hours in the day.  We know better - but many of us admit to using our email folders as a personal information management tool (ouch).  So how should we and the organizations we serve deal rationally with email?  Here are several potential statements typical employees could make; their implications are food for thought for IKM personnel and all email users alike:

4a.  Because so much of the deliberation leading to a decision is traceable only through email exchanges, it is effectively lost to the organization.  In other words, it will be difficult in future to discover "what were we thinking?"

4b.  My sent mail folder works as a safety net:  When I can't find a document on the shared drive, I can usually remember approximately when I sent it to a colleague and find it that way - assuming the message in question is not so old that it has been archived by IT.

4c.  Ideally, messages ought to be grouped logically by topic - but I haven't had the opportunity to set up a good folder system for myself.  As a result, I spend a lot of time searching through past mail.

4d.  There is a departmental folder structure everyone adheres to for certain types of mail; in addition of course we each set up personal folders to reflect our individual jobs.  We have access to an expert who advises individual employees on managing email.

4e.  To keep the inbox manageable, I place all non-urgent informational email in a "reading" folder - only it seems I never get to it!

4f.  I have noticed several articles on 'email etiquette' with good advice on practices and pitfalls in email management.  If we all remembered just a few of the tips - for example, "ensure the subject line clearly states the topic and the desired action" - we might do each other a great favor.

4g.  Our collective approach to email would be a good topic for our lunch-and-learn series - so many of us are expressing frustration and looking for techniques to master the monster.

Next in the series:  Do we pass the test for "good writing" in emails?

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 3 of 10

Current Awareness:  Here, "current awareness" refers to the act of ensuring one becomes aware of appropriate topical and industry events, publications, legislation, news, debate, and so on in a timely manner so as to react to them or otherwise incorporate them into one's work.

If they do it themselves, how well - and through what means - do knowledge workers ensure they stay abreast of relevant developments in their field - without getting inundated by and wasting time on irrelevant or duplicated information?  If it's done for them, how successful is the program? 

3a.  Employees are keenly aware of the need to stay abreast of developments and put effort into maintaining a personal lineup of sources to monitor and/or news "feeds" to receive.

3b. The culture supports free subscriptions to many web based newsletters, blogs, and the like - and the time to review the incoming notifications is regarded as a necessary part of staying sharp.

3c. The information centre or a similar entity offers a customized service to establish, manage, and periodically review a set of current awareness sources - including ones that aren't free.

3d. The information centre, the communications group, or a similar entity monitors the media and posts a daily intranet collection of items of general interest to everyone ("what you need to hear about today").

3e. Employees sometimes comment how they are uncertain they 'get it all' and feel uncomfortable when they are caught unaware of a relevant development.

3f. Employees indicate their current awareness mechanism is irregular, deriving in some cases from conversations with colleagues.

3g. Some say that although they do not subscribe to many sources, they still feel they catch the important items.

3h. Employees find it time consuming to look at their burgeoning inboxes and end up deleting many notifications unread.

3i. Personal preferences vary from "I want it all to come in email (or I'll never find the time to look)" to "I'd prefer a central news forum where I can go browse if I have the time (and yes, I may rarely find the time)" - so any organizational effort to support current awareness must necessarily cater accordingly.

Next in the series:  Email

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 2 of 10

Corporate Memory:  How easy is it to find out what we know?

How accurately do the statements below describe the organizational entities in which we work?  The statements illustrate typical circumstances in typical workplaces; no value judgment is implied. My purpose is to invite examination of the practices we follow - with the goal of identifying information and knowledge related opportunities.

2a. Employees manage the information objects (documents, presentations, bookmarks, emails, etc) they need in personal files according to organizing principles they find intuitive.

2b. There is a central repository or document management system housing the department's files, routinely used by everyone.

2c. The entity is small enough and/or the external contacts are so well defined that everyone knows "who to go to" when there are questions.

2d. A directory or similar tool tracks who is in charge of what subjects or projects so it is straightforward for a new team member to identify the best person to approach.

2e. There are formal mechanisms for sharing information (for example, at staff meetings or through tools such as wikis) or informal channels through which information flows naturally.

2f.  When an employee retires or leaves, a procedure ensures information handover to any successor.

2g. Additional mechanisms for protecting corporate memory include ...

Next in the series: Current Awareness

An IKM Awareness Checklist: Part 1 of 10

Best Practices? No.  Awareness? Yes.

In his post http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2008/08/05.html#a2212 well-known Dave Pollard offered a thought provoking inventory of "12 tools that will soon go the way of fax and CDs".  Dave has this to say about item 3, the elusive "tool" known as Best Practices:  It's natural that people want to hear what the leading companies and individuals in any area of business endeavour are doing, but the sad truth is that most "best practices" are so devoid of context, of the knowledge and history that explains why they are so effective, that they essentially become unactionable.

Indeed each organization - in fact each department within it, whether by way of geography or function - is a unique mix of purpose, history, resources, individual approaches, and many similar factors.  It is impossible to generalize how an enterprise unit ought to go about information and knowledge management (IKM). What is possible is to gauge the level of awareness among managers and team members as to the suitability of the practices being followed now or potential new practices to be followed in future.

Over the years, I have used many questions to shed light on the approach an organization takes to IKM.  In this and the next nine posts, I illustrate the nature of such questions in hopes they may help readers who are interested in the attention paid to the way knowledge workers go about IKM.  There is no implication that a "correct" answer exists - the intention is strictly to encourage conscious assessment of actions habitually taken (or not).

IKM Awareness Checklist 1 of 10:  Policy

1a. Is there a Chief Knowledge Officer or similar position with central responsibility for IKM polices and practices - or is ownership (with funding) decentralized to the local level?

1b. Are there documented procedures to follow for finding and storing information - or do individuals follow personal practices tailored to their own work?

1c. Are new employees given training in the appropriate inhouse or external resources, search methods, and tools such as document management systems - or is there a mentoring function to handle that aspect of each job?  Is it assumed that new team members are already well versed due to previous experience - or does the department take in new hires fresh from formal education?

1d. Is an overall assessment of IKM practices undertaken from time to time - or are such practices considered in evaluations of departmental or individual performance? 

1e. Do position descriptions specifically mention expectations as to research and communication - or is it implicit that knowledge workers are assumed to perform professionally in that regard?

Next in the series: Corporate Memory

Knowledgement ... now why didn't I think of that?

When a colleague used the word "knowledgement" as a shorthand expression, it struck me as a very clever coinage, and with his permission I sing the praises of the usage - given the difficulty we have had for years with the phrase "knowledge management" in at least two ways: First, we all interpret it slightly differently based on the circumstances at hand, and a precise definition has eluded us.  Second, it has been said that since knowledge cannot be managed, the phrase is illogical.

The Urban Dictionary defines knowledgement as understanding or insight, and there is a body of writing featuring "manage knowledgement" (see as an example http://www.workliteracy.com/knowledge-management-and-manage-knowledgement or google the phrase).  I perceive a different potential definition:

"Knowledgement" avoids the conundrum of "can knowledge be managed?" by not pretending there is any management afoot.  Instead, the echo of "acknowledgement" suggests its meaning could simply be "a recognition of the need for dealing appropriately with knowledge".  To me, that plain definition reflects a pragmatic and realistic approach to the challenges associated with getting, storing, finding, and using knowledge - on the floor.  No rarefied theories - just a reference to a straightforward and shared mindset:  We are all responsible for treating knowledge correctly in the organizations we serve.  Leaders are responsible for making that activity a priority, and all team members are responsible for the undertakings to support it.

In the past, I have used the description "good information husbandry" … but "good knowledgement" is a tad sleeker, don't you think?

But for the want of accurate or updated information ...

Recently, I heard two fascinating (read scary) anecdotes how manufacturing companies had to invest vast quantities of man hours - and suffer the resulting customer perception damage - in reproducing or repackaging product ... not because of external calamity but merely because a key information item was left out of instructions or because an outdated manual was referred to in the absence of awareness a newer one was available.

Yes, documentation and procedure manuals are a challenge: Difficult to prepare, never mind keep up to date (e.g. because on-the-floor changes in procedure or customer input may not have a means of being communicated to the documentalists reliably), they are sometimes just as difficult for employees to consult conveniently.  The impact may be "limited" to needless expense in extra work, delayed shipments, and the like ... but consider that in some cases, public and personal safety could be involved as well.

In the anecdotes, significant losses ensued from something as simple as the lack of a business process documentalist and/or the necessary rigor in (1) keeping process manuals accurate and up to date and (2) making it easy and unavoidable for employees to consult them.  My experience tells me such a scenario is sadly common - in private and public sectors alike.  The question as always is: How can we promote the understanding and the organizational culture that investment in good information practice and culture pays off ... if not now, then at some point in the future?

"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 Time Waste

The crushing burden of information seeking and 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 information supply is a daunting challenge - get information professionals 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".

Information vs. Meaning: Mining the information in public sources

British publisher Infonortics' recently released Stephen E. Arnold opus, Google Version 2.0:  The Calculating Predator, is a shining example how information becomes meaningful when an analytical mind goes about linking individual, discrete items for potential predictive value.  In the thorough and extensive report (see www.arnoldit.com and www.infonortics.com), Stephen points to the content of patents held (under unassuming titles as is common with patents) by Google employees, their technical papers posted on the net, and their prior work history, making the case that Google is "interested" in certain kinds of technology and applications going way beyond search and advertising.  The suggestion is that before long, our lives will be Googlified through and through, Google having a leading role in many of the tools and functions we take for granted in day to day activities.

Stephen invested 2 years of digging and analysis to create the report - which seems quick, given the sheer weight of detail and knowledge he serves up. His pursuit of dots to connect, coupled with his unique expertise in esoteric computational technology, has yielded a fascinating glimpse into the directions Google might go in its next ventures ... amounting to a reminder that appearance can indeed mislead. As Stephen notes, he can't prove that his conclusions are correct - but the evidence he brings is sure compelling that Google is much more than a funky search company.  We shall see, in due course.

The opus would make superb required reading in Business and Competitive Intelligence courses under the topic of mining the gold in public information sources.  (As for the fact that deep expertise may be required to make sense of what is mined ... that is of course another matter!)

Do people in fact prefer to get information from a trusted person rather than from a database?

During a discussion about "information habits" I recently heard a comment that in some organizational cultures, obtaining information from a trusted colleague is preferred over obtaining it from an impersonal source - regardless how authoritative that impersonal source may be.  Reflecting on the popularity of story telling as a topic at conferences, I considered the comfort there is in hearing information from someone we consider to be an expert and someone we know would not go with less than solid information:  "If Anna relies on that number, so can I". What is the implication for information professionals?

Hearing information live from a trusted colleague offers the opportunity to ask questions or probe for more detail - something we can't do in front of a list of search results.  Moreover, when we don't personally know the reputations of authors of particular items ... how can we avoid the experience of pointing to a document only to be told by a subject matter expert, "that author is known to hold some unusual views"?

Of course, there's the experiential factor.  Sure, in preparing for the upcoming conference in London, I could have found out on the relevant website about the tube's recent innovation, the refillable Oyster card ... it was a lot faster and more enjoyable to hear it straight from my niece, complete with her own personal tips.  It is understandable that knowledge workers seek each other out.

The trick for those who work in supplying information to knowledge workers is to work both avenues.  If the right information lands on the right desks at the right time ... we may hope the owners will eventually talk to each other.  But it is essential that we act as 'people connectors', linking one person with another who can take the role of trusted colleague.  In both ways, we will then be part of the 'oral culture' in a manner consistent with our professional practice.

80s eyeglasses? The unthinkable is suddenly thinkable

Imagine, those cover-half-the-face eyeglass frames we used to wear in the 80s are once again seen in trend setting fashion circles.  (Is the fad of the wide temples, cutting off peripheral vision, over so soon?)  Hm, let's not forget that the larger the frame, the better it handles progressive lenses with triple corrections ... how's that for a consideration we never had back then!

The unthinkable becoming thinkable may take us by surprise now and then.  But it shouldn't.  In fashion, as in our work lives, we are prepared for the darndest things when it comes to new work practices on the part of our clients, new expectations in terms of how we communicate with them, new demands for corporate strategies in knowledge support, and so on.  My recent re-reading of Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point reinforced for me the need for us to be constantly on the alert for small and subtle signs how things are changing - so that we may be ready, turning on a dime, to work with clients whose work styles have evolved or are evolving to be very different from what we were accustomed to in the past.  Then again: Certainly we are prepared to accommodate "thumb generation" preferences for dealing with information through evolving always-on mobile tools - but what do we then make of articles written by Gen-X/Yers who cut themselves off from 24/7 connectivity, at least for a time, in an effort to preserve sanity?  Old fashioned information packages in print to be read at leisure, anyone? 

As time rolls on, our profession is learning that multiple and sometimes opposite changes happen quickly.  We roll on too, and embrace the old and the new, and the old as the new, as the case may be.  Perhaps we'll even need to go get a pair of eyeglass frames we swore we'd never go near again ... just so it's clear we are NOT stuck in the past!

Infovores and Selectovores

In keeping clients aware of relevant new developments, be that through lists of new articles or summaries of news, a special challenge is tuning the periodic alerts and heads-ups not just to the topic at hand but also to the recipient's "appetite".  Years ago, I wrote an article for SEARCHER magazine entitled "Keep Me Posted - But Not Too Much" commenting on the dilemma clients see between wanting to be comprehensively abreast of their fields and avoiding overload.  When we instigate a flow of current awareness information for clients, it is essential that we gauge their preferred style of consumption ... are they "infovores" who prefer to glance at 50 items to select the 3 they care about because they do not want to lose out on serendipity, or are they "selectovores" who are content with a more limited number of items to look through, relying perhaps on supplementary means of being made aware of key new developments?  It is important to ask up front:  "If it's between getting too many hits so you have to scan through many items yourself, or getting too few so you might miss a potentially relevant item ... where do you lean? Do you want a daily email, or should I batch the news?"

Time will tell if the client begins to lean differently from the original answer.  One helpful value-added service is to categorize the hits in a set of alert results:  Of the 15 items on the global market for product category X, these 5 focus on consumer research, these 7 point to trade statistics, and these 3 discuss tariffs.  Such groupings walk the line between wholesale forwarding of hits and stepping in to judge on the client's behalf what should be deleted, and help clients formulate their modification requests ("the trade statistics items are the most useful for me while tariff items can be placed at the end"). As always, appropriate ongoing follow up with clients is paramount.

Hip - Hirable - both?

HIP: We all know the information profession needs modern-day entrants and practitioners.  So it was good to see the article in The New York Times' Fashion & Style Section on 8 July 2007 entitled "A hipper crowd of shushers" extolling just how hip today's librarians are.  It is encouraging that the life style article appeals to new professionals. We need them, and the article's focus on how the profession of librarianship has gone from "shh" to "cool" painted an encouraging picture.

HIRABLE: Ideally, I would like for any CEO reading the article to think, "I'd better hire some of those!". That angle was not the article's focus, but I was reminded that we always need to answer the question:  Sure we can be hip, but can we also be in business demand because we deliver business value?

The trick, of course, is to be hip and hirable. Perhaps that could be restated as "know the impact you want to make".

 

It's never too soon to add a librarian

Recently, a colleague gave me an opportunity to reply to a favorite question: "How should I advise the owner of a startup company about information support?" Here's a synopsis of the typical scenario I shared with her, having encountered variations on the theme over many years: 

Among individuals in a small team working closely together, communication is immediate and corporate memory is fresh and readily available, just as physical information objects are but a door knock away from anyone else ("sure, I have that report right here").  As the team grows and the volume of accumulated documentation does too, signs begin to appear that information objects - physical or virtual - present a challenge. ("Who has a copy of ... ?  Where is the market study we purchased last month?  Which of these versions of the project report is the official one?") People discover they are spending unjustifiable amounts of time hunting for documents and presentations; the volume of material held in shared drives or intranet collections proliferates past the point of utility; and "we can't find things" becomes a common complaint.  It gets worse when work is repeated or unnecessary work is done because the memory and evidence of previous relevant efforts can't be found.  When management begins looking for a solution, it is often discovered how complex a task it is to address the accumulated backlog of information and at the same time put in place appropriate information related practices for the future.

It's never too soon to plan for the safeguarding and permanent future accessibility of the knowledge invested and developed as the organization grows.  And there's a bonus: In addition to their expertise in information and knowledge management, information professionals offer a wide range of skills highly relevant for any entrepreneurial venture.

Conference season is upon us ...

Large numbers of information professionals are heading off to conferences during the summer - yours truly included.  For those "just" attending - I use quotation marks because attending a conference's many sessions, visiting exhibitors, and seeing to the social networks is serious work! - the conference is likely a welcome annual professional highlight; for those who have worked on committees in the association in question, it is an opportunity to see the entire year's efforts come to fruition.

This is my moment to encourage anyone who may be considering volunteering in the appropriate association ... don't hold back!  Every association needs willing hands to make events happen, get out the newsletter, take care of the website and blogs, and scout for members deserving of special recognition ... not to mention stand for election to the board of directors!  There is a need for every volunteer ... and do consider that association roles and positions look good on a resume!

Professional associations are an invaluable source of collegial support and inspiration - in fact, many say the # 1 reason they are members is the networking benefit.  But associations don't run themselves.  Of course, many may hesitate to add commitments to already crowded schedules ... that is understandable ... yet let's keep in mind that active participation is an investment in ourselves and our careers.

Not sure what role is most appropriate for you?  Call me - we'll talk. 

Pattern vigilance

Hm, I'm not hearing from John in response to my email.   Hm, Julia is surprised I don't know the information she says she emailed me yesterday.

It was subtle - and dismissible as a glitch - at first, but over more than a week, the evidence began to mount: Some emails sent to me were disappearing into thin air without bouncebacks to the senders. My technical support contractor worked hard to get to the bottom of it - but we will never know how and why a number of my regular correspondents' messages were suddenly deemed spam.

The episode made me wonder ... how often in our work do we see a small divergence from patterns and let it go as just an exception?  How much evidence do we need before we see a problem?  What are the thresholds by which we determine when to say "I've been noticing"?

The bottom line is vigilance.  Deviations from current patterns may be legitimate alterations in organizational procedures ... but it never hurts to ask, "Hm, why?"

Jargon Cleanup: Communicating to non-insiders

A spa has recently opened in my neighborhood. I went in to get a price list and was impressed (I could use some of these services) and disappointed (I don't understand what some of the services are).  I guess what "St. Tropez" is about, but within the categories in the brochure, I am lost as to what some of the spa jargon might mean.  Not to worry, Google later tells me.  But still:  Would a well established business not want to appeal to a new clientele unfamiliar with the 'insider' words?

The Spa brochure - intended as a sales tool but speaking mostly to the initiated - reminded me how much attention we need to pay to the way we communicate with our own clients.  Just as I am going back to the spa counter to tell the owner that the brochure is not fully informative for new clients, so I remind everyone in the information profession to be mindful of jargon and constantly ask "will non-insiders know what we mean?" 

It looked like a good idea ... at the time!

I was reminded how often we find ourselves asking "now why did we (they) do that?" when out of the blue came an email: "Do you have documentation on the process for recording a decision?  It's needed for a workshop tomorrow and here's what I have so far."  My colleague and I proceeded to exchange messages and in minutes crafted a brief list of questions that, in its very simplicity, seems to call out:  If only we always documented how we made a decision, we wouldn't find ourselves in those corporate memory fixes!"  With thanks to Jackie for prodding me, here is an abbreviated version of the list:

1. What situation, event, problem, or opportunity gave rise to the need for a decision?  Is it a one-time circumstance, or one likely to recur so that we need to consider a policy?

2. Who "owns" the responsibility for making the decision?  Who has relevant input?

3. What is the goal - what are we trying to achieve or avoid? (In part the inverse of 1.)

4. How is the decision process structured, and how much room is there for departing from it?

5. What data, input, background (etc) was available and considered at the time of the decision? (This is critical to avoid the risk of hindsight casting a decision in untoward light.)

6.  What are the options in addition to doing nothing?

7. What extrinsic factors come into play?  ("While options A, B, and C all have intrinsic merit, B was chosen because security is the top priority.")

8. Was the decision near unanimous, or contentious?  (No names are needed, but it's helpful later to understand whether there were doubts.)

9. If the decision involves implementation of any kind, who has responsibility for it?  What process is in place to ensure it moves forward?  What happens if implementation stalls?

10. Shall we "check back" later and measure whether the decision was a good one? When and how?

In times of rapid employee turnover, this simple "template" for capturing "what we were thinking" can be a powerful tool ... if it's consistently used!

 

Librarians are keepers, right?

The Globe and Mail's 10 February 2007 Focus Section features an Ian Brown piece entitled "The urge to purge" dealing with the challenges of all the "stuff" we accumulate - especially books.  From personal collections his article's focus moves on to library holdings, and he comments how among North American public libraries, there is a trend to get rid of whatever hasn't been used in a certain amount of time. Professor Dilevko of the University of Toronto's Faculty of Information Studies is quoted: "When only the most popular books are found on library shelves, the intellectual choices available to patrons shrink and become standardized."  Unfortunately, funding models and space constraints can and do lead to popularity-driven weeding policies that effectively push out great, time-honored authors in favor of current commercial sucesses.

The article does not mention the ongoing legal wrangles over a certain large scale book digitization initiative, but I imagine my fellow librarian readers joined me in pondering the benefits of efforts to preserve electronic access, for all time, for everyone, to all our published heritage - and in wondering why the controversy can't be resoved to everyone's satisfaction.  But that's another story altogether!

By the way: Did you know Toronto's public library system is the "biggest circulating library in North America"?  Hm!!