A University and its Library

Stephen TownDirector of Information

University of York

The future …

The questions posed …• Context

– HE Funding– Globalisation– Technology

• Repositories• Digitisation & use

– Customer base• Business & Industry

• Library• Provision decisions• Promotion• Value (of resources)• Proof of worth

– Developing services for• Researchers

– Literature evaluation– Bibliometrics

• Teachers– Information literacy

• Students– Basic academic skills– Plagiarism

Summary

• HE Context• University Context, based on York• The University Library• Strategy, Quality & Value• Changing stakeholder needs– Current issues & service developments

UK AND GLOBAL HE CONTEXT

English Funding Context

A LOCAL UNIVERSITY CONTEXTThe University of York

• Founded 1963• UK top 15; RAE 8th; World

103rd; Russell Group; WUN• 15,265 students• >30 departments in

humanities, social sciences, science

• Campus growth– Heslington East

• Collegiate and inclusive

The University of York

The University Plan

• Excellence• Internationalisation• Inclusivity• Sustainability

University of York Distinctiveness

• Excellence• Growth … but preservation of community• Global focus and reputation• Commitment to partnerships• Commitment to the locality and region• Making significant & increasing investments in

information systems & services• Unique and distinctive academic foci and

related collections

THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

• > 1m items• >120 staff• Archives extensive &

unique• Developing digital library

expertise• Director of Library &

Archives 2007; Director of Information 2009

• Part of a broader Information Directorate

The University Library

Branch Libraries & beyond

• York Minster: the oldest and largest Cathedral Library in the country– Operated under a unique

partnership between the Dean & Chapter and the University of York

• King’s Manor Library• Associations with

– The Railway museum– Yorkshire Country House

partnership– York Museums Trust

• Directorate bringing together Library & IT with some merged services

• Aims:– Support the Director in

strategy fulfilment– Ability to offer joined up

services, particularly in new user facilities

– Better structured to deliver University Information Strategy

Information Directorate

Library Finance• Staff (50%)– Numbers 150; 100 fte– Cost £3.8m

• Content (40%)– Books £0.6m (up through new fees)

– Serials £2.3m (static)

• Other expenditure (10%) £0.4m• Income (£0.4m), capital (£25m+) & new fees (£0.7m)

Governance structure

Senior Management Structure

STRATEGY, QUALITY & VALUEPerformance

Strategy Triangle (Earl)

• Top Down– Senior management & Business

• ‘Inside out’– Staff & technical creativity

• Bottom Up– User views

Information Strategy 2008-13

• Core programmes– Information systems– Portals & access– Content– Infrastructure– Policy & process– Learning spaces

• Enabling programmes– Relationships– Quality– Staff & culture– Resourcing– Collaboration &

partnerships

Major Achievements

Major Achievements

Digital Library

Academic collaboration

Marketing: Annual Report

Marketing: Library Website

Marketing: Twitter Feed

Marketing: Branding

Marketing: Branding

Marketing: Branding

Marketing: Murder!

How we build Library Value?• Library relational capital– within and beyond the University

• Library tangible & intangible capital– including Human capital development

• Library virtue– contribution to transcendent outcomes

• Library momentum– quality maturity and pace of change

Client judgement

Content Strategy• Academic repositories• Digitisation– Resources– Service– Backfiles

• Embedding into learning• Key texts• Modern media capability

Content decision making• Complex– No longer departmental alone– Proliferation of possible investments– Licensing

• Still largely historic– Financial pressure dictates ‘one in, one out’ approach

• Value– Little realistic ROI measurement– Cost per use a factor

Cost and Value

“focusing on cost without being able to demonstrate [service] value and quality … leaves the initiative to people whose chief concern is cost-control or profit: the funders and the vendors”

Whitehall, T (1995)

Quality & Data collection

• Quality assurance• Peer review & benchmarking• Performance indicators– SCONUL statistics– Balanced scorecard

• Quality culture– User satisfaction measures & surveys

Library Survey QuestionsAffect of Service• AS-1 Library staff who instill confidence in users• AS-2 Giving users individual attention• AS-3 Library staff who are consistently courteous• AS-4 Readiness to respond to users’ enquiries• AS-5 Library staff who have the knowledge to answer user

questions• AS-6 Library staff who deal with users in a caring fashion• AS-7 Library staff who understand the needs of their users• AS-8 Willingness to help users• AS-9 Dependability in handling users’ service problems

Library Survey QuestionsLibrary as Place• LP-1 Library space that inspires study and

learning• LP-2 Quiet space for individual work• LP-3 A comfortable and inviting location• LP-4 A haven for study, learning, or research• LP-5 Space for group learning and group study

Library Survey QuestionsInformation Control• IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office• IC-2 A library Web site enabling me to locate information on my own• IC-3 The printed library materials I need for my work• IC-4 The electronic information resources I need• IC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed information• IC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my own• IC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent use• IC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work

Survey trends

LibQUAL+ 2011: all Library users

2012: Overall Results

2012: Economics

2012: Education

2012: Law

2012: Management

2012: Politics

2012: Sociology

2012: Social Policy & Social Work

Library Survey: E-resource comments• The more books available electronically, the better, though being able to

make copies of key texts at a reasonable price is a decent alternative.

• For York Science Park residents it would be ideal if we could offer them access to all Library services and electronic journals. It would be fantastic if this could be offered as part of the value of being on the science park and involved with the University of York.

• The things that matter by far the most to me in my research work are electronic access to journal articles and a good ILL service.

• I use the electronic access facilities extensively - often to access publishers web sites via Shibbolith login

Library Survey: E-resource comments• The personal service is great, however i would like to see more electronic

sources (especially key texts) and a more consistent web-search service

• The system of accessing online journals and electronic resources from the library website is too long and complicated. I don't want the library website to be opening several tabs to reach one page, it would be good if this could be made neater.

• Electronic access to journals is by far the most important service for me.

• Electronic resources (particularly the ability to access PDF journals from my campus accommodation or from home) are very important to me. I really appreciate the ability to get certain books online.

Social Science cluster issues• Data sets demand; costs prohibitive• Advice and support for data management– Content very different across disciplines– National vs local options

• Interdisciplinary – Inter-institutional partnerships eg DTCs– Journals cross-department– Journal cost sharing?

CHANGING STAKEHOLDER NEEDSCurrent issues & service developments

The Future …

• of research• of the university• of the research library• of scholarly communication

ARL Scenarios 2030• What values are

assumed in the scenarios?

• How does this link to value?

• What is the resulting library value proposition?

Scenario 1: Research Entrepreneurs

• Competition and outsourcing

• Information value high

• Personality cult relationships

• Linking stores and discovery

Scenario 2: Reuse and Recycle

• Collaboration• Information value

low• Relationships

across groups• Research

management and professional training

Scenario 3: Disciplines in Charge

• Specialised Universities

• Data stores high value• Political skills valued• Research information

decoupled & disaggregated

Scenario 4: Global Followers

• End of Western hegemony

• IP looser?• Relations with East

critical• Global communal

library?

Academic virtue cycle

“We encourage reading, because people who read more write more, people who write more get cited more, and people who get cited more get more grants, and reputation for themselves and the University”

But …• “Needs are endless…” (Thorhauge, 2010)• The journal article is now not the only answer

to scientific communication• The academic journal could be seen as

meaningless in the e-environment if no longer freighted with reputation

• Publishing adds value, but a large component of this value is provided by Universities themselves

Key Research developments

• Research support inconsistent• Research management systems not in place• Research Information Systems for– Publications (Repositories)– REF evidence eg PURE

• Research services for– Open Access– Research Data Management

Other areas to “catch up”

• Infrastructure especially wifi provision• End user training and awareness to unleash benefits• Quality of content to attract staff and research income• Communication & colllaboration tools• Investment in the website• Reporting from business systems (e.g. Agresso, SITS)• Supporting core business in learning and teaching• Student recruitment and marketing using online tools

Information Services SWOTStrengths

• Building / Physical Space• Creativity and Collaboration• Embedding Academic Liaison into departments• Partnerships and Collaborations

Weaknesses

• Celebration/Communication of achievements• Patchy engagement with student bodies• Links with planning (MTP/LTP)• Fragmentation with staff in different office buildings

Information Services SWOTOpportunities

• Student experience funding• New forums for engagement - Academic Co-ordinators, GSA Forum,

Student/staff liaison groups• Membership of RLUK

Threats• Above inflation increases in content subscription costs• Raised expectations in new funding regime• Needs for funding with student growth• Open Access

Resulting current Library issues• Change and staff culture & capability• Extension of traditional role• Digital media, services and curation• Pedagogical change & technology• Relationships• Information policy• Publishing

Recent additions to the portfolio

• Open access publishing management• Research data management• Digital archiving (multimedia)• Widening participation outreach• The University Art collection• Digital signage

Forthcoming Developments• Customer Service Excellence• Open Access Publishing• Research Data Management• Implementation of new Library Management

System (Alma)• 10th Northumbria Conference, 22nd-25th July• Digitisation of core/unique resources

Questions?

Conclusions 1• Costs must be controlled– Individually– Institutionally– Collectively

• Purchase choice must shift to value– Quantitative measures insufficient– Qualitative evaluation critical to debate– Understanding and influencing of new user

behaviours

Conclusions 2• Maximising return– Better awareness– Active exploitation– Intermediate guidance

• Minimising overheads– Licensing, compliance and bureaucracy– Active engagement with publishers at all levels– Charging back for University contributions?– Managing expectations