the librarian as bridge-builder

This article was downloaded by: [University of Chicago Library]On: 09 October 2014, At: 10:11Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Public Services QuarterlyPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wpsq20

The Librarian As Bridge-BuilderKara Fox , Laura M. Horne , Tim King , Sara Seely &Kathleen WalshPublished online: 11 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Kara Fox , Laura M. Horne , Tim King , Sara Seely & KathleenWalsh (2008) The Librarian As Bridge-Builder, Public Services Quarterly, 4:2, 177-185,DOI: 10.1080/15228950802203281

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15228950802203281

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wpsq20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/15228950802203281

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15228950802203281

indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

The Librarian As Bridge-Builder

Kara FoxLaura M. Horne

Tim KingSara Seely

Kathleen Walsh

Libraries transform communities by providing well-organizedinformation resources and services (Burger, 2007). Historically,libraries have been information providers. Modern libraries, how-ever, are in a unique position to support diverse communities aswell: they support individuals’ abilities to take utmost advantage ofan ever-changing information landscape. This role enhances livesand strengthens communities; this is what libraries and librariansdo best.

Conversely, communities can also transform libraries if librariansappreciate the rich diversity of the communities’ information needs,acting as bridges between communities as well as enabling and facili-tating community-building. It is up to librarians to decide where andhow to build these bridges. With the advent of the World Wide Web,many people find information on their own and now wonder whylibraries and librarians are necessary. While the formats and

Kara Fox is Librarian, Everett Public Library, 2702 Hoyt Avenue,Everett, WA 98201 (E-mail: [email protected]). Laura M. Horne isSocial Sciences Librarian, University of Richmond, Boatwright MemorialLibrary, 28 Westhampton Way, Richmond, VA 23173 (E-mail: [email protected]). Tim King is Online Community Maven, WebJunction.org,Seattle, WA (E-mail: [email protected]). Sara Seely is Reference Librarian,Boise State University, Albertsons Library, 1910 University Drive, Boise, ID83725-1430 (E-mail: [email protected]). Kathleen Walsh is Infor-mation Systems Analyst for the Global Development Program, Bill &Melinda Gates Foundation, PO Box 23350, Seattle, WA 98102 (E-mail:[email protected]).

Public Services Quarterly, Vol. 4(2) 2008Available online at http://psq.haworthpress.com

# 2008 by The Haworth Press. All rights reserved.doi: 10.1080/15228950802203281 177

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

availability of information may change, powerful opportunities forlibraries to creatively support and transform communities remainalive and well. As libraries transition from system-focused to user-focused organizations, librarians seek to make the value of librariescrystal clear in each unique community so that all community mem-bers can articulate why their library is unquestionably vital to theirpersonal, professional, and civic lives. Each person should know thatlibrarians understand the contexts from which he or she comes, notonly while providing the resources needed within those contexts butalso while demonstrating effective collaboration, clear communi-cation, and responsiveness. Librarians can change, innovate, and takerisks by listening to the needs of the communities they serve andencouraging those communities to influence the library. Our rolesas librarians are to show that the libraries of today are more thanproviders of information but are also facilitators for information flowacross communities.

This essay presents reflections on this theme from five recentgraduates of the University of Washington Information School. Weidentify several areas in which libraries have developed fruitfulprograms, and we consider ways in which each area can serve as abridge between communities while also encouraging communities toinfluence libraries. We are excited to explore how the library canact as more than a place that provides information but as a bridgeto facilitate community transformation through teaching and learn-ing, using emerging technologies, maintaining supportive organiza-tional structures, and becoming strategically innovative.

BRIDGING RELATED TO TEACHING AND LEARNING

Central to the mission of an academic library is support for theenterprise of teaching and learning on campus. In the previous dec-ade, library leaders have embraced and grappled with the conceptof the Learning Commons: a landscape including virtual and physicalspaces, offering access to print and digital collections, and infusedwith reference and instructional services (Beagle, 2002). The LearningCommons movement embodies a desire on the part of academiclibraries to take a user-centered approach for providing technologies,spaces, and information resources that directly support the workof scholars and students. The Odegaard Undergraduate Library

178 PUBLIC SERVICES QUARTERLY

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

(OUGL) at the University of Washington does this throughtechnology-enhanced spaces for collaboration and media production.For example, students can reserve a room equipped with a largescreen, workstations, and software that allows co-editing of a singledocument; another space is designed to digitally record and publishmultimedia presentations as streaming video. These spaces are theresult of cross-campus collaborations with technology partners anda keen interest in students’ needs as they go about the work oflearning (McKinstry, 2007). In addition to collaborative space, theOUGL Learning Commons offers integrated service: technologyand research help side-by-side at a seamless, one-stop service point.A nearby writing and research center is available for help with allstages of the research process.

The Learning Commons concept will evolve as we become moreaccessible and actively anticipate users’ information needs in class-rooms, library spaces, and virtual learning and sharing environments.We can imagine a virtual learning environment that integrates coursecontent and communications with library resources and services.With the use of tools such as wikis, blogs, and their many combina-tions and iterations, the library can become a campus-based clearing-house for research expertise, one that crosses disciplines, weavesthroughout students’ educational experiences, and emphasizes thecentrality of the library. If librarians embrace the social dimensionof learning and pay attention to how students get their work done,we can become advocates for peer-to-peer communities, expandingthe idea of the Learning Commons to create additional, virtualplaces.

We can also envision an interface to the library peppered withinstructional opportunities. If a patron gets lost or stopped in someway while using a resource, a ‘‘help’’ button provides specific, contex-tual advice to walk him or her successfully through the process,whether in the form of a short video tutorial or a screen-cast thatanswers frequently-asked-questions. Instead of requiring the patronto launch a chat session to find a solution to the problem, the librarycan anticipate the need, automatically provide a path to a likelysolution, and perhaps provide a learning opportunity along theway. If we base our work on user-centered models, the Library-as-Learning Commons can continue to create bridges between facultyand students, between students and resources, and across curriculato enhance learning experiences.

Future Voices in Public Services 179

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

BRIDGING RELATED TO USINGEMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

The power and impact of communities have changed dramaticallyin recent years, due in large part to emerging technologies. Librariansunderstand the value and potential of networked technologies,and they can continue to be instrumental in their development. Whenpatrons have electronic access to their libraries, they may seethe library as a valuable institution and be increasingly drawn to itsvirtual or physical embodiments. Embracing technologies as toolsfor developing and strengthening communities makes librariesplace-based but not place-bound.

The Data Census Project of the Technology Services Division atthe University of Washington Libraries is a great example of howlibrarians are exploring ways to leverage community expertise whileproviding these communities with better services. This project teamresearches the Libraries’ roles and services in digital data manage-ment. While housing research data is one possible approach, the proj-ect team is looking beyond traditional services toward ways in whichresearchers might share supplementary knowledge around these datacollections. Developing a supplementary metadata repository is onemethod being considered by the project team to allow researchersto contribute and share additional information about the storeddatasets, enabling re-use or re-purposing of the original data.

Pushing this idea further, we envision library projects to developonline communities for sharing knowledge, offering spaces forresearchers to contribute and organize metadata for themselves.While data storage and preservation are already strengths of libraries,the idea of a virtual place for researchers to interact and share data isan exciting potential for libraries to act as bridges between communi-ties of researchers. Librarians have been successful at connectingpeople with people and people with information, and the develop-ment and hosting of a virtual community is a new way of augmentinga traditional service. Hosted online communities not only provideforums for researchers to connect but allow librarians to facilitatethose connections and see how they are being used, providing oppor-tunities for libraries to better understand the needs of researchcommunities. Popular technologies like blogs and wikis are robustand innovative ways to make information available to communities,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

providing place-based but not place-bound forums for patrons,enriching both libraries and communities.

BRIDGING RELATED TO MAINTAINING SUPPORTIVEORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES

Comparing Association of Research Library SPEC Kits from 1973and 2006, hierarchical organizational charts for libraries featureprominently in both. These two documents reveal that the generalfocus on libraries as hierarchical organizations has not changed sig-nificantly. It is not surprising that hierarchical organizations oftenhave difficulty supporting innovation and a sense of community,particularly through top-down management systems (Dessler, 2007).In order to give appropriate support to their communities, librariesneed to modify traditional hierarchical approaches for decision-making and to shift organizational structures. To support the flexi-bility, innovation, and peer-based content and knowledge productionof the Web 2.0 world, libraries may benefit from allowing strategicdecision-making to happen further down the hierarchy.

Throughout these hierarchies, all libraries are dealing with the‘‘graying’’ of the library profession. As of 2006, ‘‘more than 3 in 5librarians are aged 45 or older and will become eligible for retirementin the next 10 years, which will result in many job openings’’ (Bureauof Labor Statistics, 2006, n.p.). NextGen librarians are entering theprofession, and this generation expects a work environment withoptions for strategic decision-making and the ability to have instant,personal impact through their work (Bennis & Thomas, 2002). Thisshift in expectations offers library organizations an opportunity toreconsider their decision-making structures. If libraries capitalize onthe expectations new librarians might have for their participationand impact, libraries can become stronger, more adaptable, and moresupportive of community-building within the organization, whiledeveloping outward-facing services for users’ communities.

One simple, effective way for library organizations to enabledecision-making at a broader level without completely altering thetraditional hierarchy is to build leadership development strategies.Like many academic libraries, the University of WashingtonLibraries have a professional development program consisting of


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

‘‘new employee orientation; classes and workshops delivered in thelibraries; customer service training; funding for any staff memberto take advantage of opportunities for development. . .; consultantservices such as coaching [and] facilitation. . .; [and] support and coor-dination for organization development initiatives, such as strategicplanning and communication enhancement’’ (Jennerich, 2006,p. 612). This is an excellent beginning for a structure that allowsexperienced librarians to act as bridges to success for new librarians.

To advance similar programs to the next level, we envisionexpanded leadership development programs that enable new andveteran librarians to regularly exercise creativity, team building,and innovation. Libraries can facilitate the development of their staff,creating opportunities for librarians to develop their leadership skills,which in turn could foster the development of creative and innovativelibrary services. Building a cohesive community among librariansthrough a formalized leadership development program benefitslibrarians, libraries, and communities.

BRIDGING RELATED TO BECOMINGSTRATEGICALLY INNOVATIVE

Libraries should do more than simply survive; they shouldflourish. For any organization, growth over time is a daunting task.Most businesses do not make it in the long term. Even institutionslike IBM and General Motors are relatively young; GM has existedfor more than 100 years—a youngster compared to many libraries—but not without turmoil, downturns, and many struggles to innovate.IBM, perhaps a more relevant case to compare to libraries, was oncethe epitome of a company committed to closed systems and intellec-tual property rights, but recently IBM has bet their future on opensource software and services (Samuelson, 2006). Continuous inno-vation has helped IBM to flourish, and strategic innovation can helplibraries, too.

For too long, libraries have faced the tide calmly, seeming steadfastin the midst of a changing world; however, we only look sturdy. Onthe surface, we have restructured our collections, brought in compu-ters and Web access, and even swapped the ‘‘librarian bun’’ for tat-toos and Dansko clogs. Meanwhile, many of our patrons havemoved on in search of interactivity. They blog. They participate in


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

online communities. They enjoy instantaneous two-way communi-cation. They generate content and organize information in ways thatmakes sense to them. Maybe our aging model is becoming irrelevant.

Luckily, there is still time. We can innovate. We can take managedrisks. We have some great library-specific examples to follow.PennTags (http://tags.library.upenn.edu/) is one encouraging modelfor patron-library interaction where users can comment on andshare content using a tag-based model. LibraryThing (http://www.librarything.com/) demonstrates that cataloging can be accessibleto a broad audience, showing us that if we empower users with theability to mash, share, and discuss our content—properly formattedusing Resource Description and Access (RDA) conventions, ofcourse—they will thank us with their energy, loyalty, and partici-pation. Beyond what users contribute on top of existing collectionsof standards-based records, LibraryThing has no content. Librariescreate some of the structured data that makes LibraryThing great,we have a professional community, and we have vast amounts of use-ful content. Every library has a unique, notable local collection, butunfortunately only on-site patrons can see most of these collections.Again, we can do more.

The University of Washington Libraries’ Special CollectionsDivision is tackling an innovative model of collection sharing: UWlibrarians seed Wikipedia with items from their collections. Forexample, in an entry on Pacific Northwest Indians, they post relevantphotos from their digitized collections. Lally and Dunford (2007)demonstrate that not only are such practices good for the readersof the articles, they are also good for users of the special collections;usage statistics show that instead of pulling users away from theLibraries, these Wikipedia seeds have actually increased visits to boththe UW Libraries and Special Collections Division Web sites. Thepractice makes sense: You want to help your patrons, and yourpatrons are going to go to Wikipedia anyway, so why not help themget to you once they get to Wikipedia? Similar innovations do nothave to be done on a grand scale: small steps are fine and providea base to build on. (Keep in mind that libraries do not have stellartrack records for sweeping online innovations in the public eye thesedays.) For example, the Libraries’ stacks are filled with documenta-tion on Seattle’s many—regrettably, failed—transportation projects.Some of these plans were rather interesting—one favorite was the cre-atively named ‘‘SCAT,’’ a 1960s plan to run light-rail trains down


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Seattle’s narrow downtown alleys—and could act as inspiration forfuture transportation planners elsewhere if the information weremore easily available. The beauty of the Web is that by putting amodest number of links into Wikipedia entries a librarian could makeit so. Libraries undoubtedly have many such collections mildewing inthe stacks. It is time to get the best, most potentially useful portionsof that information out and seen. It is good for the information, andit is good for libraries.

By proactively contributing to Wikipedia, the Special CollectionsDivision librarians are serving their communities of users and buildingawareness of the Libraries’ valuable services. They built a bridge viaWikipedia that resulted in greater use of their collections and betterserved patronage. Embracing similar innovations in libraries will helpbuild additional bridges between libraries and communities.

CONCLUSION

Libraries have a rich resource in their communities. By stretchingour thinking to consider how librarians can bridge those communi-ties, we can act decisively in ways that encourage vibrant mixing ofideas and paradigms. In this essay, we explored how the librariescan act as bridges to facilitate community transformation throughteaching and learning, using emerging technologies, maintainingsupportive organizational structures, and becoming strategicallyinnovative. Such connections and moves offer libraries boundlessways to expand services and offerings by enhancing the ways in whichlibrarians offer instruction, technology access, and collections ofmaterials in a value-added, Web-enabled library environment.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to extend a special thanks to Phil Edwards,a Doctoral Candidate at the Information School, for his guidanceand mentorship, not only during the writing of this article but inpreparation for our future careers. We would also like to thank HarryBruce, Dean of the Information School, for devoting resources tosupport the writing process, and we would like to recognize ourcolleague, Kreg Hasegawa, for early contributions to the develop-ment of the themes for this column.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

REFERENCES

Beagle, D. 2002. Extending the information commons: From instructional testbed toInternet2. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 28(5), 287–296.

Bennis, W. G., and R. J. Thomas. 2002. Geeks & geezers: How era, values, and defin-ing moments shape leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. 2006, August 4. Librarians.In Occupational outlook handbook, 2006–2007 edition. Retrieved June 25, 2007,from http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos068.htm.

Burger, L. (n.d.). Libraries transform communities. Retrieved June 25, 2007, fromhttp://lb.princetonlibrary.org/.

Dessler, G. 2007. Management: Principles and practices for tomorrow’s leaders.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Jennerich, E. Z. 2006. The long-term view of library staff development: The positiveeffects on a large organization. College & Research Libraries News 67(10), 612–614.

Lally, A. M., and Dunford, C. E. (2007). Using Wikipedia to extend digital collec-tions. D-Lib Magazine, 13(5=6). Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/may07/lally/05lally.html.

McKinstry, J. 2007. Beyond Facebook: Thinking of the learning commons as asocial network. In B. Schader (Ed.), Learning commons: Evolution and collabora-tive essentials. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

Samuelson, P. 2006. IBM’s pragmatic embrace of open source. Communications ofthe ACM, 49(10), 21–25.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

hica

go L

ibra

ry]

at 1

0:11

09

Oct

ober

201

4

the librarian as bridge-builder

Documents