San Diego, California is home of beautiful weather, spectacular beaches- and a group of highly motivated, driven and future-ready information professionals. The SLA-San Diego Chapter is proud to join in the conversation with our SLA peers about what it means to be Future Ready.  Our San Diego membership boasts a wide range of professional experience and expertise, and we hope that you find our contributions to the FutureReady365 blog to be both thought-provoking and useful!

by Kathy Elliott, San Diego Chapter, Biomedical & Life Sciences Division

Anticipation … no, not the 1971 hit song, and not the feeling you get sitting down to a Thanksgiving feast. I am talking about the act of preparing for the future before it arrives. As information specialists, we often find ourselves juggling too many tasks, struggling to keep them all up in the air. Who has the time to look into a crystal ball? But that just-in-time attitude only has us treading water in tough economic times. Anticipating future trends can give our clients the added value they need to succeed and thrive. This is true for businesses, academic institutions, hospitals, museums … every type of organization that uses information.

What can a special librarian do to anticipate future trends? Obviously, research plays a critical role. But we’re information specialists, not necessarily subject specialists. So I have one more word for you: networking. An idea may start out with one or two people, but librarians are connected to a world of colleagues who are in this business because they love to help others. As a former scientist retooling for a career in libraries, I’ve been struck by this supportive culture. And when librarians reach out to non-librarian specialists, synergy happens.

What does this model look like in the real world? I’ll offer one example. My sister, Judy Kammerer, is the managing librarian for the health sciences library of University of California, San Francisco, Fresno Center for Medical Education and Research and the hospital library of Community Regional Medical Center, while I have experience doing genomics research in the lab. We decided to collaborate on a project that anticipates the application of new genomic medicine discoveries to clinical practice.

As a first step, I am writing a paper on this topic for a Medical Librarianship course at San Jose State University. I started by collecting background information from the literature. Then I posted a questionnaire for hospital librarians on several listservs, asking if clinicians (doctors and nurses) were requesting information in this field, and what resources the librarians recommended. The survey feedback was great. It suggested that this hot new field has not yet made significant inroads into clinical practice. Next, Judy and I plan to network with clinicians and genomics researchers. A key step will be to design an algorithm that can identify articles about clinical applications of genomic discoveries. Finally, we will create a website with links to these articles, relevant RSS feeds, and other resources that will enable clinicians to monitor and understand new applications as they arise.

Experts in the field predict that translation of genomics research into clinical uses will accelerate rapidly. We hope that our website will help doctors and nurses learn about new applications without delay. Reducing the time lag between discovery and application may save not only money but also lives.

For the future-ready librarian, just-in-time is not good enough. Anticipation rocks!

Kathy Elliott is a graduate student in the MLIS program at San Jose State University. She received a BA in Zoology from Humboldt State University and an MS in Biological Sciences from Stanford University. After teaching high school biology, Kathy returned to the laboratory, performing molecular biology research at SIBIA Neurosciences, Merck Research Laboratories, TorreyPines Therapeutics, and in 2009 she played a major role in the start-up of Pathway Genomics. Her career change to librarianship is providing new opportunities to apply her scientific background. Kathy is currently Student Liaison for the San Diego chapter of SLA.

Kathy shares her home in San Diego, California, with one husband, two dogs, and three lizards. In her spare time, she enjoys gardening, singing, hiking, and volunteering for American Brittany Rescue and the San Diego Zoo.

Image: By Courtesy: National Human Genome Research Institute (http://www.genome.gov/17516876) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons”

Hello from Wisconsin! We are delighted to contribute a week’s worth of postings from the Midwest! You’ll see that Wisconsin isn’t just about the cheese—our chapter boasts 120 members from diverse environments: corporate, law, academic, and other settings, many of us from unique national companies and associations. Our state’s two library schools have renewed focus on special librarianship and growing interest from our student members is evident. We are an active, enthusiastic chapter and happy to contribute our thoughts on future readiness! It’s great in the Dairy State!

When I decided to participate in the SLA Future Ready 365 blog, choosing a topic was a challenge. My background is diverse, but I am new to the field of library and information science, recently receiving an MLIS and am a job seeker. I wondered what I could offer SLA’s experienced, educated and varied readership. There are many things that are exciting about the field of special libraries including sharing information and revelations about personal and professional development. “Write what you know” said Mark Twain (and others); so, I reflected on the past few years.

The knowledge that not everything can be learned in the classroom is apparent – now, even more so than when I received my undergraduate degree (many years ago!); academic study does not fully prepare us for the real world of work, fulfillment and success. It is even clearer to me that the responsibility is on the individual to expand his/her knowledge base in creative ways. Some take part in fieldwork and internships, some do volunteer work, some blog, and some create entrepreneurial businesses. Social media offers many ways to connect with people of like minds, and networking is even more crucial today. One significant opportunity, however, is often forgotten or set aside for a later date: membership in a professional organization.

Organizations, especially SLA-Special Libraries Association, have diverse memberships with rich backgrounds and wide-ranging responsibilities, interests and personalities. Becoming a member is (and should be) more than paying a dues statement. Taking advantage of all an association has to offer takes work, but reaps huge rewards. Students and professionals alike should be reminded of the huge number of programs and the assistance that associations offer. Here are a few of the benefits of an association membership – especially our own SLA.

• Learn: Industry knowledge is enhanced by understanding competencies, ethics, trends, and salary and other surveys. Understand what your association stands for and offers its members.
• Research: Associations offer wide and deep industry materials, LIS developments, resources, and scholarships and internships information via websites, blogs, newsletters and job postings. Access, read and use them.
• Network: Connect with library professionals, peers, students, faculty, industry experts, friends and potential employers. It is critical for success.
• Participate: Be active in SLA. Join divisions in your field of study and others groups that interest you, local chapter leadership teams, national committees and discussion boards. You truly get back a lot when you give of your time and knowledge.
• Share: Get involved in mentoring programs, LinkedIn Groups and Discussions. Meet with those outside your career field to advocate for special librarians. Spread the good news about who we are and what we can do.
• Grow: Develop new skills, expand your knowledge, gain confidence and have fun at local, state and national chapter meetings, seminars, webinars, conferences and committees. Professional and personal development is a life-long learning process.

Through my membership in professional associations, I have been involved in many worthwhile and enjoyable activities. I attended the SLA national conference in Philadelphia – a wonderful experience! I also gave a presentation to a faculty-student group on my international and independent study experiences; organized a educational seminar co-sponsored by an association and my library school; developed programs for a women’s networking group; attended numerous sessions at a state library conference; joined a mentoring program in SLA’s CID (Competitive Intelligence Division); and am a member of a steering committee in a field that interests me. I also continue to participate in many university alumni and other networking groups, contribute to several LinkedIn Groups, consult for a real estate board of directors, and volunteer at my local library and in a childhood development program. Have I done all that I could to become an active association member? No, not yet… that is an ongoing process and a goal to keep in my sights. The benefits of being involved in an association are endless. Get (more) involved in SLA today. Enjoy your membership!

Marilynn Manross received her MLIS from University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee’s School of Information Studies in August 2011. A non-traditional student, her graduate school experience included a study abroad in Paris, an independent study “Corporate Librarianship in France” and three scholarships (one to attend SLA 2011 in Philadelphia). With administrative and financial experience in diverse industries — research, operations, office management and investment portfolio administration — she is currently exploring opportunities in a corporate research department, library or information center. Her next job may be located in her native Milwaukee or as far away as New Mexico, Virginia, Canada or Europe. Marilynn highly values her memberships in SLA, ALA, WLA-Wisconsin Libraries Association, SCIP-Strategic & Competitive Intelligence Professionals, Alpha Kappa Psi Professional Business Fraternity and Alliance Française de Milwaukee.

Military Libraries come in all shapes and sizes. We’re academic libraries, supporting Bachelor’s, Master’s and Doctoral degrees. We’re public libraries, complete with children’s story hours and retiree’s financial resources. We’re also other types of special libraries: medical; history; science, technology & engineering; intelligence; and headquarters support. The Military Libraries Division brings together members from all U.S. military services, Canadian Combined Armed Forces, international military services, contractors, vendors, academic institutions and anyone with an interest in military librarianship. Check us out at http://military.sla.org/. – Gloria Miller is a Librarian at the Headquarters, U.S. Army Materiel Command, Redstone Arsenal (Huntsville), Alabama. She is currently the Chair-Elect of the Military Libraries Division.

It’s November 2010. I have just become the solo librarian at a professional/continuing education center for the military. It’s my first job as a professional librarian and also my first job working for the military. I have one part-time staff member, a whole host of daily duties, and (thankfully) a lot of creative freedom. I see a million different projects we might tackle in order to move the library into the future, and, as a zealous young librarian, I want to tackle them all.

I decide instead to take a more sensible route stemming from my background in marketing—figure out who our customers are, identify their information needs, and draft our priority list accordingly. According to experts, analyzing customer needs helps reduce your urge to “do it all” by focusing your efforts and limited resources on high priority areas.¹ This is especially pertinent in a military environment, where shrinking budgets and high turnover in executive leadership dictate the need for data-driven decision making.

Flash-forward to today: Our information needs assessment has been wildly successful. We have learned a great deal about our customers, including their usage habits, information-seeking preferences, on- and offline research behaviors, and perceptions about the library and librarians’ roles. Our small but mighty team acted on this data to develop a clear vision of how our library can support as well as delight our customers—through innovative, creative solutions to their most pressing needs. In addition, we used the data to help us map out and prioritize the routes we will take to meet this vision.

For example, the needs assessment unearthed an unmet need among faculty for access to relevant, credible news articles. Putting our heads together with the programming and graphic design departments, we re-vamped our library’s e-newsletter into a desktop research tool, bringing topical news briefings to our instructors’ fingertips in a more useful format. This creative shift of existing resources produced a more relevant product, increased customer-satisfaction levels, and demonstrated how responsive the library is to customer needs.

Over the course of one year, our library’s scope has narrowed; we are no longer interested in doing it all but in doing all we do extremely well. Since our customers’ needs have provided us with clear guidance, our focus moving forward will remain on them.

Lee Ann R. Benkert is the resource center manager at the U.S. National Security Space Institute and is a member of the Rocky Mountain chapter of SLA. She views librarians as an army of information ninjas, stealthily advancing the world’s perceptions of info pros, one silent footstep at a time. You can follow her on Twitter @lbenkert.

By James King, Information Architect, NIH Library (Washington DC Chapter, Government Information Division)

Best Practices for Government Libraries is a collaborative document that is put out annually on a specific topic of interest to government libraries and includes content submitted by government librarians and community leaders with an interest in government libraries. The 2011 edition includes over 70 articles and other submissions provided by more than 60 contributors including librarians in government agencies, courts, and the military, as well as from professional association leaders, and more. Best Practices is edited by Marie Kaddell, Senior Information Professional Consultant; SLA DGI Chair.  If you did not write for this year’s Best Practices, Marie invites you to submit a guest post for the Government Info Pro marie.kaddell@lexisnexis.com.

The information in this article does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the National Institutes of Health. Any mention of a product or company name is for clarification and does not constitute an endorsement by NIH or the NIH Library.

When Eugene Garfield envisioned the citation index in 1955, he wanted to improve information retrieval by showing relationships between articles based upon their citation and reference history. A potential side benefit of the index was to monitor the growth and structure of scientific knowledge, but neither the corpus of published data nor sufficient computing power was readily available to effectively do so.

This benefit is now within our grasp due primarily to the work of large-scale indexes like Thomson-Reuter’s Web of Science, Elsevier’s Scopus, and the National Library of Medicine’s (NLM) PubMed. In addition, two factors have converged to create a strong need for bibliometrics. First, scientific knowledge has continued to grow and became more specialized, making it harder for a small group of experts to effectively review research proposals without relying on an objective measure, forcing an even greater reliance on computerized methodologies. Second, at the same time that science has become solidly global and collaborative in nature, the pools of research funding around the world have been shrinking. This has increased competition for scarce funds and put additional pressure on funding organizations to show the value of their research expenditures.

A recent large-scale example of how bibliometrics affected science was the 2005 Department of Defense (DOD) Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) review process, which required all DOD research groups to submit aggregated publication and citation counts for written articles that were used in research during a two-year period. These counts were then included in deliberations about which military bases and research labs to close, which to combine, and which to move. U.S. military libraries around the world scrambled to help their military labs respond to these critical data analyses, demonstrating how information professionals could play a role in defining and defending the value of the research organizations in which they serve.

I believe information professionals are in an ideal position to develop a set of valuable services that define and defend the organization’s value. To do this effectively, it requires an understanding of the scientific and business need of their organization, an agreement on the organization’s preferred measures of success, a clear understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the various measures available (including the algorithms that underlie them), and a clear understanding of how the metrics are best applied.

EXAMPLES

An example of how libraries can utilize existing tools to create useful evaluative reports for stakeholders comes from the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) Library. Library staff compiled the number of publications produced and the number of high-impact papers (from the top 50 percent to the top 0.01 percent) published by each WRAIR researcher, plus the number of citations of each researcher’s works. These measures were entered into WRAIR’s balanced scorecard, a strategic planning and management system that provides a framework of financial and performance-based measurements tied to the vision and strategy of the organization. By also comparing the output and average citation count of Army research publications on a discipline or topic, such as malaria vaccine or drug research, to the total output in the discipline, the library is also able to show the impact of its researchers on areas of interest to stakeholders.

Over the past several years, the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) has been working on another approach to creating useful metrics. By identifying and capturing the metadata of all journal articles, conference proceedings, book chapters, U.S. patents, and technical reports written by NRL researchers and engineers, they automatically create a number of useful reports. Examples of these reports include a bragging list of the 25 most frequently cited NRL papers of all time, the journals in which NRL papers are most often published, and—with some analysis by a third party—the patents that have cited NRL work. This effort came out of a mandate from the NRL director of research requiring all scientific promotion candidates to submit a publication list with citation counts generated by the research library.

A number of other U.S. government agencies, such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), have also pursued the creation of internal databases of all agency-produced materials. In a similar vein, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) requires that all publications resulting from NIH grant funding be deposited into NLM’s PubMed Central database. Dr. Elias Zerhouni, the former director of NIH, pushed for this mandate specifically so that NIH could have a tool to measure research productivity.

WHICH MEASURES?

In pursuing an effort like this, it is critical to know what to measure and which measures will be of value. The WRAIR example relied upon the institute’s balanced scorecard to tie metrics to the strategic plan, while the NRL tied its effort to a research mandate.

The Bernard Becker Medical Library at Washington University in St. Louis provides a great model for libraries to use to assess the impact of research. Though focused on biomedical research, it can easily be applied to any research setting. The model highlights five key areas to explore when measuring research impact:

• Research output – counting how many publications were made and tracking the various outputs;
• Knowledge transfer – determining if the research was referenced or reused, including counting the number of references to those publications;
• Clinical implementation – identifying whether the research was applied to practice (e.g., used in a patent or a medical protocol);
• Community benefit – assessing whether the research made a difference in efficiency, effectiveness, or quality of life where it was applied; and
• Policy enactment – evaluating the research’s impact on laws, policies, and regulations in the pertinent sphere of influence.

Some organizations, such as NIH, have also been fortunate enough to have the resources to work with index providers to create robust, customized views of their data. One NIH-hosted service that uses customized data is Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT), which is designed to support the extramural research community by providing per-year data on grants as well as disease portfolios. This service allows users to search a repository of intramural and extramural NIH-funded research projects from the past 25 years and access publications (since 1985) and patents resulting from NIH funding. Search results can include the research project number, project title, contact information for the principal investigator, name of the performing organization, fiscal year of funding, NIH administering and funding Institutes and Centers (IC), and the total fiscal year funding provided by each IC.

A second NIH-hosted service, the Electronic Scientific Portfolio Assistant (eSPA), helps the intramural community evaluate the outcomes (including outputs and impact) of NIH funding. It is primarily focused on helping review and analyze portfolios of research projects for program planning and evaluation. By combining research funding with publications, custom portfolios of research can be created to help program managers and administrators track and evaluate their research.

The NIH Library has recently engaged the RePORT and eSPA groups, as well as other groups across NIH, to encourage the addition of bibliometric measures and more researcher-focused reporting in their tools.

CHALLENGE/OPPORTUNITY

Dr. Garfield’s vision was to explore the relationships and networks of scientists so he turned to publications as what is still one of the richest sources of relationships through co-authorships, references, and citations. As a natural step in this evolution and personally one of the most intriguing development efforts to date in this area is a NIH-funded effort to develop a national network of scientists built upon the initial work of Cornell University. This effort, dubbed VIVO (vivoweb.org), is an open source semantic Web project being built by libraries and has the potential of changing the way researchers collaborate by enabling the discovery of research and scholarship across disciplines.

Well-placed information services and resources that specifically meet the needs of our community will continue to make the difference between success and failure, even life and death. However, as distribution costs in the digital world approach zero, we must be willing to rethink the traditional view of library as a place and the traditional services that have been offered. Will today’s information professionals be brave enough to critically evaluate the current slate of services to reduce what is no longer of value in order to free time for new services like the ones described? I believe that exploring new roles like the one described in this article has the potential of opening new doors in the organization and applying our expertise in new ways. If we as a profession are to continue to be relevant in this era, we need to be willing to take risks.

Note: The author wishes to thank Gali Halevi, account development manager for Elsevier, who provided tremendous support in the creation of this program and in the writing of this article.

James King is an information architect at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland, working for the NIH Library in the Office of Research Services. He is the immediate past president of SLA’s Washington, D.C., Chapter and now serves as the chapter’s Webmaster and as convener of the association’s Information Futurist Caucus. He recently helped Gali Halevi of Elsevier to coordinate a one-day seminar, Impact and Productivity Measurements in a Changing Research Environment, at which speakers shared their perspectives on various research metrics. The presentations from the seminar, which was hosted by Elsevier, are available free online at http://rainingdesk.elsevier.com/bibliometrics2010?utm_source=ECU001&utm_campaign=&utm_content=&utm_medium=email&bid=PJFG62F:VLGVS1F.

by Jan Keiser, San Francisco Bay Region Chapter, Legal and Solo Librarians Divisions

I work in a small company as a solo resource manager, with the title of Senior Informationist. I have been applying excellent research skills to the company’s information needs for eight years.

In the context of my position I see the concept of the “outer brand” as a definition of myself; it’s who I am and the work I represent. We all have a brand–at work, at school, in society–a mark is left whenever we make a personal decision affecting others. The inner brand, however, only I can see and I’m responsible for it. Over the last few months, my inner brand has been suffering and I knew this would eventually affect my outer brand, so I needed to make some changes.

A parallel position for a market analyst was created at my company.  Enter “M,” a recent MBA grad from a local university, smart and ambitious, although young and inexperienced.  Since no clear direction was provided to the company about our positions, the “market research analyst” would receive an information request and turn it over to me (she had neither the skill nor the resources with which to respond). M assumed these requests came to her because that’s how the system worked – and then after I provided her with the research, she’d receive credit for the project–the work was assumed to be hers. This had been going on for months and I was completely jammed up doing the research while she was being invited to planning meetings. But I don’t think it was intentional – the company lacks clear communication. I’ve learned that you can’t always wait for someone else to jump in and save you.

I decided to sit down with M to see if she understood the difference between our roles. I pointed out that M didn’t have an opportunity to analyze our market or use her survey design skills, all the primary research skills etc. that she had studied in her MBA/Marketing program. I suggested this was an opportune time to demonstrate these skills since the company is making a strategy change. I explained that I’d gather the materials to help her analysis. M agreed this was a good idea.

In a series of planning meetings we finally decided to schedule joint capability presentations.  We will begin by clearing delineating our marketing research background. Then we’ll outline the company’s research needs and offer up solutions.

There has been a great deal of interest in this joint “road show.” In three days we will present to the entire Marketing and Sales departments. With customized examples of marketing and sales dilemmas, we’ll explain how to apply our independent expertise to provide solutions.  And, we’ll work together as a team – or a pair?

This struggle looks so simple on paper. I think everyone has experienced a similar problem. We don’t want to cause further friction so we say nothing – but then begin to feel anxiety and ill will (and that’s being polite!) towards the other party. I’m glad I spoke up – wish us luck.

*****

UPDATE

The presentation went very well. As I said, I have done this many times. I was more comfortable; I inject humor into my presentation and was thanked over and over for my efforts. Even my partner said, “Well. You shined.”

My partner also delivered interesting information, although she failed to do simple things, such as stand up during her presentation. She sounded bored and shrugged a lot, as if to say, “Well, whatever…”  I don’t know if feedback was provided or not to her or not. Since that meeting we have presented twice more and will present again next week. I have noticed she is enthusiastic and really seems to know her stuff. She still doesn’t stand up though, so that’s her style. I was lucky, working in a corporation years ago I was sent to “presentation school,” where you actually have to write a presentation and deliver it before your peers. You are taught how to handle latecomers, people who fall asleep or don’t listen and the entire performance is videotaped and then critiqued. It is excruciating.

So far, we are moving forward as a team. Lessons learned:

• Confront the issue honestly without taking it personally – swallow your paranoia
• Design some plan of attack to seriously alter the issue
• Have this plan complete before you open your mouth
• Rehearse as you would a presentation – you don’t really know how the other person will react
• If it doesn’t work, you have a documented effort to put forward to your boss, if necessary.

Jan Keiser has been providing business intelligence to clients for over twenty years.  She has held research positions in corporations such as Foote, Cone & Belding, Pacific Telesis Group, Telesis Healthcare Marketing Group, and SBC, Inc., doing everything from developing customized information products to managing architecture and content for corporate–wide websites. At one point she operated an independent marketing business in San Francisco.

Jan has a B.S. degree from the University of San Francisco in Organizational Behavior and a Master’s Degree from San Jose State University in Library and Information Services.  She will be joining a Graduate Program in Healthcare Informatics next year. Jan is an active participant in marketing and information industry associations, writing newsletters and mentoring newcomers.

by Nora Martin, Australia and New Zealand Chapter, Leadership & Management Division

In May 2007 I began employment as the inaugural Library Manager at the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC). AUSTRAC is Australia’s anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing regulator and specialist financial intelligence unit (FIU). My major contribution included the establishment and maintenance of an online library and the implementation of a new library and research centre service.

I attended the 11th Aurora Leadership Institute in February 2008 as a result of being awarded the inaugural AGLIN Scholarship. Subsequently I served on the AGLIN Executive Board from 2008-9. AGLIN is an independent organization established to coordinate Australian Federal government libraries. The Aurora Leadership Institute assists future leaders in the library and information sector to maximise their skills and potential. This was also an opportunity to spend time with and learn from leaders in the library profession.

My participation as an AGLIN Executive Board member for 2008-9 gave me an insight into how an executive board operates and was a valuable learning experience. I would describe the benefits of participating at the Institute as increased self awareness and learning about the difference between leadership and management, especially the importance of leading from within.

Aurora increased my confidence to such a degree that I applied for and obtained a 9-month reassignment within AUSTRAC as Senior Analyst within the Strategic Analysis Unit. This role included conducting detailed research to provide internal and external stakeholders with proactive intelligence on money laundering and terrorism financing typologies, trends and vulnerabilities. This reassignment turned out to be a wonderful opportunity for professional development, leading to an increased understanding of the information needs and requirements of our Intelligence business unit. Another benefit was that this knowledge greatly assisted me upon return to my substantive capacity as Library Manager in early 2009.

Information professionals have exceptional research and analytical skills, often not recognised by the intelligence community. These skillsets are very transferable and it’s a positive sign that increasingly government agencies are strategic in their approach to the exercise of professional development within human resource management. Governments worldwide continue to deal with the threat of terrorism and organised crime plus work together to combat global threats, such as those concerning the environment and climate change. As a result, the need for the services of government information professionals has increased in recent years. The need for current information and qualified information and knowledge services staff cannot be underestimated. The challenge is to reinforce this message to key stakeholders within government agencies, to prove our value and become indispensible.

In July 2009 (due to operational requirements) I was permanently reassigned to the position of Senior Analyst within the AUSTRAC Operational Intelligence branch. My responsibilities included the evaluation and dissemination of Suspect Matter Reports to domestic and international partner agencies. Concurrently at this time I took on a mentor role and trained another information services colleague in library procedures. My mentee demonstrated her commitment to the library profession by taking on the responsibility of maintaining a streamlined library service in addition to her normal duties.

Whilst enjoying the challenge of working in the intelligence field, library work remains and is my passion! Late last year I obtained a promotion to an executive leadership role at the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) Library. Our ATO eLibrary model is linked to the 2011 SLA Annual Conference sub-theme “using knowledge sharing to encourage collaboration.” The library team is placing a particular emphasis on web 2.0 and emerging web 3.0 services, demonstrating a capacity to innovate and develop new information products and services to meet an identified need.

The moral of the story is to think outside the square in terms of professional development opportunities. Often a break from “traditional” library work will reenergise and reinvigorate you leading to other exciting opportunities down the track!

After working in a public library as a paraprofessional for over twenty years, Nora Martin completed her degree in 2005 and is now Assistant Director, Library & Information Services at the Australian Taxation Office. In 2009 Nora was the recipient of the SLA Diversity Leadership Development (DLDP) award and International Travel award. She previously worked as Library Manager at AUSTRAC, Australia’s anti-money laundering regulator and specialist financial intelligence unit. Prior to this time, Nora was employed as a Research Librarian at Fairfax Media, providing high-quality research and information services to journalists, working on local print publications and helping journalists from various interstate and overseas bureaus.

by Sandy Malloy, San Francisco Bay Region Chapter, News Division

David Meerman Scott, a marketing strategist whose work I see all the time, wrote a post on his WebInkNow blog, “Apple Is Not Different,” in which he opines that no product or company matters outside the context of the problems they solve for the user.  Says Scott, “What your buyers do care about are themselves and they care a great deal about solving their problems (and are always on the lookout for a company that can help them do so.)”

Substitute “patrons” or “customers” or “clients” or “users” for “buyers” in this statement and “librarian” for “company” and you have a situation that we librarians should take to heart.

Scott cites Apple as an example of a company whose products are considered cool.  But even the coolest products are only as good as the problems they solve.  Sleek design?  That solves the problem of “ho, hum, I have a computer on my desk”; in other words, boredom.  The “it-factor” of being a member of the Apple tribe?  That solves the problem of needing to feel a sense of community or belonging.  Lack of viruses?  Congratulations, you’ve saved the trouble of buying and maintaining a lot of external virus detection software.

Do you believe you should create a brand for yourself?  Remake your image?  Market your library?  SLA’s Alignment Project gives you tools to do all these things, and they are important, but mean nothing outside the context of understanding your clients and how you are going to solve their problems.

So, it’s not “my library.”  It’s YOUR library (you, my client) and I’m going to do my best to understand how you want to use it.  Do you want it on your desktop?  In your pocket?  Would a regular email newsletter help you do your job?  What about tweets of new articles that are available?  A spreadsheet of leads?  What can I do to help you get new business, or satisfy regulators, or help you look good to your boss?

Even the language barrier cited by SLA alignment research speaks to connecting with our clients.  When we use their language, we say that we understand the organization’s business or at least enough of it to be on their wavelength when it comes to solving problems for them.

As a group, we librarians or are a very service-oriented group.  But we can also be proprietary about what we know and the resources to which we have access.  In promoting ourselves and our libraries in terms of resources and our own knowledge, we are, in marketing-speak, touting features.  What we need to be touting are benefits.  To quote Mr. Scott once again, being aware of “what’s in it for me? [the client]“, we are “addressing real problems rather than reverse engineering a benefit based on the feature set. ”

Sandy Malloy is Senior Information Specialist at Business Wire, a Berkshire Hathaway company, the San Francisco-based distributor of press releases where she has worked for almost 22 years.  She received her MLS from the University of Southern California and has been an information broker, public librarian, academic librarian, medical librarian and sales representative (though not all at the same time.)

by Rebecca Jones

A few weeks ago Jane Dysart, Kim Silk and I were fortunate to hear Daniel Pink talk at the Rotman School of Management Life-Long Learning Conference for Leaders, ‘How to Get Your Business Back to Reality.” His latest book, Drive, bases “the surprising things that motivate us” on 40 years of human motivation research.  It wasn’t his discussion about what does or doesn’t motivate us that caught my attention, although that is fascinating and worth a blog post(!); it was his discussion about the need for organizations to challenge and re-think base assumptions on which they are building their strategies.

I’m increasingly concerned that that the library sector and information profession must do just that: challenge, re-frame and quite possibly re-think our base assumptions and the practices and approaches built on those assumptions. Pink re labels assumptions “orthodoxies”.  Labelling and viewing what we, as a sector and profession view to be truths as “orthodoxies” rather than assumptions forces us to see the deep-rooted concreteness of these “truths”.  It is these deep roots that make it somewhat painful to question the validity of these orthodoxies today and, more importantly, tomorrow and into the future.

I laugh, both because laughter is healthy and because for a profession that has an orthodoxy (yes,  a truth – an assumption!)  of finding and delivering answers to any question, we aren’t really too comfortable asking and considering questions about our practices, approaches, strategies or organizations. I don’t think we’re really any different than any other sector; wrestling with those types of questions is akin to wrestling itself – invigorating for some, uncomfortable for others and the outcome is unknown.  And, yet, to be future ready we must challenge those orthodoxies and ensure our practices, perceptions and approaches are ready for the future – whatever that future may hold. I may not like wrestling, but I absolutely hate the thought of seeing the library sector or the information profession perceived as irrelevant in the future, so I’m willing to be uncomfortable and to engage in the challenging discussions and re-framing required.

SLA is designing its future. Next week the Board will begin considering the assumptions and “orthodoxies” held true by an association that’s more than 100 years old. SLA’s future for the next 100 years will be designed by standing in that future as Jane Dysart challenged the association to do in Information Outlook in 1993 when she was SLA President.  Jane has always questioned orthodoxies, often without even realizing she’s doing it, because she is naturally curious. She has taught me so much about the value – and fun! – of curiousity.  Curiousity leads to discoveries. We need to be curious about what type of association will be indispensable to an indispensable sector and an indispensable profession. We need to ask questions about what that association will “look like”, how it will enable its members and how members will enable it. How will the association differ from other information and library sector associations?  Will members come together at an annual conference in the future? Why? How? What services will so delight members that they’ll prize the association above all others?  Curiousity rarely, if ever, “killed the cat” and it will help us discover the questions, re-frame our assumptions, and design the future we want, need and will delight in.

Get involved in SLA’s Strategic Vision Project. Stand in the future & see the SLA that will be indispensable for you – and contribute your voice here.( http://futureready365.sla.org/05/27/sla-strategic-vision-project/)

Jane Dysart, Juanita Richardson & Kimberly Silk at SLA 2010

Rebecca is a partner with Dysart & Jones Associates. She is the former director continuing education at University of Toronto’s iSchool, and still an instructor & member of the Advisory Board.   Early in her career she was incredibly lucky to work for 14 years in large corporations in managerial roles in libraries, records management, human resources and IT. She’s an SLA Fellow and, with her wonderful Competencies Committee colleagues, a recipient of SLA Leadership Award.

Introduction (Toni Wilson)

We started CI Week on the FR365 blog with a description of what competitive intelligence is and what it is not, and we are closing the week with the same focus – understanding what CI is and the value it delivers for information professionals and organizations with goals to be future-ready.  This blog post offers a graphic and practical description of how CI can be applied in real-world situations.

Picture this:  You are stuck in a horror film – a typical B-movie situation that already has multiple people dead or missing.  Do you want to go into the woods alone searching for a friend who has run off after a half-werewolf, half-robot-alien creature from the future has killed two of your other friends already?  If only you knew something about the Were-Bot.  Does it get full on two people or does it want to eat more?  Does it sleep after eating?  Perhaps it doesn’t like the taste of librarians.  All of this information could help you choose a future path, action, or next step.  It would be useful in this situation to have a Competitive Intelligence report on Were-Bots, and a librarian would be just the person to put it together.  Whether your business is ladders or law, school or screwdrivers, knowing what your competitors are doing, the composition of your clients, or, like our B-movie situation, the eating habits of your enemies, is invaluable.  The addition of this in-depth information can allow you to analyze yourself in relation to your partners within the company, and how, as a whole, you can relate to those outside.  Competitive intelligence makes an organization future ready by researching, compiling, and analyzing information on THEM, and it is this information that allows the right choices to be made moving forward.

Charles H. Frey has been the Manager of Reference Services at Neal Gerber & Eisenberg LLP in Chicago for four years.  He has been working in law firm libraries for 13 years and got his Library Science degree from the University of Kentucky.

Introduction (Toni Wilson)

This blog post, from an expert member of the CI Division, speaks to the importance of communicating the results of CI research effectively.  While we’ve been focusing to a large extent on the CI collection process this week, as it helps information professionals and their organizations become and remain ready for the future, communicating the findings from our CI collection efforts appropriately – so it’s absorbed and becomes part of the decision-making process – is absolutely critical.

Competitive intelligence (CI), at its most basic level can be defined as being future ready – or armed with the right information to the make the right decisions.  In this post-post modern, Web 3.0, social media, everything and intensely technology mediated world, information is ubiquitous.  Being “Future Ready” to me means being able to take information and elevate it by taking that information in whatever forms it comes and turning it into actionable intelligence.  Librarians or any information professional’s ability to turn reams of paper (or electronic documents) into a three-second sound byte or a neatly parsed phrase that holds meaning and contains value is the essence of being future ready.  In some respects, being future ready for special librarians engaged in CI is a matter of perspective and semantics.  For example, what the competitive intelligence world calls Early Warning Systems, librarians might call Current Awareness.  To be future ready, it’s time to stop thinking about research questions and to start thinking about business problems and how information-turned-into-CI, with the help of analysis, can help organizations solve their business problems with an eye to the future.

Zena Applebaum is a competitive intelligence professional at Bennett Jones LLP, a Canadian law firm.  She writes articles for industry publications and blogs regularly regarding topics important to the successful practice of CI.  Zena is currently the CI Division’s Vendor Relations Chair.