Several recent readings, discussions, and events have had me  thinking about collaboration a bit more than usual - which is saying  something, since I am a librarian at PALS  and spend a good deal of time working with collaborative ventures.  The  most recent catalyst for my mental tangent was Charles Henry and Brad  Wheeler's article "The Game Has Changed" in the March/April 2012 edition of EDUCAUSE Review Magazine.   In this article, Henry and Wheeler encourage academic institutions to  move away from "institution as an island" mentalities and work towards  interdependence.  They point out that while corporations have  consolidated to take advantage of the power size can bring, academic  institutions have dismissed economies of scale in favor of independence.
 It seems as though the topic of collaboration is getting increasing  library press coverage...and for good reason.  The current landscape  promotes and necessitates collaboration: we cannot accommodate shrinking  budgets, increasing user expectations, and advancing technological  needs without taking advantage of the communication infrastructure that  enables us to work together at a distance at relatively low costs, when  compared to travel costs and time spent away from daily work.  As my  work with the Minnesota Library Futures Initiative has made evident,  libraries - like academic institutions - share many of the same  struggles.  While it is true we must balance collaborative efforts with  individual needs, we all can benefit from reducing redundancies and  increasing our interdependence.
 In a recent conversation, I mentioned that while negotiating  journal licensing with vendors, we could talk to fellow librarians to  gather feedback on practices that have worked for them.  One of the  people I was talking to noted that a good part of licensing is  confidential information.  I don't think my response to this reminder  was as adequate as it could have been at the time, but let me take this  opportunity to say that sharing or collaborating doesn't necessarily  have to be a "I'll show you mine, if you show me yours" relationship.   Simply talking about experiences in general can provide valuable  information to colleagues, such as which vendors are more rigid with  their policies, who is hard to reach, and what kind of bribes are  effective..oh, wait... In addition, sharing our experiences may help us  get on the same page as a profession: what are our expectations from  vendors? What can we tolerate; what is intolerable? In addition, having  these conversations could eventually lead to more shared purchases,  allowing us to leverage the power of an economy of scale.  While  Minnesota already has a great start at this shared purchasing model  through Minitex and consortia like MnPALS and CLIC, further  collaboration will only make these groups stronger.
 At a large university this sharing of knowledge and purchasing  power may not be as obviously beneficial, but for librarians at smaller  institutions, those newer to the profession, or those taking on new  roles within the profession, collaboration is key. And even though large  universities may not see as many obvious benefits, they will gain  prestige, karma, and the opportunity to refine their practices.  I often  notice where a practice could be improved when I explain it to others  and allow them opportunities to question how or why the process is the  way it is.
 As noted by Henry and Wheeler, we need to move off our islands - or at least build bridges between them.
  
 
No comments:
Post a Comment