In the University of Kuopio, information service provision is done by the Centre for Information and Learning Resource Services. It consists of three separate departments: the Information Technology Centre, the Learning Centre and the library (see Fig. 3).
The idea of providing these services jointly by these departments gradually evolved from the beginning of the 1990s. The greatest influence and need for co-operation is attributable to the fact that a growing number of information services are implemented via information technology and software. Thus, in order to use resources efficiently, we in the library need to access and utilize the expertise found in other departments. If one examines Fig. 4, it can be seen that most of our services consist of maintaining information systems and teaching, supporting and developing these services, as well as making them available to help our customers on the campus.
Quality Management to Managing Self-Organizing Processes 105
Co-operation has also been crucial due to the fact that the actual resources have not expanded at anything like the increase in the number of researchers and students working in the University. For example, it is now impossible to maintain the library’s core functions without expert level knowledge on databases, their creation and maintenance.
The aim for the library’s quality work has been to improve the quality of the services provided. In this discussion, the term services include functions that impact on the collection and information literacy education provided by the library. Also improving the know-how of the staff has been focused in implementing the concept of organizational learning. Quality work also provides tools for the management, strategy work and objective definition for the library. On the other hand, the requirement for measurability provides evidence-based facts and practices and helps in negotiations with the university’s management about the library’s resources.
The clientele of the Kuopio University library consist of students, teachers and researchers. The library is also open to the general public, so in theory, anyone can access its services. The Finnish library network also creates one special circle of customers – other libraries and information services (e.g., inter-library loans). In addition to acquiring, organizing and supplying documents, the library also delivers curriculum-based information literacy courses for graduate students.
The quality work started in the beginning of the year 2003, beginning with the renovation of the library’s web pages. A project was established for this, the aim of which was to help our client find the information they need as efficiently as possible using the website and to make the pages clear, concise and logical. A project team was created to undertake this task, and the pages were tested by our university’s web experts.
Fig. 3. University of Kuopio Centre for Information and Learning Resource Services.
At the same time, we started to renew the library’s organization. Our intention was to convert the library’s office-based structures into service process-based teams. As part of this effort, the teams and staff members were empowered to make decisions. The aim here was to help all the
CUSTOMERS
SERVICES
Researchers Teachers and students
Other University’s management
Acquisition, organization and support of the ICT- environment
E-library, library and digital object management systems Data communication: data network, e-mail, web-services etc.
Technical infrastructure:
Workstations including peripherals and software, servers, videoconferencing equipment etc.
Computer classrooms and hardware for short-term loan
Information
management Data security, data administration, data and system architecture Acquisition,
organization and mediation of knowledge resources
Library material (printed and e-material) Web-based teaching resources Graphics and other digital material
Support of the teaching and studies
Web-based teaching course management systems and tools Student information systems, e.g. academic records database Information literacy teaching, aiding in the acquisition of information Pedagogic education and helpdesk services for computer aided teaching and resource
creation Support of the
publication process
Information management software, e.g. citation management University’s publication database
Image processing, graphic design, photography Publishing, e.g. series and dissertations Support of the
research process
University’s research database Statistical methodology support
Information retrieval support
IT-based communication support for research teams Other support University administration information systems support Research and
product development
R&D and product development
Fig. 4. Services Provided by the University of Kuopio Centre for Information and Learning Resource Services.
Quality Management to Managing Self-Organizing Processes 107
members of the staff to appreciate that they carry part of the responsibility for improving the library’s quality of service (Carter, 2004, p. 9).
There are currently three standing teams: the lending services team, the information and teaching services team and the administration team. It is also possible to establish ad hoc teams to undertake specific projects. Teams are instructed to function in an orderly manner. They prepare an annual plan of action; they establish meeting practices and schedules, and they report their work to the library’s management team. This helps management in its strategic planning and in communication between management and the staff. This more formal management was implemented in the fall of 2005, though the teams have functioned on an informal basis for years. This new policy also confers a more official status on the teams.
The quality team was in charge of the quality work done in the library during its first phase from the year 2002 to 2005. It was responsible for the establishment of the quality work and started the documentation under- pinning the quality system. The team consisted of 14 members of the staff from all the departments of the library and its wide representation ensured that it was effective in its role of motivating and assimilating other personnel into quality work. The library’s head of services was chair of the team and acted also as the quality manager who was in charge of the quality system development within the library. Quality manager also acts as a contact person with the university’s quality manager. The quality team held its last meeting in the beginning of the year 2006. Today, quality considerations are integrated into the work of standing teams, which bear responsibility for ensuring improvements that the quality of service is improved in the future.
The actual quality work has been target oriented from the onset. One goal was that it should be subjected to internal auditing – a policy established by the university – and that this should be undertaken for two services, local lending and inter-library lending. The auditors were from different departments of the university who had been clients of the library but were not familiar with the actual library work. The library has also been active in auditing other departments library director acting as a one of the university’s internal auditors. The aim in this process has been twofold: to improve the library’s own processes and to show that the library is a vital part of the university’s core processes, teaching and conducting research (see alsoJuntunen et al., 2005).
An intensive documenting process preceded the auditing with the intention of creating documented terms of reference for the clients within the intranet, implemented together with the library services provided via the web. The desk staff involved in routine work can also use these services.
Intranet pages were established for the staff including minutes and other communication of the teams, terms of reference for internal use such as Lending practices, On call routines, The Library system reference manual and Discretion rules. Each of these has a named person who is responsible for the maintenance of the reference materials. The library’s quality manual consists of the library’s internet and its intranet pages. The Centre for Information and Learning Resource Services also has a paper version of its quality manual, which includes more ISO standard-like documentation.
This documentation formed the foundation for the internal auditing that took place in 2004. The auditors evaluated in detail the management system and loaning and also visited two of the library’s lending premises and the inter-library lending office. What was the evaluation like? To begin with, the auditors were highly motivated and had examined our documentation thoroughly. They had been granted access and passwords to the library’s intranet in order to peruse the documentation. The library’s management system was under transition as described earlier, and the auditing process encouraged us to ensure that the documentation should be at the same level as the Centre for Information and Learning Resource Services in order to achieve conformity. Another fact that we appreciated was that the auditors provided feedback about the amount of ‘‘librarian-slang’’ used in the documentations. As Quinn (1997) (see also Phipps, 2001) states, libraries have a tendency to devise their policies from library service standards, not from the customers’ needs, and this was very clear in our documentation, including guidelines and forms intended for library users.
The actual work of librarianship and its substance were omitted from this type of auditing. Evaluating this part of what we do can be best achieved by peer reviewing and benchmarking from other libraries and librarians from both our home country and foreign libraries. This is an on-going process, and we have already found good partners and had benchmarking sessions.
It was also important that all of the staff be involved in this process. Thus, we have been able to concentrate on the creation of quality documentation from the bottom up and in committing our staff to the success of this process. Auditing has been a learning process for our library; a lot of issues were raised, which now need to be debated, assessed and documented.
Auditing and the discussions that followed have provided new perspectives for us and an impetus to hold joint discussions on our library’s future development.
The proposals given in the audit report have been discussed in the quality team and the modifications needed have been implemented. The rapidly changing technological environment is very challenging in this respect.
Quality Management to Managing Self-Organizing Processes 109
Documentation needs to be updated monthly. Also customer feedback – face-to-face and survey-based – affects our ways of carrying out our services. Group discussions with the staff about the feedback are the most efficient way of improving one’s services.
CONCLUSIONS
What have we learned during this process in our library? First of all, it is important to define, separate and address the two aspect of quality management. The most important from our point of view is the library’s core processes and their documentation. This helps our staff in fulfilling the library’s goals and our clients’ needs. This also helps in integrating both the university’s and library’s strategies into our everyday work. Modern information technologies are a great help in this documentation process and should be exploited as extensively as possible.
Another aspect of quality management that is indirectly as important to the library is the political and rhetorical quality work. Which facets do policy makers wish to see addressed: in Finland there are many levels to be addressed, civil servants, especially those in the Ministry of Education;
within the University, especially the University’s management. These individuals set the political agenda and goals for higher education.
Crucially, they also hold the strings to the purse, deciding who will be funded and who will be allowed to wither. Libraries must also be active in this political debate because it is the only way that their voice can be heard.
Both arguments, service provision and policy influencing, need to be backed up by facts. The requirements for evidence-based librarianship and measuring the cost-effects, as well as, assessing the impact and effectiveness of library services are becoming increasingly important (see, e.g.,Poll, 2005).
Decision makers need facts and they prefer simple, mathematical numbers.
Thus, libraries must be active in making these measurements by themselves and must be creative in ensuring that they are unambiguous and comprehensible. This is our next goal – to create a set of key figures to describe the library’s effectiveness on the University’s core processes.
It is also important to benchmark against other types of libraries and information services. On the one hand, it is important to keep pace with the competition, and on the other hand, it helps us identify niches for specialization and in that way improve the flexibility of our library services.
The ideal that libraries are a part of global network that has the mission of enabling everyone to access scientific knowledge must be enshrined as a goal
in spite of the economical and political pressures bearing down on the libraries.
This sets a new goal for library management. Libraries and their leaders must become more and more open to the society and to ongoing cultural changes. We must adopt a more proactive attitude and be ready to influence the decision makers and legislation that places restrictions on our activities.
Ultimately, information must be free and not be subjected to any borders.