Working Paper #6: Technical Services Division in a Team-Based Learning Organization

Prepared by the TSD Blue Ribbon Committee: Carlen Ruschoff (Chair), Sue Baughman (Facilitator), Robert Bratton, Yvonne Carignan, Patricia Kosco Cossard, Margaret Cullings, Karla Hahn, Heidi Hanson, Christine McCarthy, Janet Siar, Loretta Tatum. September 14, 2001

Introduction

Methodology

Findings

Division Structure

TSD Relationship to Other Library Teams

Transition

Evaluation and Continuing Improvement

Acknowledgements

Appendices:

• Appendix A: Blue Ribbon Committee Charge
• Appendix B: Timeline
• Appendix C: TSD Mission and Values
• Appendix D: Recommendations Based on the Working Group Papers
• Appendix E: Organizational Charts
• Appendix F: Scenarios
• Appendix G: Scenario Proposed by the Cataloging Department
• Appendix H: BRC Response to the Government Documents PIT Report
• Appendix I: FAQs

I. Introduction

The TSD Program Review employed a carefully planned process to examine the current structure and to identify the requirements for a new structure. All of the work processes within TSD were reviewed. The work took place in five stages and included the efforts of almost all TSD staff and selected volunteers from other library divisions. The methodology is further described in section II of this paper.

The overall philosophy behind this recommendation incorporates the thinking described in Working Papers 1 and 2. Working Paper 1 elaborates a vision of a team-based learning organization and notes that staff have indicated "a strong desire to work in ways that reflect the team-based ethos." This vision highlighted the need for team structures to enhance decision making, solve problems, collaborate, develop an outward orientation to the learning and research mission of the university and support the Libraries' mission. The paper also emphasizes the need to create an organization where many individuals exercise leadership in a variety of modes. Working Paper 2 addressed similar issues but in the more focused context of subject teams, program teams, and functional teams in the arena of public service and collection management.

During the course of Program Review, the key elements needed for any TSD organizational configuration became apparent. First, an organizational structure is about the work we do. It both dictates and reflects the distribution of work responsibilities throughout the division. Second, organizational redesign should be more than simply developing a new reporting structure. Indeed, it should reflect a whole new way of thinking about the work that must be done and about how our goals will be accomplished. Third, decision-making and communication are profoundly intertwined with the structure. A viable organizational structure must encourage and facilitate collaboration and teamwork. And fourth, organizational structure must include a vehicle for on-going learning allowing staff to refresh and retool their skills as the organization and technology evolves.

The proposed structure incorporates these key elements into a new framework designed to support both principles and the processes that guide our work. The structure flattens the organization and distributes leadership responsibilities across traditional boundaries within TSD.

This paper describes both the proposed organizational structure and the rationales behind the framework. Although the authors of the proposal are mindful of workflow and procedures, the proposal does not attempt to define the specifics of workflow or procedural changes that may be suggested or a natural outgrowth of the new organization. These details will be worked out as part of the transition to the new structure by the staff who are most directly involved.

II. Methodology

The Committee also used several exercises to clarify members' understanding of the work of the division and the content of the various reports. The group reviewed the strategic plan and the TSD mission statement. The group charted the physical paths of the division's work flows. A vision of the division's work five years from now was created. The group also met with staff from the Libraries' Personnel Office to get a better understanding of the various campus classification structures governing staff positions in TSD.

Beyond the basic work units, the Committee was also concerned with identifying how staff would relate to each other and organize their work. The BRC developed a vision of how various groups would interact and what structures were needed to ensure effective coordination of various groups. The BRC considered the leadership needs of various groups and developed positions and groups to meet those leadership needs.

The BRC also revisited the goals for the reorganization process and clarified for themselves TSD's organizational values and the goals the structure should support. In addition, the BRC determined that the structure should adhere to a set of organizing principles. These principles are grounded in the data gathering processes, particularly in the analysis of current work flows, the study of the physical movement of materials through the division. In addition, these principles reflect broader organizational goals that also reflect the goals and principles of the strategic plan and working papers 1 and 2.

Organizing principles

• The structure will be administratively centralized
• The structure will support a streamlined workflow
• The structure will rely on a staff that has a broad knowledge base and is cross trained in multiple activities
• The structure will be supported by teams which serve to provide leadership and coordination between physically separate production groups and divisions
• The structure will allocate staff resources to accommodate the work loads
• The structure will be based on a 5 year vision of TSD's future
• The physical space will affect our administrative structure
• The structure will not include workflow or procedures in detail

The BRC instantiated its ideas into a series of diagrams illustrating the composition and relations of production groups, coordinating teams, and other key leadership groups. These diagrams served as a tool to clarify confusion and inconsistency in the developing organizational design. Later these diagrams were used to describe and communicate the Committee's vision of the new organizational structure.

III. Findings

First, many of the current procedures are complicated and material passes through many hands. A new structure must promote streamlined procedures and eliminate duplication of effort.

Second, the Committee recognized that TSD tasks require a tremendous amount of expertise-- the knowledge and skill set required is large and multifaceted. Training in basic concepts and routine decision-making is necessary for an effective operation. Furthermore, there must be opportunities for continuing education as the organization and procedures change. Basic learning and on-going development is so intrinsic to the success of Technical Services that the Committee agreed that a training component must be incorporated into the structure.

Third, it was observed that individuals have different skill sets and often specialized skill sets. Specialization is both an advantage and a disadvantage. On the one hand, staff who specialize know their work and are able to perform tasks well and quickly. On the other hand, specialization can become so narrow that individuals participating in the same work stream are not familiar with the role and the tasks of their colleagues. In other circumstances, job specialization causes processes to result in bottlenecks because the work flows from a larger group to a smaller group, or from a faster process to a slower process. To address the issue of specialization, the Committee concluded that the new structure must advocate an environment where staff have a broader knowledge base and are able to perform a wider variety of tasks relating to their work.

Fourth, there needs to be improvements in communication about priorities and status of materials within TSD as well as between TSD and other divisions. The new structure must facilitate communication and collaboration across the organization by bringing together staff who have an interest in specific areas of work.

Fifth, participation in national programs such as the Program for Cooperative Cataloging which supports NACO, SACO, BIBCO, and CONSER, continue to be important. A new structure must promote and provide the widest opportunity for staff to share expertise and participate in these programs.

And sixth, processes in TSD are strongly tied to the Libraries' ILS. A new structure must be flexible and able to adapt to changes and opportunities that are brought about by a library system which provides greater capabilities.

In addition to the themes summarized above, the BRC identified many specific processes and procedures that will need to be explored and addressed in some way. The Committee categorized these activities into four distinct groups: 1) short term recommendations: those that have solutions that can be achieved very quickly, or those that must be addressed urgently; 2) long term recommendations: those that should be addressed after the new ILS is implemented, or require more time to investigate; 3) policy recommendations: those that affect policies for which library-wide input is needed; 4) recommendations for PITs: those that will require a Process Improvement Team to examine the current procedures and the desired outcome. These recommendations have been forwarded to the TSD Council so that work could begin in updating processes and procedures.

The BRC also examined the report of the Government Documents PIT which was completed in June. This PIT was formed by the Directors of PSD and TSD in the fall of 2000 to review the tasks related to bibliographic control and recommend improvements to those processes. The report of the BRC's findings and suggestions has been forwarded to the Directors of PSD and TSD for their consideration and action. The BRC report is found in Appendix H.

return to top