I recently announced the formation of the Shared User Services Department, headed by Rhonda Marker as director of shared user services. This month, I want to provide a bit more context for this shift and how it fits into the priorities for the Libraries.
To begin, it is best to look at the budgetary issues and priorities that we discussed at the State of Libraries in 2015, what we have learned, and how what we have learned is shaping our actions and the priorities for this year.
A major priority—because it is at the heart of everything that we do—has been to clarify decision-making within the libraries. At the State of the Libraries, we talked about several ways in which we would do this, but the two that are most relevant to this discussion are the roles and decision-making authority of the AULs and directors and improving budget transparency.
Throughout the year, as we began to define roles, it became apparent that having the coordinating function for shared public services and the leadership of the New Brunswick Libraries combined under one AUL was causing confusion. This is the same structural problem that the University addressed when they separated the executive vice president for academic affairs position into two positions: a senior vice president for academic affairs and the chancellor of Rutgers–New Brunswick. Following the university structure, we knew that we needed to separate the coordinating function and the leadership of New Brunswick Libraries.
Budget transparency is also a driver for clearly defining central and university functions. We are now in the thick of the RCM budget process, and we know that the four chief financial officers expect us to accurately report expenses. A clearly defined central unit would bring more clarity to our accounting. The RCM budget model and our funding levels brought in another factor. With no funds available to create a new unit, the function of an existing unit would need to be modified.
Two more priorities from the State of the Libraries provided us with ideas of how we could redefine our central units to support the changing university environment: the need to better understand and imporove our collections and the need to clearly articulate our vision for advanced research support, including scholarly communication.
This year, we have begun to address collection management and development. We’ve used central and New Brunswick reserves to make large purchases that fill some holes in our collection. However, the results from our recent LibQUAL+ survey indicate that the negative perceptions of our collections are linked to discovery issues and problems with the website. Based on these findings, we have set a new priority for this year to improve information control which we will discuss more fully at the 2016 State of the Libraries.
We are pioneers in the areas of advanced research support and scholarly communication, but internally we lack the infrastructure—organizational structure, connection to Cabinet, clear sources of funding—to support a path forward. This is something that we will study over the next year.
With a need for improved information control and a lack of direction for scholarly communication priorities, we looked at the Scholarly Communications Center to see if there was an opportunity to restructure. Over many weeks this summer, I worked with a team to tease out the various functions of the Scholarly Communications Center, assessing each responsibility and aligning it with the appropriate unit or department. These were not easy decisions because advanced research support and discovery are complex aspects of what we do as a library system.
Our goal was to create a department that could play a central coordinating role and be a single point of entry to access ongoing scholarly communications projects and to bring new projects into the fold. The Shared User Services Department will also coordinate discovery, the website, and the shared components of reference. The Libraries have put a great emphasis on transparency and accountability over the previous year and SUS will work closely with University Library Directors and Cabinet to prioritize projects and communicate with infrastructure units to make sure that resources are available and requirements are clear. In essence, they will be the one-stop shop for project management on these larger initiatives.
I noted this in my earlier announcement, but it is worth reiterating that this transition also involves significant changes in the role of the directors, IIS and RIS. I will explore each of these in upcoming issues of the Agenda.
These are exciting changes for the Libraries and I anticipate the work of the SUS department will further shift and mold our priorities over the coming year. During this period of transition and change, I encourage you to speak with the directors and AULs if you have concerns, suggestions, and ideas that will help us move forward in a smart, efficient way.
Sixty years ago Hungary was in revolution against the one-party Communist state. Soviet armed forces entered Budapest to restore order, then withdrew in the face of stiff popular resistance. Prime Minister Imre Nagy announced a multi-party government and declared the country’s withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact alliance. This prompted a second Soviet intervention, the ouster of the Nagy government, and the flight of 200,000 Hungarians who feared the Communist crackdown and took advantage of an open border.
Rutgers University Libraries faculty and staff had a busy summer preparing for the email and calendar migration to Rutgers Connect. The migration took place over three days between August 23 and August 25, 2016, but by the time we reached this milestone, over two months of work by Unit Computing Specialists (UCSs) and Integrated Information Systems (IIS) staff had already been invested into planning the process, preparing for the transition, and learning the new environment.
On December 26, 2015, Izzy Stern tweeted: “Today is the day I found out that Rutgers doesn’t even have full ebrary access. So many sad faces.” As a graduate student in a major humanities department at Rutgers–New Brunswick, Izzy might have expected to use ebrary, one of the largest academic e-book resources, for her research in the winter break, but then had a rude awakening that day when she found out that it was not available at Rutgers, yet. So she went online and shared her frustration on Twitter with the entire world, which was totally understandable. As a matter of fact, the lack of access to e-books was a major source of complaint from our students and faculty about the library collections—hundreds of similar comments can be found in the results of the LibQual+ and previous Counting Opinions surveys. Here, I quoted only Izzy’s tweet because it is on the open web, but the problem she reported was a common one.
Libraries operate on the premise of cooperation and support. Technical services, in particular, embodies this ideal, as evidenced by international union catalogs such as OCLC’s WorldCat and programs like the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC), which contribute catalog records that are created to specific standards that are shared with other libraries, ensuring an efficient, accurate, and timely workflow.
