Barriers to staff development in an academic library

Introduction

The continuous advancement of information and communication technology (ICT) has created an environment of rapid change for libraries, and in particular, academic libraries. In order to succeed and fulfil their mission in supporting the teaching, learning and research needs of their parent institution, academic libraries have had to innovate and adapt their service models to remain relevant; and, under pressure from their stakeholders, have had to respond to increasing demands for accountability and demonstrate their value in institutional terms, such as student outcomes and student success. Changes in areas such as scholarly communication, data management, and higher education pedagogy have also required the role of academic librarianship to adapt and evolve to meet these new challenges in user expectations (Saunders, 2015, p. 285). The academic library is at the heart of the University, so to be successful and meet the challenges of a constantly changing environment, it is important to ensure that the Library has the right people in the right job (Barthorpe, 2012). In this context, the University Librarian has requested a report that investigates the barriers to staff development in information agencies generally, and to the Library, in particular. This report provides solutions to some of these barriers and includes recommendations for consideration by the Executive.

Part A: Barriers to staff development

The importance of workforce planning

Academic libraries are customer-focused organisations that provide services to ensure that library customers are provided with the right information in the right format at the right time (Jain, 2015, p. 3). Similarly, the function of human resource management (HRM), is to ensure ‘the right number of people with the right skills, experiences and competencies, in the right jobs, at the right time’ (Hallam, 2007, p. 3). Workforce planning is integrated into the management role of strategic planning, in that it requires the development and implementation of strategies to attract and retain a highly skilled workforce, so that it can be better prepared to meet the needs of the future in an ever changing environment (Bryson, 2016, p. 36). HRM tasks include recruitment, selection, training, evaluation, compensation and development of employees (Moran et al, 2018, p. 219). The first step in workforce planning is to ‘determine what type of new skills, knowledge, competencies, attitudes, talents and mindsets are currently required or likely to be needed in the future’ to meet ongoing needs (Bryson, 2016, p. 36). This also helps to provide an understanding of the environment the library is operating in and some of the key external and internal issues that need to be considered (Hallam, 2007, p. 3).

Ageing workforce

A major concern for HRM in academic libraries is the “greying” of the workforce (Warren, 2011). Researching the diversity of the Australian GLAMR sector, ALIA (2019, p. 7) found that 53% of librarians were aged 50-69 years, compared with 29% of the total labour force. And of those in the 60-69 age group, between 2006 and 2016, the proportion jumped from 9% to 19%, respectively, suggesting a delay in retirement plans. Conversely, librarians in the 20-39 age group declined from 24% to 21%, respectively, for the same period.

These demographic trends present a number of barriers for staff development, especially in regard to recruitment and retention. With the increased number of staff pushing back retirement there is less opportunity for younger workers to progress their careers. This is problematic because Millennials are less likely to remain in a single career, let alone stay with an organisation for an enduring period of time, particularly if there is a lack of recognition or reward for their efforts (Bryson, 2016, p. 130). Due to the ongoing pressures and challenges with academic library budgets (Tillack, 2014), organisations have been forced to restructure their workforce, which has often removed middle management positions. This impacts younger workers who aspire to leadership positions, so may leave the profession if unable to advance their careers (Franks, 2012, p. 106).

In an academic library, there may be up to four generations of staff working together at any one time; for example, Baby Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y and Millennials (Bryson, 2016, p. 127). This has implications for management due to the associated stereotypes, and how each envisions the 21^st century academic library. In particular, each generation has a different attitude to technology, which may impact how change resistance is managed in the organisation as it develops new innovative services and moves away from traditional service models and roles as it seeks to remain relevant to the needs of their communities.

New service models

Due to the changes that have occurred in terms of digitisation and access to information through technology, academic libraries have had to adapt their service models to meet the needs of its users (Barthorpe, 2012). With more information being available to users electronically, there has been a continual decline in print usage, which has caused academic libraries to shift their collection development policies to e-preferred (Schmidt, 2016, p. 192). This has provided an opportunity for libraries to reclaim space and redesign the library as a learning commons to support the changes in pedagogy that encourage a more social and collaborative approach to learning, and integrate educational support services and technology to be more user-centric (LaMagna et al, 2016, p. 54).

Many learning commons are designed with a single service desk where students receive assistance and referrals to other services and resources through a triage reference model; for example, referencing and IT support. Implementing the use of a single service desk has given rise to staffing models that employ student workers and support staff as the primary point of contact for library patrons (Thompson & Sonntag, 2008). This creates a potential barrier to staff development because those who work in the library commons may be non-librarians, so need to be trained to identify when a referral to another service is needed so they can triage a patron’s request. Furthermore, due to relying on student workers there is frequent turnover of staff, which adds additional challenges to staffing and training (Mitchell & Soini, 2014).

Makerspaces

The creation of makerspaces in academic libraries has also been enabled through strategic space reclamation efforts. Makerspaces can support a broad range of activities including: arts and crafts, for example, painting; technology, for example, 3D printing, laser cutting, music studios and computer programming; or a combination of arts and technology. Makerspaces pose new barriers for staff development because training for maker learning is hard to obtain with staff often turning to other peers in the field or online resources, such as YouTube videos (Moorefield-Lang, 2015, p. 107). It also can’t be assumed that librarians will automatically possess the requisite skillset for making, hacking, inventing, crafting, or 3d printing.

Low use of online resources - eBooks

The e-preferred collection development policies of academic libraries have meant that there has been a surge in the acquisition of ebooks. However, as a disruptive technology, ebooks present challenges to end users, and the academic libraries that manage them (for example, metadata for discovery, user experience) (Frederick, 2015). Over the last ten years, there have been numerous studies into the perception and use of ebooks in academic libraries, which have pointed to a lack of familiarity among users regarding the features of the format, and a lack of awareness of the various collections held by libraries. Therefore, it is critical for librarians to promote ebooks to all potential users to increase usage and return on investment on these resources (Blummer & Kenton, 2020, p. 79). This presents a potential barrier to staff development with the need for marketing skills and the development of library promotion practices (Patil, 2014).

Demand for new skills

Driven by the impact of digital technologies and changes in the research environment, the role of academic librarianship has gone through significant change, which has demanded new skills from librarians. This can be seen in the creation of discipline or research librarian roles, which have evolved from traditional liaison functions that required skills around collection development, reference services and information literacy to now demanding a different skillset including consultancy, partnering, data management, advocacy around scholarly communications including open access and open data, and research support (Toohey, 2016, p. 1). In other words, there is the need for ‘the librarian with more’ – traditional librarian skills supplemented with additional knowledge of working with and manipulating data (Kennan, 2016, p.7). However, whilst the roles and competencies required for this new breed of librarian align with the existing liaison librarians’ roles, there are skills and knowledge gaps, which are constraining and pose further barriers for staff development (Cox et al, 2015, p. 451).

Part B: Solutions to staff development barriers

Whilst academic libraries are challenged by some or all of the issues mentioned above, in preparing for this case study, the following barriers to staff development were identified in relation to the Library. These include: a declining budget with most of the operating expenditure taken up in staffing and essential operations, an ageing staff profile; a new makerspace; a triage model of reference in the learning commons; a lack of data management awareness; and an overall lack of understanding in the wider community concerning the value of an information agency and its services. Solutions to some of these problem will be presented below, and in the final section, a set of recommendations will be provided.

Organisational analysis and review

The first step in overcoming any barriers to staff development requires an organisational analysis. As libraries change and embrace new technologies this is a critical aspect of planning which helps to determine the capabilities needed to meet the strategic goals of the Library and the necessary staff development to ensure that the right people are in the right job (Boyd, 2008, p. 235). Having understood what types of new skills, knowledge, and other abilities, or mindsets, are currently required or likely to be needed in the future, a gap analysis can be undertaken to compare the projected requirements (needs) with the existing pool of capabilities (availability) to highlight if there is ‘a match, excess or deficit of personnel and skills’ (Bryson, 2016, p. 36). In this way, a gap analysis will reveal any disparities between new skills and expertise and traditional skills as identified in Part A.

The structure of the organisation can also influence how staff are deployed and should be part of the strategic planning process (Bryson, 2016, p. 36). For example, academic librarianship has been moving away from traditional tasks such as collection development, which is being outsourced to vendors with the time freed up being allocated to more strategically-oriented tasks around research support. This potentially signals the need for an organisational review that examines whether the structure of the organisation is the best fit for the new services and roles being demanded to meet the ongoing needs of the community.

A skills inventory is also an important aspect of staff development. Information such as details of employees’ qualifications, experience, cultural background, specific knowledge, skills, personality type, etc can be used to ‘assist in the identification of employees for promotion, transfer, specific project and or/training’ (Bryson, 2016, p. 37). For example, Cox et al (2015, p. 451) found that librarians with “technique-oriented” personality types may find it easier to transition into new data management roles. Finally, due to budget restrictions, the Library may be unable to afford the creation of new positions, so it important that current staff, including older staff, are change-ready and upskilled with the necessary skills and experience.

Collaboration

According to Sputore (2016, p. 5), developing effective forms of collaboration ‘has become essential for organisations dealing with the challenges of complex, dynamic environments.’ Academic libraries are the perfect collaborator as they offer a broad range of services that extend across both the academic and business aspects of the University (Gieseke, 2012). In particular, the changes occurring in digital scholarship, and the challenges associated with research data management, provide opportunities for the library to become more user-centric as research collaborators (Corrall, 2013). For example, as a trusted partner, the Library can leverage its reputation for innovation and the existing relationships that have been developed through faculty liaison work to better support researchers (Sputore et al, 2016, p. 5). In order to be successful collaborators, as well as developing the technical skills around research data management, librarians in these roles will also need to develop interpersonal skills with a knowledge of advocacy and outreach practices in order to market their services (Kennan, 2016). Alternatively, the Library may also need to consider relaxing the requirement for LIS qualifications so that it can benefit from other professionals who already possess the requisite skill sets. Ultimately, successful collaboration through building meaning partnerships will help to ensure that the Library’s value is further reinforced in the minds of its users (Sputore, 2016).

Digital dexterity

To meet the challenges of a constantly changing environment, and for the organisation to be successful, the Library will need staff that are digitally dexterous. The Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL), identifies digital dexterity as ‘a fundamental aspect of the mission of university libraries, now and for the foreseeable future’ (CAUL, 2019). Digital dexterity is more than digital literacy and encompasses the ‘cognitive ability and social practice needed to leverage and employ various types of media, information and technology for advantage in unique and highly innovative ways that optimise personal and business value’ (Gartner 2015, p.3). CAUL (2019) further extends this definition to include ‘active participation in all aspects of work and life in a digital world, so that people develop the skills, knowledge and understanding to help them live, learn and work in a digital society.’

However, if academic librarians are to be successful in supporting students in developing these skills and capabilities, library staff will also need to develop these specialist attitudes, knowledge and capabilities (CAUL, 2020). Developing digital dexterity may also help to cultivate the skills required by academic librarians for data management and also overcome the challenges of supporting a makerspace. Therefore, the Library should adopt CAUL’s Digital dexterity framework for library professionals and become an active participant in the community of practice.

Recommendations

1.     An organisational review to ensure that the Library is aligned with the strategic direction of the University and that staff development supports the Library’s strategic goals.

2.     A gap analysis to identify the pool of current skills and capabilities mapped against projected needs to meet the Library’s strategic goals.

3.     Adopt policies that encourage older workers to upskill and provide succession planning that considers the transfer of knowledge in preparation for older workers retiring.

4.     Leverage existing liaison networks with the research community to increase awareness of data management services and practices.

5.     Adopt CAUL’s Digital dexterity framework for library professionals. Assign digidex champions to lead projects and engage with the wider community of practice.

Conclusion

This report has provided a discussion of barriers to staff development facing information agencies generally, and the Library, in particular. Due to the rapid advancement of ICT, academic libraries have been forced to innovate and adapt their service models to survive in a constantly changing environment. To remain relevant to their users and the academic community at large, academic libraries require a workforce that is flexible with staff who have the requisite knowledge and experience to meet the strategic goals of the Library. The impact of digital technologies and changes in the research environment demand new skills and a new breed of academic librarian, which will present challenges for older workers, who will be required to upskill to remain relevant in the workforce. In order to overcome barriers to staff development, the Library will need to go through a review process, become more collaborative, and support digital dexterity programs. These efforts will ensure that the Library has the right people in the right job now and into the future.

List of references

Barthorpe, G. (2012, June 4-7). Are we there yet? Do we have the staff we need to meet the needs of new generation learners? [Paper]. 2012 IATUL Conference, Singapore. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/iatul/2012/papers/43

Blummer, B. & Kenton, M. (2020). A systematic review of e-books in academic libraries: access, advantages, and usage. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 26(1), 79-109.

Boyd, R. (2008). Staffing the commons: job analysis in the context of an information commons. Library Hi Tech, 26(2), 232-243.

Bryson, J. (2016). Managing information services: an innovative approach (4^th ed.). Routledge.

CAUL. (2019). Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) position statement on digital dexterity. https://www.caul.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/digital-dexterity/digdex2019position.pdf

CAUL. (2020). Council of Australian University Librarians (CAUL) digital dexterity framework for library professionals. https://www.caul.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/digital-dexterity/digdex2020framework_library_professionals.pdf

Corrall, S. (2013, June 26-29). Designing libraries for research collaboration in the networked world [Paper]. LIBER 42nd Annual Conference, Munich, Germany. https://www.liber2013.de/fileadmin/inhalte_redakteure/2.2_Corrall.pdf

Cox, A., Searle, S., Wolski, M., Simons, N., & Richardson, J. (2015). Librarians as partners in research data service development at Griffith University. Program: electronic library and information systems, 49(4), 440-460. https://doi.org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.1108/PROG-02-2015-0013

Franks, R. (2012). Grey matter: The ageing librarian workforce, with a focus on public and academic libraries in Australia and the United States. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services, 25(3), 104.

Frederick, D. E. (2015). Managing ebook metadata in academic libraries: Taming the tiger. Elsevier Science & Technology.

Gartner. (2015). Defining digital dexterity – the core workforce resource for the digital business. https://www.gartner.com/doc/3084618/defining-digital-dexterity--core

Giesecke, J. (2012). The value of partnerships: building new partnerships for success. Journal of Library Administration, 52, 36-52.

Hallam, G. (2007). Our future – as the 21^st century library and information workforce – is intrinsically linked to our ability to innovate, initiate and inspire. Can workforce planning help us get there? In Schmidt, G. (Ed.) Proceedings of the ALIA National Library and Information Technicians Conference 2007. ALIA, Melbourne, pp. 1-15. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/11677/

Jain, P. (2015, August 15-21). Knowledge Management, Leadership and Decision Making: A Case of Academic Libraries. IFLA WLIC 2015 Conference, Cape Town, South Africa. http://library.ifla.org/1223/1/180-jain-en.pdf

Kennan, M. A. (2016, August 13-19). Data Management: Knowledge and skills required in research, scientific and technical organisations [Paper]. IFLA WLIC 2016 Conference, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America. http://library.ifla.org/1466/1/221-kennan-en.pdf

LaMagna, M., Hartman-Caverly, S., & Marchetti, L. (2016). Redefining roles and responsibilities: Implementing a triage reference model at a single service point. Journal of Access Services, 13(2), 53-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/15367967.2016.1161516

Mitchell, J., & Soini, N. (2014). Student involvement for student success: Student staff in the learning commons. College & Research Libraries, 75(4), 590–609. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.75.4.590

Moorefield-Lang, H. (2015). Change in the making: Makerspaces and the ever-changing landscape of libraries. TechTrends, 59(3), 107-112.

Moran, B. B., Morner, C. J., & Stueart, R. D. (2018). Library and Information Center Management (9th ed.). California Libraries Unlimited.

Patil, S. K. (2014). Library promotion practices and marketing library services: a role of library professionals. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 133(2014), 249-254.

Saunders, L. (2015). Academic libraries' strategic plans: Top trends and under-recognized areas. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 285-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.03.011

Schmidt, J. (2016). Developing a library collection today: Revisiting “collection evaluation, the conspectus and chimeras in library cooperation”, Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 47(4), 190-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2016.1250598

Sputore, A., Humphries, P. & Steiner, N. (2015, August 15-21). Sustainable academic libraries in Australia: Exploring ‘radical collaborations’ and implications for reference services. IFLA WLIC 2015 Conference, Cape Town, South Africa. http://library.ifla.org/1078/

Thompson, S., & Sonntag, G. (2008). Building for learning: Synergy of space, technology and collaboration. In B. Schader (Ed.), Learning commons: Evolution and collaboration essentials (pp. 117–200). Chandos.

Tillack, T. J. (2014). Pressures, opportunities and costs facing research library acquisition budgets: an Australian perspective. The Australian Library Journal, 63(3), 206-219. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049670.2014.915498

Toohey, J. and Poulton, K. (2016, August 29 – September 2). New directions and changing perceptions: academic librarians as collaborators, mentors and influencers [Paper]. ALIA National 2016 Conference, Adelaide, Australia. https://read.alia.org.au/sites/default/files/documents/pr_new_directions_and_changing_perceptions_toohey_poulton_reviewed_final.pdf

Warren, V. (2011). Using workforce structures to enable staff retention and development: An academic library case study. New Library World, 112(1/2), 8-18. DOI https://doi.org/10.1108/03074801111100427