April 18, 2019 Meeting of Library Strategic Planning Team

Time and Location of Meeting

April 18, 201912:00 pm - 1:00 pm Main - 323c

Agenda Details


Thursday, 4/18/2019, 12:00-1:00 pm – UGL 142 (Mortenson Center, conference room to the left as you walk into the room) [NOTE: location of meeting

  • Welcome
  • Approve minutes 3/14/19
  • LSPT updates (office hours, division report edits and public access, etc.)
  • Strategic directions and priorities [12:05-12:35 pm]
  • Presentation of strategic directions and process, and discussion [See: crosswalk document <PDF> <Word>]
  • Identifying priorities – in assigned pairs/groups, identity 3-5 priorities for a specific strategic direction [See: Results compilations from Division reports]
  • Group presentations of priorities [12:35-12:50 pm]
  • University Library, Mission and Principles – temperature check on affirmation process [12:50-12:55 pm]
  • Retreat leaders and date: Tuesday, May 14, 8:30am-1:00pm; Library – Main – Reading Room 200 [12:55-1:00 pm]

Next meeting: Wed 4/24/2019 4:00-5:00 pm – UGL 142 (Mortenson Center) 

University Library, Mission and Principles – review and consider the following minor adjustments in order to affirm at 4/24 meeting 

  • In the mission statement, add “In a diverse and inclusive environment” at the beginning or end of the last sentence, or the penultimate sentence.
  • Rename Principles to Values?

Minutes Details


Thursday, April 18th, 12:00-1:00 pm in UGL 141 – Mortenson Center Conference Room 

In attendance: Clara Chu, Co-Chair; Merinda Hensley, Co-Chair (via phone); Jim Hahn (Central Public Service); Erin E. Kerby (Life Sciences); William H. Mischo (Physical Science and Engineering Libraries); JJ Pionke (Social Science); Matthew J. Roberts II (Arts and Humanities); William A. Schlaack (Technical Services); Mara Thacker (Area Studies); Tracy M. Tolliver (Staff and Auxiliary Services); Jen-chien Yu (Assessment, Ex-Officio)

Not In Attendance: Joanne S. Kaczmarek (Special Collections)

Minutes: Courtney Horry

  • Clara Chu opened the meeting by calling for the approval of the last meeting’s minutes.
  • Clara asked members if they had any questions from the previous meeting and asked Merinda Hensley who attended via phone if she had any announcements or additions to the opening of the meeting before moving to the first agenda item.  Merinda expressed that she did not but would forward a summary of the office hours to the group.
  • Division Reports
    • Clara discussed the SOAR reports which were posted to the Box folder and were divided by LSPT organizers into category breakdowns representing data for strengths, aspirations, opportunities and results as noted by each division.
    • Strengths
      • Clara noted that some commonly listed strengths were related to expertise, work culture (collaborations and other aspects of how divisions work together), and services
      • Other listed strengths were aligned with how divisions carry out work (i.e. operations, unified platform).  The report for technical services noted one strength as being able to work across the library.
      • Clara expressed that the team organizers, comprised of herself, Merinda and Jen-chien Yu were not able to summarize across the group and are expecting to utilize qualitative software to analyze both common & less commonly expressed ideas and wording across reports.
    • Aspirations
      • During review Clara, Merinda and Jen-Chien examined the aspirations and strengths as they related to the campus Strategic Plan
      • Bill Mischo asked if the same four categories will be used for the new framework or if the library plans to use the same four categories as the campus strategic plan. Clara responded that the team will propose new categories that are very similar to those for the campus and emphasized that these would only be proposed with approval from LSPT.
      • Prominent areas in the work of different divisions was found to be supporting research, collections and the issue of space changes with the coming library construction.  The library planning site mentions that the “library is a catalyst” which refers back to collections and the idea of collections emphasizing history and knowledge and how then to engage in new research then the space that is going to be created will help to create that catalyst.
      • The group discussed “services” and how it should be represented within the three proposed areas. The team agreed that services should definitely be included in the strengths portion. Clara also mentioned for consideration, the addition of “infrastructure” to one of the categories.
    • Processing
      • Clara expressed that LSPT organizers would like to propose the integration of language from the aspirations section of the campus framework to create “strategic directions” that represent the direction that the library would like to move in.  The use of similar language would be to create a direct relation between both the goals of the library and the campus.
      • All reports also noted an emphasis on scholarship, innovation and discovery
    • The team has come up with what the 4 new strategic direction areas:
  • Strategic Direction 1: Trusted Partner – the library is in partnership with the rest of the campus. The team noted that many of the aspirations listed were to become proactive and trusted partners.  The planning team added this to the category with discovery scholarship and innovation.
  • Strategic Direction 2: Transformative learning – LSPT organizers noted many aspirations for life-changing experiences – meaning that the role of the library would not just be educational but positively impactful on the lives of community members it serves and engages with.
  • Strategic Direction 3: Societal Impact – LSPT organizers hear often that this category should be connected to the local area.  They are proposing a change in the category to be “Community-Engaged Societal Impact” – a locally focused proposal for this rather than for society as a whole.
  • Strategic Direction 4: Notion of Evidence-Based – noted commonly across report aspirations. Proposing a change from strategic investments as it is listed on the campus framework.
  • Questions
    • Clara opened the floor to suggest changes or questions
    • Mara Thacker noted that she proposes the addition of services the strategic directions
    • Bill mentioned that this should be added to category three and noted that services should be one of the top suggestions along with collections and spaces (similar to the existing third category).
    • Matt Roberts expressed that he supports the inclusion of the term “infrastructure” as it is not implicitly expressed in the existing framework.  He expressed that it may shift the thinking to a broader perspective in terms of how libraries are situated in higher education.  This term conceptualizes that libraries are providing infrastructure for research and scholarship to occur and libraries can sometimes be considered as expenditures rather than infrastructure.
    • Bill emphasized his support of the term “space” to be added to the strategic directions
    • Tracy Tolliver noted that a potential downside to the association of “infrastructure” is that the use is often associated with cost centers which may have an adverse effect on the intended use in the framework
    • Jen-chien noted that the team organizers and the team as a whole has not omitted anything including “services” but will be proposing major categories.
    • Bill noted that although the library acknowledges service as an everyday component it should still be included since the new framework will be read by the campus.
    • Clara asked the group for their thoughts on the use of “infrastructure”.  The team agreed that it is not necessary as it may create an unexpected outcome in its use.
    • Matt asked what is meant by the term “evidence-based” in Strategic-Direction 4.  Jen-Chien explained that this would be moving in a direction of using collection usage metrics to identify things that the library should be collecting.
    • Bill added by expressing that usage metrics would be beneficial in improving services as well.
    • Jen-chien asked for input on the perception of the term “life-changing”.  Some expressed that the term may be “hyperbolic”.  Many members expressed a preference to use a different term. Jen proposed “impact”.  Jim Hahn did not feel this was the best choice as the word means “to strike” or “force” and is often misused.  Erin expressed that if something is transformed it would thereby be impacted so it may be a useful term.  Jen-chien noted that “life-changing” was mentioned in a division report when describing the effect of touching an item in special collections. Clara felt that “life changing” is a unique term and gave an example (related it to the experience of viewing Abraham Lincoln’s hat during a library tour). Clara felt that the term “transformative” described something temporary or extended but not long term.
    • JJ suggested using “transformative learning and life experiences.”
    • Matt stated that the team should think about using the term “life-changing.” He expressed his interest in using “life-changing” as he felt that the library does actually offer “a unique and singular” experience. He is open to exploring the idea further.
    • Merinda noted avoiding the use of the term “high-impact practices” as they are often associated with defining study-abroad and undergraduate research. Merinda mentioned that the team does not need to get caught up in specific terminology yet because there would be an activity later in the meeting to focus on that and that there would be additional meetings and opportunities for discussion during other meetings.
  • Activity
    • Clara paired up team members and asked them to identify 3-5 priorities under each goal that they felt applied specifically to one division or which applied to all divisions.
    • Bill & JJ – Strategic Direction 1; Mara & Matt – Strategic Direction 2; Erin & Jim – Strategic Direction 3; Tracy & Will – Strategic Direction 4
  • End of activity
    • Clara suggested that the results of each pair should be looked at in the next meeting and also combined then.  Clara also announced that the resulting work from the next meeting would be made accessible for all LSPT members to view via the shared Box folder.
    • Clara announced that Merinda, Jen-chien and herself had been asked to lead the process of the library retreat and that they would ask LSPT members to provide their input if they wished at a later date.
    • Clara closed the meeting by informing members that the next meeting would focus on reading the mission and principles of the existing framework and address the following:
      • Affirming them as they are
      • Adding the statement “in a diverse and inclusive environment” to the beginning or closing penultimate line of the statement
      • Changing the term “principles” to “values”

Adjourned 1:00pm

Next meeting will be Wednesday April 24th in the Mortenson Center conference room.