Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Developing a Matrix and Using Self-Reported Scoring to Measure Librarian Engagement on Campus

Developing a Matrix and Using Self-Reported Scoring to Measure Librarian Engagement on Campus PurposeOur library’s strategic plan calls for us to “Transform the role of the subject liaison librarian to better engage our campus community.” This statement specifically focuses on the aspect of the liaison role that builds relationships with our campus partners, “to better engage our campus community.” And like our peers, liaison librarians at this mid-size research institution have been struggling not only with implementing but also determining how to measure this new role. This presentation will focus on an attempt to develop one measure of librarian engagement with our campus community.Design/methodology/approachWe developed a “campus relationship matrix” that articulates dozens of products that could potentially be the result of liaison work, such as co-authoring a grant proposal, developing a class, co-presenting a workshop on article impact metrics, etc. These relationship products were generated by examining our own work and by scanning liaison responsibility statements from other institutions. These products fall into three relationship status levels: emergent, generative, and productive. Each subject librarian was asked to rate his and her relationship with each department he or she serves. Additionally, in order to achieve consistency across the organization in understanding of three relationship levels, we engaged in an exercise to calibrate our categorization of these work products. During this exercise and through our discussions, greater nuances were revealed about what we are hoping to achieve with our strategic goal. A review and summary of the ratings is presented.FindingsBaseline counts of relationship types were completed. We are working to establish goals for next year's comparisons. In actuality, the specific goals matters much less than the conversations surrounding these results about what work we should be doing and why and how is valued. Originality/valueThis study presents a tool useful for the exploration and measure of librarian relationships with campus. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Performance Measurement and Metrics Emerald Publishing

Developing a Matrix and Using Self-Reported Scoring to Measure Librarian Engagement on Campus

Performance Measurement and Metrics , Volume 17 (2) – Jul 11, 2016

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/developing-a-matrix-and-using-self-reported-scoring-to-measure-pTRs1l9ylq
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
1467-8047
DOI
10.1108/PMM-04-2016-0018
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PurposeOur library’s strategic plan calls for us to “Transform the role of the subject liaison librarian to better engage our campus community.” This statement specifically focuses on the aspect of the liaison role that builds relationships with our campus partners, “to better engage our campus community.” And like our peers, liaison librarians at this mid-size research institution have been struggling not only with implementing but also determining how to measure this new role. This presentation will focus on an attempt to develop one measure of librarian engagement with our campus community.Design/methodology/approachWe developed a “campus relationship matrix” that articulates dozens of products that could potentially be the result of liaison work, such as co-authoring a grant proposal, developing a class, co-presenting a workshop on article impact metrics, etc. These relationship products were generated by examining our own work and by scanning liaison responsibility statements from other institutions. These products fall into three relationship status levels: emergent, generative, and productive. Each subject librarian was asked to rate his and her relationship with each department he or she serves. Additionally, in order to achieve consistency across the organization in understanding of three relationship levels, we engaged in an exercise to calibrate our categorization of these work products. During this exercise and through our discussions, greater nuances were revealed about what we are hoping to achieve with our strategic goal. A review and summary of the ratings is presented.FindingsBaseline counts of relationship types were completed. We are working to establish goals for next year's comparisons. In actuality, the specific goals matters much less than the conversations surrounding these results about what work we should be doing and why and how is valued. Originality/valueThis study presents a tool useful for the exploration and measure of librarian relationships with campus.

Journal

Performance Measurement and MetricsEmerald Publishing

Published: Jul 11, 2016

There are no references for this article.