Dynamic approaches to value
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•481 views
The document discusses approaches to measuring the value of research libraries through a dynamic "value scorecard" framework. It proposes measuring value across four dimensions: Virtue (impact), Library Capital (collections and assets), Relationships (relational strength), and Momentum (innovation and progress). Specific metrics are discussed for each dimension, including impact data, collection valuations, relationship strength indexes, and strategic program assessments. The framework aims to capture a library's value proposition over time through quantitative data and qualitative narratives. Case studies from the University of York library demonstrate initial implementations of the value scorecard approach.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Similar to Dynamic approaches to value
Similar to Dynamic approaches to value (20)
More from Stephen Town
More from Stephen Town (17)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Dynamic approaches to value
- 1. Measurement and assessment in the research library: Dynamic approaches to value J. Stephen Town Director of Information & University Librarian University of York, UK LISC75 University of Cape Town Friday 28th November 2014
- 2. 75TH CONGRATULATIONS! … AND INTRODUCTION Greetings from York
- 3. The 600th Anniversary of the York Library The 1414 Library, York Minster
- 5. The First York Library (8th C) “per bonam et deuotissimam magistri mei industriam uel etiam mei ipsius qualecumque sudorem” Alcuin of York
- 6. Aelbehrt & Alcuin [The library was assembled]: “by the good and most devoted industry of my magister and also by some of my own perspiration” “industria should be translated as ‘by his own good and most devoted plan,’ and sudor is sweat, the perspiration of the copyist’s heavy toil.” Dr Mary Garrison, University of York
- 7. In a dynamic landscape … • Capturing the value proposition – Achieving, developing and valuing innovation – Transcendent contribution • A Scorecard framework (the “plan”) • Implementation cases (“the sweat”) • The Research agenda and challenges for measurement
- 8. DYNAMISM, INNOVATION, & MEASUREMENT The Landscape and the Response
- 9. HE Measurement future “There is no alternative but to play the impact game” “… looking for more indicators of learning [and research] outcomes” “there are some great individual stories, but we want to put more ‘quants’ around them” Madeleine Atkins, CEO, HE Funding Council (England)
- 10. The Dynamic Environment (after Shore, E.) • The end of research library coherence (1880- 1980) • Coherence will only be regained “above campus scale” through partnership • The end of ‘black box’ measurement alone • Innovation required to re-achieve coherence, through – Digital infrastructure – Sustainable funding – Publication form control
- 11. Innovation requirements Gentle, P. Strategic & structural change to accommodate innovation, which … – Bridges silos – Fosters culture & sets tone – Supports disruptive ideas – Sees and hears unfiltered concepts Corrall, S./Kanter, R.M. – Widen search; broaden scope – Tighten human connections between innovators and others – Loosen formal controls and silos – Spectrum from incremental to ‘big bets’ – Even technologists need relational and communication skills
- 12. Innovation: Research Library responses Jantz, R.C. Innovation in ARL libraries – Collaborative leaders – Flatter structures – ‘Ambidexterity’ – More transformational styles – A more innovative climate Deiss, K.J. Political acumen – Creating services that add value take precedence … – Create public value – Customer readiness – Effective communication – Relationship management
- 13. One response … “Information” level management and strategy “Intelligence” in social and technical solutions • Impact proof • Innovation delivery • Infrastructure sustainability • Intimacy with markets and partners
- 14. THE VALUE SCORECARD Dimensions and implementation
- 16. The distinction between Quality and Value R. H. Orr. (1973). MEASURING THE GOODNESS OF LIBRARY SERVICES: A GENERAL FRAMEWORK FOR CONSIDERING QUANTITATIVE MEASURES. Journal of Documentation. 29 (3), p318.
- 20. Value & Balanced Scorecards
- 21. Distinctions … Balanced Scorecard • Balanced • Simple • Performance • Discrete measures • Single targets • Direct data Value Scorecard • Unbalanced to suit context • Complex • Insight & prediction • Connected • Correlation aim • Narrative & advocacy
- 22. Initial Template (BS plus VS)
- 23. York levels of input • Service Unit template reporting (Quarterly) • Internal initiatives – Action plans from surveys, feedback, lean – Strategy projects • National & collaborative initiatives & services – UK Customer Service Excellence standards ( & RLUK) – LAMP; CCM; Research data; OA Publications – LibQUAL+; TechQUAL; ClimateQUAL • Corporate data (analytics) – HR institutional data; UoY Staff Survey; benchmarks – Library and other system data
- 25. The Library Capital dimension Tangible capital – Collections value data – Services value data – Environments value data – Valuation and link to values – Correlation between this, and impact, and transcendent effects Intangible capital – Meta-assets value data – Organizational value data – KM & intellectual value data – Correlation between this, and impact & capital growth
- 26. Increasing asset value at meta-level …
- 27. Human Capital Enablers (4 ‘C’s) – Capacity • Minus confounders – Absence, turnover – Capability • Talent: raw & growth • Critical mass – Climate of Affect • Engagement • Emowerment – Culture of momentum • Enablement • Programme capability • Maturity Outcome proofs – Market fit • Sustainability • Market related impact – Strategic fit (over time) • Quality & Improvement • New product development – Contribution to • Productivity • Creativity – Competitive impact • Service development • Reputational investment
- 29. People Strategy: some components • Corporate data & benchmarking • Structure & organizational change • Talent-Engagement-Enablement • Development portfolios • Management development • Customer Service Excellence standard • Collaborative leadership
- 32. ClimateQUAL vs UK and US Mean 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Climate for Continual Learning Climate for Customer Service Climate for Deep Diversity,… Climate for Deep Diversity, Valuing… Climate for Racial Diversity Climate for Gender Diversity Climate for Diversity of Ranks Climate for Sexual Orientation… Co-worker Support for Innovation Distributive Justice Procedureal Justice Interpersonal Justice Informational Justice Climate for Psychological Safety Climate for Teamwork, Benefit of… Climate for Teamwork, Structural… Job Satisfaction Leader-Member Relationship Quality Authentic Leadership Organizational Citizenship Behaviors Organizational Commitment Organizational Withdrawal Team Psychological Empowerment Task Engagement Interpersonal Conflict Task Conflict York UK Mean US Mean
- 33. Too many approvals are needed for routine decisions in my Department* *Results adjusted for negative phrasing (ie low score is bad, high score is good)
- 34. The pace of change in the University over the past three years has been positive by Tenure and Age
- 35. Customer Service Excellence Award assessed: March 2014 Achieved with two “Compliance plus” scores: Customer Insight Delivery
- 36. Assessor comments “The Directorate values customer engagement highly … to ensure that customers experience and views are included” “There are particular strengths about learning from best practice and presenting projects externally…” “The Information Directorate is a highly focused service delivered by staff who are professional, polite and helpful. It is … forward thinking and proactive … actively working to enhance services …”
- 37. Capability Maturity Model (see Wilson) Ad Hoc Repeatable Defined Managed Continuous 1 2 3 4 5 Continuous Improvement, innovative ideas Detailed measures, controlled Integrated Process Basic processes, repeated success Initial, ad hoc
- 39. Measurement dimensions Relationship Capital – = sum of all relationships – “Goodwill” value increase assessment – Relational data (=strength?) – Correlation between this, direction, activity, impact & capital growth
- 40. Relationship Capital - 6 ‘Cs’ Awareness & Fit • Consciousness – General audit of relational spaces (7 market model) • Congruence – Degree of fit of relationship activity to parent institution (gap analysis) Strength & Process • Communities – Assessment of strength level across all relations • CRM data • Strength index • Communication – Measures of the process of communication for relationship development • Communications audit • Down to individual level
- 41. Relationship Capital market model
- 42. Relationship Capital sub-frame Return on relationships • Causality – Specific outcomes of positive relationships on academic process, innovation, finance, quality & staff development • Comeback – Specific ensuing returns to the Library of repeat benefits of relationships – Transaction costs saved through Trust
- 43. Measuring relational strength Item Rating Does the ALL regularly attend Board of Studies? Is there a specific departmental library committee? Does the ALL regularly attend other departmental meetings (e.g. undergraduate committee)? Is the ALL on departmental staff mailing lists? Does the department keep the ALL up-to-date with general developments in the department? Is the ALL in regular contact with the Library Rep (in person, phone or email) How is the relationship between the ALL and the Library Rep? Does the Library Rep regularly attend Library Committee? Does the department regularly ask for feedback on the library on module feedback? To what extent is information literacy training embedded in the UG programme? To what extent is information literacy training embedded in the PGT programme? Does the ALL deliver PGR training?
- 44. Departmental action plans: Data
- 47. Engagement narrative “[The Department] have for a long time had a fairly arm’s length engagement with the Library though I believe that a significant number of students and staff have been regular and frequent users of the Library both for physical and electronic resources. Over the past few years engagement has increased with more active liaison between the Library and the department both via contact with the Library Representative and via attendance at BoS and Staff- student Consultative Committee.”
- 49. Measurement dimensions Momentum – “= mass x velocity” – Alignment proof – Progress data – Correlation between capital development through projects and time – Volume , pace, culture, and meta-assessment of organizational capability
- 52. Strategic KPIs (“clear departmental KPI toolkit”) 1. Meet need … 2. Resource … 3. Innovate … 4. Engage … 5. Align … 6. Risk … … satisfaction measures … financial measures … new services … relational strength … University fit … failure avoidance
- 54. Project momentum
- 56. York UK NSS result trends
- 57. York UK LibQUAL+ result trends
- 59. Impact correlation: LAMP Wireframes
- 60. Collecting the narrative …
- 61. CONCLUSIONS Implementing the Value Scorecard
- 62. The Scorecard score? • Virtue – Work to do on impact • Library Capital – Human good progress; other tangible mixed • Relationships – Progress; CRMs in sight; partnership importance • Momentum – Good progress on innovation & use in advocacy Overall need to move to correlations
- 63. Research agendas • Practical applications of value measurement • Innovation and impact evaluation • Big data sets • Visualisation • Dashboard production • Predictivity of intervention proofs
- 64. Social capital and value “There are intelligent [libraries] and stupid [libraries] … intelligent groups gather information better and adapt better to reality… thus we find ‘social intelligence’ Luis Anglada (2007) quoting Marina (2004)
- 65. Acknowledgments • Ian Hall, Ruth Elder, Sarah Thompson, Michelle Blake, Karen Smith, and all data contributing teams at UoY • The York Manuscripts Conference 2014 • RLUK Conference 2014 • Wollongong University • Matt Stripe & HR colleagues, Nestle (UK & Ire)
- 66. Sources • Value, Impact and the Transcendent Library. Library Quarterly 81(1). 2011. 111-124. • The value of libraries in Baker & Evans (eds) Libraries and society. Chandos, 2011. 303-325. • With Kyrillidou, M. Developing a values scorecard. Performance Measurement & Metrics 14(1) 2013. 7- 16. • The value of people. Performance Measurement & Metrics 15(1) 2014. 67-80. Forthcoming • Relationship capital. Library Management 2015
Editor's Notes
- This was Aelbehrt’s Industria And Alcuin’s perspiration Copying was hard physical labour and Alcuin is making the point that he did some copying work himself The point here is that there is “a clear distinction between the ‘plan’ and the ‘execution’ of the Library The link to this paper is that a sense of a library’s transcendent value has been around for a long time, in particular its impact on learning and scholarship But also perhaps that to measure this value also requires both a devoted plan and sweat
- One modern Director’s “industria” … in a dynamic landscape Articulating the value proposition Translating what we understand about changing need into strategies and plans The transformation and sustenance of our services into a different social, technological and economic future To demonstrate that our value proposition encompasses a contribution that transcends narrow and local assumptions about the library’s role
- How we build Library Value? Library tangible & intangible capital Including human capital development Library momentum quality maturity and pace of change Library relational capital within and beyond the University Library virtue contribution to transcendent outcomes Relational Capital: The value of relationships with users, both individual and collective Organization Capital: Tangible assets (collections, environments, services) and intangible assets (meta-assets, organizational capital, human capital) Organization Virtue: doing good and generating benefit - proof of organizational impact Organization Momentum: The concept of time
- The Balanced Scorecard Customer - how can we fulfil user expectations? Financial - how can we secure and use resources in an effective way? Internal Process Perspective - How should we organize internal processes to meet user needs and expectations? Learning/Growth - How can we secure the future capability of our services?
- The scorecard relationship as a codex, folding some related measurement areas together
- This is not at all to disparage the BS, or to reject its important features Both can be cultural instruments
- In order to enhance reports further, unit leaders should consider the following: Impact: What work has impacted upon delivering the core goals of the University? Momentum: What projects and improvements have been achieved which demonstrate momentum towards the Information Strategy? Process and Process Improvement: What changes have been made that have made more efficient or effective use of resource? Capital Assets: What have you purchased/acquired/collected that has increased our overall asset value to the University? Relationships: What relationships or partnerships have been developed that assist toward strategies? People: What impact have new starters or training or development had on services?
- Collections capital Strength CCM
- Human capital People value data Correlation between people data and all other elements
- Engagement and understanding of stakeholder requirements and context is essential for service design in changing times The role of relationships in innovation and new service creation is therefore critical “Success is a function of healthy relationships”
- Social capital and trust are in inverse relation to Transaction costs Social capital cannot be built on your own! Effective relationships add value and save cost where they build trust; so human interaction measures are a key indicator of value
- NB includes values statement You cannot start this until you have that clear agreed sense of values
- Virtue Impact data Correlation between activity data and transcendent effects
- LAMP Towards impact correlation
- The Library is still “a growing organism” (Ranganathan Law 5) Value measurement of all activity is crucial in constrained or customer-oriented contexts Two lessons from a place with great libraries spanning nearly 1300 years Focus on your transcendent value and avoid vikings