Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Competing values:an examination of library administrators’ perceptions and behaviors in competitive and performance measurement information use in developing strategic responses and reporting strategic impacts and value for their organization
Presented by
Larry Nash White, PhD
Libraries tell great stories…
Background of problem
Overarching Research Question:
How do head library administrators in North Carolina use competitive and performance information in generating their library’s strategic responses and reporting their strategic value?
Research Question
Competitive or not?
Competitive info used?
PM info used?
“The government are extremely fond of amassing great quantities of statistics. They are raised to the nth degree, the cube roots are extracted, and the results are arranged into elaborate and impressive displays. What must be kept in mind, however, is that in every case, the figures are first put down by a village watchman, and he puts down anything he damn well pleases.”
Josiah Stamp, English economist and banker (1880 – 1941)
Research Questions - Context
What competitive perceptions do head library
administrators in North Carolina have about themselves, their fellow head library administrators, and their library?
What types of competitive / performance
measurement information do head library administrators in North Carolina use to perform administrative functions in their library?
What types of competitive / performance
measurement information / data do head library administrators in North Carolina use to address strategic value questions posed by stakeholders?
Research Sub-questions 1-3
Michael Porter
Thomas Davenport
Does counting count?
How do head library administrators in North
Carolina allocate resources to perform performance measurement?
How do libraries in North Carolina compete to recruit / retain strategically important staff and administrators?
Research Sub-questions 4-5
The research design is a three stage, mixed methods research design involving:
Stage 1: surveys of academic and public library administrators’ perceptions and practices in using competitive and performance measurement information to generate strategic value (addressing sub-questions 1 - 5);
Stage 2: interviews with key informants (addressing sub-questions 1-4); and
Stage 3: case studies (addressing sub-questions 1 – 3, 5).
Methodology
Response rate: 39 % (73/194)
15% use Escape question!
Al Capone method used…
The study population included all of the Head
Library Administrators (HLA) of North Carolina:
77 public libraries
58 community college libraries
59 academic library (private and public funded)
194 respondents.
Response Rate by Library type: (37.7% PL, 39.3% AL)
Pub Lib HLA note: All public library directors must have completed a library administration course in their MLS / MLIS professional education in order to be certified: 1) as a public librarian and 2) as a library director in order for their library to receive State Aid.
Participants Information
F/M ratio: 2.5:1
Average respondent age: 54
MLS awarded: 1970-2008
Competitive or Not?
Findings: Sub-question 1
HLA Exp 19 years (1,39)
In-library admin exp. 6+ years (1,39)
84% have no prior administrative experience before becoming HLA
Comp or not?
Answer Response %
Yes 44 75.86%
No 14 24.14%
Total 58 100.00%
Comp / PM information used to perform administrative functions?
Findings: Sub-question 2
Comp / PM information used to address strategic value questions?
Findings: Sub-question 3
Resources to perform PM?
Findings: Sub-question 4
No strong correlations to experience!
Over $2,000,000 in costs!
Academic costs pending!
Compete to recruit / retain strategically important staff
Findings: Sub-question 5
Compete to recruit / retain strategically important admin?
Other Findings: Sub-Q 1
Few key informants known! No case study volunteers! Libraries feel small!
Competitive PerceptionsQuest 16 17 18 19 20 21
QuestSelf desc comp? Self comp rate
Others desc as comp
Self rate comp at work
Rate other HLA comp
Rate other HLA comp
4 Gender (0.058) (0.349) 0.065 (0.204) (0.150) (0.013)
5 Age (0.099) 0.141 (0.009) 0.026 (0.032) 0.246
6 Library Setting 0.096 (0.130) (0.104) 0.359 (0.267) (0.152)
8 Year MLS awarded 0.181 (0.142) 0.113 (0.014) 0.030 (0.099)
9 2nd degree 0.006 (0.145) 0.050 0.121 (0.122) (0.252)
11 HLA exp total 0.103 (0.010) 0.173 0.171 (0.064) 0.244
12 HLA exp current library (0.269) 0.186 (0.205) (0.009) 0.027 0.059
13 Prev admin exp before MLS – Gov’t 0.015 (0.267) 0.060 0.050 0.128 (0.515)
13 Prev admin exp before MLS - For $ (0.093) (0.115) (0.027) (0.048) 0.139 (0.006)
13 Prev admin exp before MLS - Non $ (0.024) 0.108 (0.287) 0.151 0.036 (0.169)
15 Yrs exp before 1st HLA position (0.241) 0.118 (0.273) 0.046 0.055 (0.092)
No significant correlations to resources; recruitment or retention practices; nor to the types of metrics uses or which admin functions they are used in!
Competitive / PM information collected by your library is used to address which types of accountability / value questions?
Other Findings: Sub-Q 2
Other Findings: Sub-Q 3
Question Inputs Outputs Outcomes RIO, ROA, or CBA
Valuation of staff
experience or knowledge
Learning / educational outcomes
Quality measures (i.e. BSC,
Baldridge)
Efficiency measures
(i.e. 6 Sigma, etc.)
Effectiveness measures
Other
1 Assessment 18 18 29 10 16 18 3 2 15 2 131
2 Budgeting 19 20 21 17 9 8 3 4 9 4 114
3 Decision making 19 19 24 10 14 10 3 2 13 6 120
4 Decision making - in strategic decisions
18 19 28 13 13 14 3 3 14 5 130
5 Developing new services, programs, or delivery methods
18 17 30 12 19 15 3 2 17 1 134
6 Environmental scanning
11 11 13 7 9 7 3 2 9 14 86
7 Fundraising 9 8 18 9 9 8 3 3 12 12 91
8 Marketing / Public Relations
9 11 23 9 13 10 3 3 10 6 97
9 Organizational learning
12 10 19 5 19 19 3 3 13 7 110
10
Planning programs and services
19 17 27 12 14 11 3 3 13 2 121
11
Planning - strategic or long range
20 20 30 14 14 12 3 4 14 2 133
12
Planning -competitive response
9 8 18 11 10 9 3 2 11 13 94
13
Retention of staff and administrators
9 7 19 9 22 14 3 4 11 9 107
14
Staff Development 10 10 21 8 21 18 3 3 10 6 110
Other Findings: Sub-Q 3
Question Inputs Outputs Outcomes RIO, ROA, or CBA
Valuation of staff
experience or knowledge
Learning / educational outcomes
Quality measures (i.e. BSC,
Baldridge)
Efficiency measures
(i.e. 6 Sigma, etc.)
Effectiveness measures
Other Responses(10x14x73=10,220
Possible)1,578 Provided =
15.4%
1 Assessment 18 18 29 10 16 18 3 2 15 2 131
2 Budgeting 19 20 21 17 9 8 3 4 9 4 114
3 Decision making 19 19 24 10 14 10 3 2 13 6 120
4 Decision making - in strategic decisions
18 19 28 13 13 14 3 3 14 5 130
5 Developing new services, programs, or delivery methods
18 17 30 12 19 15 3 2 17 1 134
6 Environmental scanning
11 11 13 7 9 7 3 2 9 14 86
7 Fundraising 9 8 18 9 9 8 3 3 12 12 91
8 Marketing / Public Relations
9 11 23 9 13 10 3 3 10 6 97
9 Organizational learning
12 10 19 5 19 19 3 3 13 7 110
10
Planning programs and services
19 17 27 12 14 11 3 3 13 2 121
11
Planning - strategic or long range
20 20 30 14 14 12 3 4 14 2 133
12
Planning -competitive response
9 8 18 11 10 9 3 2 11 13 94
13
Retention of staff and administrators
9 7 19 9 22 14 3 4 11 9 107
14
Staff Development 10 10 21 8 21 18 3 3 10 6 110
There is a potential negative impact on the library organization’s ability to use competitive / PM information to develop strategic responses due if the current internal focus and recruitment over retainment emphasis continues. This will make it difficult for library organizations to keep attract / keep experienced HLA / staff with experience in using competitive / PM information to make strategic decisions in place.
Other Findings: Sub-Q 5
How do head library administrators in North Carolina use competitive and performance information in generating their library’s strategic responses and reporting their strategic value?
the overall levels of respondent interest, organizational capacity and ability to use competitive / PM information in the areas of developing and reporting strategic impacts / value and addressing stakeholder strategic value questions is sporadic in use; is primarily internally focused; and is more reporting than responsive in nature
there is little / no alignment between the competitive / PM information available and how it is used by HLA / libraries in admin functions or to address stakeholders questions regarding strategic value
resource allocations (e.g. $/staff/admin time) to support competitive and PM information use activities are perceived as limited yet HLA seem to have high expectations for the results of these activities
staff / administrators retention practices focus more on recruitment than retention, inferring there is less experience / ability available within the library organization for use in the competitive / PM information process to generate strategic responses and values.
Conclusion: Overarching Question
Results additionally suggest that:
I now have more questions than answers…
research is needed to better document and understand the use, alignment, expertise, and effectiveness of competitive / PM information by HLA in developing strategic responses and reporting strategic impact and values.
educational opportunities and resources are needed by North Carolina HLA in order to more effectively develop strategic responses and report strategic impacts and value for their libraries.
North Carolina libraries have limited potential in employing organizational intelligence and analytics to convert competitive / PM information into strategic responses or address questions of strategic impacts and values.
Implications
Research!
Education!
Responding will be harder!
This study’s conclusions are limited to the
academic and public library administrators in North Carolina who are participants and presently serving in HLA positions in their libraries.
Future actions will pursue determining how to
better understanding and explain the results of this study. Additional actions will include replication of the study in another state in the coming year to determine validity of findings and reliability of the study instrument; and extended efforts at conducting the key informant interviews and case studies to further examine and understand the problem and HLA information behaviors.
Limitations & Future Actions
Need replication, larger sample size!
Knowledge / interest needed!
“This survey is a hoax!”
“You’ll never have all of the information you need to make a decision. If you did, it would be a foregone conclusion, not a decision.”
David Mahoney
Closing Thoughts….
“You’ll never have all of the information you need to make a decision. If you did, it would be a foregone conclusion, not a decision.”
David Mahoney
There was a man who dreamed….
Closing Thoughts….
Contact information for questions, collaborations, or copies of the presentation:
Larry Nash WhiteDepartment of Library and Information StudiesGraduate School of EducationUniversity at Buffalo534 Baldy HallBuffalo, NY 14260-1020
Email: [email protected]
Office Phone: 716.645.1473Office Fax: 716.645.3775
Questions?
