Strategic
Planning Steering Committee
Minutes, Monday, June 3, 2002
1:00 - 2:30 p.m. Room 222
________________________________________________________________________
Present: jy, pl, em, gd, lb, lf, me, dg, ms
Issue 1: Recap of last meeting (5 min.)
Desired outcome: To ensure there are no questions left over from the last meeting
Outcome: There were no questions.
Issue 2: Review of
reports submitted thus far from the subject librarians/liaisons (10 min.)
Desired outcome: 1) to know who has submitted reports and who hasn't; 2) to decide how to encourage input from those who haven't submitted a report yet; and 3) to find volunteers to "index" the reports for SWOT
Outcome: 1) We have a little more than half, but some reports on centers are still out. 2) The biggest concern is how to encourage people who have not yet submitted their reports to do so. Also, we want to thank those who have. Parker will send an e-mail to LIB-FAC letting folks know which centers they're supposed to talk to. He'll then send another e-mail to LIB-FAC thanking those who have turned in reports and reminding others to turn theirs in by Friday, June 21. 3) Each SPSC member should read all of the reports because some things won't come out in an index or extract. The reports will be put in a subdirectory with access rights for the SPSC only. There are some concerns about sharing the reports with everyone in the library. Parker will assign reports for indexing/extracting to the two-person teams which will be created for the brainstorming sessions (see Issue 3 below). They will be especially looking for goals/directions and needs. This will help identify areas that are the most common among all the reports. These indexes/extracts are primarily for the use of the SPSC, but will also be shared with the entire library faculty and staff to help them with their brainstorming sessions.
Issue 3: Discussion of Laura Bayard's and Eric's proposal to get input from the library (20 min.)
Desired outcome: 1) to decide on the manner of gathering input (e.g., brainstorming sessions); 2) to decide on the composition of the necessary teams; and 3) to decide which teams will interview which departments or other major subgroups
Outcome: 1) We discussed what brainstorming is and whether that will accomplish the goal of getting input from the library's faculty and staff. Each session will need to have an introduction and explanation of what the SPSC is trying to accomplish. We can then follow-up to clarify ideas, but the point is to not have a discussion in a brainstorming session. The brainstorming session will focus on a single question or topic. After introducing the purpose for the SPSC's work (aspirations which will support being a leading academic institution in the Catholic tradition and will make the most difference in the teaching, research, and learning of the University), the topic might be "What are some things YOU would like to see the Libraries do in the next one to ten years?" Eric and Laura B. will work on refining the topic by Friday, June 7, and submit it to the group for comments. Library faculty and staff will be given the topic before their brainstorming sessions and other materials that Eric and Laura will suggest (e.g., Cameron's three questions for evaluating opportunities, evolving directions/aspirations/goals extracted from the self-study, etc.). 2) The interview teams will be composed of two members of the SPSC excluding Jennifer and the ADs. The teams will be assigned library departments with the goal of having sessions with about 20-25 people. The teams will be responsible for working out the details of dates, make-up sessions, etc., but should have their work completed by Monday, July 15. Laura and Eric suggested using one dept. as an opportunity for the SPSC to see how a brainstorming session works. 3) Eric and Laura will assign the teams and their departments. If you want to switch, you (not Eric and Laura) can find someone to switch with.
Issue 4: Discussion of
Laura Fuderer's and Scott's revised SWOT index of the self-study (20 min.)
Desired outcome: 1) to understand their methodology; 2) to make any desired modifications; 3) to decide if this same methodology might work for the subject librarians/liaisons reports
Outcome: 1) Laura F. and Scott took the SWOT index and went through opportunities and threats, trying to identify major themes by going item by item. They especially tried to identify themes that would make sense to include in a document of strategic aspirations/directions. 2) Parker volunteered to add a third column to the SWOT index categorizing each item by one of the themes. This would help people who wanted to see how a specific theme was discussed in a particular part of the self-study. The SPSC also decided to eliminate the miscellaneous category and simply add those themes to the numbered list. Laura and Scott were also asked to write an introductory paragraph explaining the purpose and methodology of the list of themes. This list of themes will be used as part of the introductory material for the brainstorming sessions. It would be made clear that this in evolving list where more themes could be added, not a set list where other opportunities/threats should be made to fit under a particular theme. 3) Though the list of themes will help the indexing of the subject reports, the report extraction/indexing should focus mainly on identifying goals and needs of the departments and centers.
Issue 5: Discussion of
what other documentation/supporting information the library faculty and staff
should have in order to prepare for the input gathering sessions
Desired outcome: 1) to decide what needs to be made available; 2) to find volunteers to create any documentation that isn't already available
Outcome: Laura B. and Eric will propose what materials will be needed for the brainstorming sessions by Friday, June 7. If there are items that need to be created, volunteers will be sought then.
Issue 6: Next
steps (10 min.)
Desired outcome: To discuss likely agenda for next meeting.
Outcome: At the least, there will be a brief discussion of the third column Parker added to the SWOT index, a discussion about the findings from the subject reports, and a report from Jennifer about the June 24 deans meeting.
Next meeting: Thursday, June 27, 2002, 10:30 - 12:00