The Task Force on Communicating Goals and Directions met on Friday, February 23. T. Casad, M. Eiteljorge, P. Ladwig, and C. Tuai attended.

1. Agreed on next meeting: Friday, Mar. 2, from 2:00 to 4:00 PM.

2. Discussed meeting with J. Younger and P. Ladwig concerning the work of the Task Force. J. Younger asked that, despite difficulties, we make our status report to LAM on March 7 as scheduled. She explained why a recommendation concerning strategic planning was so important. She also offered suggestions for preparing for the LAM report, specifically by evaluating only two or three statements and basing the recommendation on the limited findings.

3. Chose two sets of statements for evaluation: mission statement and directions/strategies statements.

4. Evaluated the statements for conflicts, gaps, and effectiveness using the criteria agreed upon in the last meeting. The statements were evaluated in isolation and by comparing the two sets (i.e, mission vs. strategy). The Task Force found that without some re-writing, the statements could not be made into a strategic plan.

4A. Found that the mission statement, although written as such, was 1) too long, 2) not unique to ND, 3) not powerful, and 4) not reviewed regularly. However, the Task Force felt like the mission statement could be built on, rather than discarded.

4B. Found that the directions statements, because they were not written as strategy statement, were unable to meet the evaluation criteria. For example, whether they met the strategic issued they were supposed to address could not be evaluated because those strategic issues were not explicitly stated. Once again, though, the Task Force thought that the one statement reported in Access could be built on in the creation of strategy statement.

4C. Found that the direction statement from Access was not governed by the mission statement. That is, the direction statement did speak to most of the items in the mission statement, but did not amplify it. For example, one mission is to "advance the goals of the University by collecting library materials in all formats necessary to support course work, research,, and service." The corresponding item from the directions statement says "Focus greater attention on developing library collections and information resources."

5. Discussed possible recommendations for LAM presentation. Alternatives focused on three groups: 1) status quo, 2) some sort of intermediate solution, or 3) complete strategic planning process. The Task Force was unable to come to a consensus. There was also some discussion about whether library employee concerns should be measured before or during any of the suggested alternatives.

6. Discussed next steps. At the next meeting, the presentation will be discussed, and then there will be a further discussion of recommendations.

Meeting adjourned at 4:30 PM