Strategic Planning Steering Committee

Minutes for Tuesday, April 23, 2002

2:30-3:30 p.m. Room 222

________________________________________________________________________

Present: Jennifer Younger, Laura Bayard, Gay Dannelly, Laura Fuderer, Diane Gram, Parker Ladwig, Dan Marmion, Eric Morgan, Sandy Stellema, Marsha Stevenson, Cameron Tuai, Scott Van Jacob, Melodie Eiteljorge

Issue 1: Recap of last meeting--J. Younger

Desired outcome: Ensure there are no questions leftover from the last meeting

Outcome: There were no questions leftover from the last meeting

Issue 2: How do we want to gather information from areas outside the library? Whom do we contact? When do we contact them? Who makes the contact?--J. Younger

Desired outcome: [a] Decide how external information should be gathered and [b] approve subject librarians/liaisons’ script

Outcome: Discussed the script first; the question about external information was raised but then postponed.

1. JY noted that the self-study/external review information about the libraries has already been incorporated in the libraries self-study, so subject librarians/liaisons should not have to spend a lot of time on this.

2. Discussed whether specific user services and information systems questions should be included, the committee decided to add another question incorporating the two programs.

3. Discussed whether the deans should be interviewed as well--the consensus was to wait because the questions might be different. The committee decided to ask that center and institute directors be interviewed. Gay and Marsha will make sure that these are covered.

4. Decided that the interview notes should be sent electronically to the SPSC listserv by the end of May.

5. PL said he would send out a final draft of the questions incorporating the discussion by the end of the week.

Issue 3: How do we want to gather information from areas inside the library? How should we use the self-study and other official documents affecting our strategic thinking? Whom do we contact? When do we contact them? Who makes the contact? How do they contact us?--J. Younger

Desired outcome: [a] Decide how internal information should be gathered and [b] approve first open forum’s agenda

Outcome: Discussed briefly the open forum; the question about internal information was raised but then postponed.

For the open forum, the committee approved the agenda as it was drafted and asked Melodie Eiteljorge to determine the best date before May 15.

Issue 4: Discussion of Cameron Tuai's class project: what is it and how can it help us? Discussion of examples that Cameron might use for his project--C. Tuai

Desired outcome: Understand the value of C. Tuai's project and provide him with examples for it

Outcome: Cameron distributed a diagram illustrating a business framework he thinks might be useful for our work. For his class project, he is specifically adapting it to assess opportunities for our library. He reminded us of Michael Porter's view that strategy is about making choices, especially about what not to do. In order to fulfill the requirements for his class, but also test his framework, Cameron asked the committee for examples of opportunities that he might consider. At this point, he knew that the committee had not made any decisions yet, so that these examples were really just examples.

1. Developing a collection in veterinary science based on its potential Catholic nature and the fact that we have some librarians who love horses was suggested as an intentionally bad example

2. Further developing the Byzantine collection was given as an example of an opportunity that would be difficult to assess.

3. Another opportunity that might be difficult to assess was enhanced document delivery services for all kinds of users

4. Developing the Medieval collection was suggested as a good example.

Cameron expected that his final presentation would be around May 3.

Issue 5: What other information do we need for our work? What outside speakers does Jennifer think would be helpful? Should these talks be open to the library or to the University?--J. Younger

Desired outcome: Decide on need and timing for external speakers

Outcome: LB suggested Dr. Nancy Cantor at UIUC. EM recommended that the audience be people across campus in addition to the librarians. SS suggested that we might want to invite speakers from universities whose libraries have something we would want to emulate.

JY suggested that since the plan will not be ready to implement in October we could continue to bring in speakers after that.

Issue 5: Next steps--J. Younger (5 min.)

Desired outcome: Review likely agenda for next meeting

Outcome: At next meeting will review mission, vision and values. Think about whether we have a statement that articulates values. We will discuss reviewing, affirming, or re-affriming those values.