Information Technology and Libraries -- A Virtual Convergence

Copyright 1994 CAUSE. From _CAUSE/EFFECT_ Volume 17, Number 
3, Fall 1994. Permission to copy or disseminate all or part 
of this material is granted provided that the copies are not 
made or distributed for commercial advantage, the CAUSE 
copyright and its date appear, and notice is given that 
copying is by permission of CAUSE, the association for 
managing and using information resources in higher education. 
To disseminate otherwise, or to republish, requires written 
permission. For further information, contact Julia Rudy at 
CAUSE, 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 302E, Boulder, CO 80301 
USA; 303-939-0308; e-mail: jrudy@CAUSE.colorado.edu


CURRENT ISSUES

                  INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND
               LIBRARIES: A VIRTUAL CONVERGENCE
                      by Arthur P. Young

This special issue of _CAUSE/EFFECT_ highlights information 
technology and library collaborative projects, testimony to 
an inexorable trend that is bringing librarians and 
information technologists into new and challenging forms of 
interaction. Principal forces driving the contemporary 
information environment include the rapid development of 
electronic storage capabilities, the emergence of 
technologies which facilitate access and use, and the advent 
of sophisticated network communication. These forces, in 
turn, are deeply influencing the very nature of the scholarly 
communication system, a delicate system currently beset with 
escalating costs, publication delays, and lack of uniform 
protocols for electronic formats. To these dynamic factors 
may be added enrollment declines, fiscal uncertainties, pleas 
for information equity among the subject disciplines, and 
demands for accountability within higher education. Extending 
the circle further, the globalization of economic activity 
and attendant competitiveness reinforces the international 
dimension of technological development, information delivery, 
and multilateral organization. This vast and dynamic 
infoscape both dwarfs and impels our more confined spheres of 
work and influence on college and university campuses.

There has been a protracted dialog in the academic library 
and computing literatures over the past decade about the 
appropriate relationship between academic libraries and 
computing centers. Articles have tended to focus on the 
similarities and differences between the library and 
computing cultures, with special attention on matters of 
organizational structure and control. Only a few large 
universities and perhaps a couple of dozen or more smaller 
institutions have placed the computer center and the library 
under single management.

There are precious few articles or reports on the rationale 
for mergers, and longitudinal data relating successes and 
failures are equally scarce. Some of these changes have 
engendered stiff opposition, and some attempts at combination 
have been subsequently decoupled. At the national level, 
convergent trends have been recognized in the form of a new 
partnership, the Coalition for Networked Information, a 
singularly important cooperative alliance of the Association 
of Research Libraries, CAUSE, and Educom. The Coalition, now 
in its fifth year, has brought together computer 
professionals, librarians, and publishers to discuss and 
formulate policy positions on such matters as copyright, 
licensing, and network protocols.

Beneath the rhetoric and experimentation, there is a growing 
recognition that the traditional boundaries of information 
and technology are more shifting and kaleidoscopic than fixed 
and linear. Libraries have traditionally been concerned with 
the acquisition of print material in a variety of formats, 
bibliographic organization, and furnishing access to the 
collection through a variety of reference and resource-
sharing mechanisms. A distinguishing characteristic of 
libraries is the allocation of scarce resources to large user 
communities. The arrival of electronic access, the automation 
of large internal files, and the availability of resources on 
an international scale have brought computerization in the 
library to an advanced state of sophistication on many 
campuses. Computer professionals have traditionally been 
equipment- and software-oriented, maintaining large central 
files for administrative operations and special data sets for 
research constituencies. The widespread computerization of 
campuses, the introduction of client/server computing, and 
the Internet juggernaut are reorienting the information 
technology community toward a recognition that computing, 
information management, and telecommunication technologies 
are merging. As the CAUSE Current Issues Committee recently 
stated,
  ... campus information technology professionals have an 
  opportunity to refocus their attention to developing tools 
  and information systems that will enable individuals and 
  groups to acquire, catalog, search, translate, and retrieve 
  data, text, images, and a variety of other resources.[1]
This challenge was made within the context of desired 
collaboration with other campus units, including the library.

The concentration within the information technology area on 
reengineering various campus activities, with an emphasis on 
the retrieval of relevant data for various constituents, is 
congruent with the library's client-centered and information-
related mission. Libraries are now grappling with traditional 
computing issues such as security, software compatibility, 
and data archives. Mission relatedness of academic libraries 
and computing services, together with the desired goal of 
coordinated and effective access to information resources, 
transcends matters of control and culture. The main objective 
should now focus on exploiting points of convergence to 
advance campus information and technology agendas. If the 
premise of correlated missions is accepted, there is a need 
to forge relationships at a deeper level than reporting lines 
on an organizational chart. Dialog must begin with an 
exploration of the process of collaboration.

The many facets of collaboration are cogently examined in 
Michael Schrage's brilliant volume, _Shared Minds: The New 
Technologies of Collaboration_. Schrage defines collaboration 
as "the process of shared creation: two or more individuals 
with complementary skills interacting to create a shared 
understanding that none had previously possessed or could 
have come to on their own. Collaboration creates a shared 
meaning about a process, a product, or an event." He goes on 
to note that " ... collaboration can occur by mail, over the 
phone lines, and in person. But the true medium of 
collaboration is other people. Real innovation comes from 
this social matrix. Collaborations have in common people who 
realize that they can't do it all by themselves. They need 
insights, comments, questions, and ideas from others. They 
accept and respect the fact that other perspectives can add 
value to their own."[2] Collaboration, the author points out, 
isn't just about communication or teamwork, it's about the 
creation of value. Information value, then, does not derive 
from the medium that produces it, but rather from the people 
who interact with it.

The following list, drawn from Schrage's work, identifies the 
core ingredients of interaction required to achieve a state 
of collaboration:
  *  Competence. Varying levels of competence are fine, but 
a serious imbalance of competence is anywhere from 
detrimental to fatal.
  *  Shared, understood goals. Collaborations are not open-
ended relationships, and relationships are subordinate to the 
goal.
  *  Mutual respect, tolerance, and trust. Successful 
collaborations focus on strengths rather than less important 
personal issues.
  *  Creation and manipulation of shared spaces. Shared 
spaces become the collaborative tools which are used to 
facilitate the relationship.
  *  Playing with representations. Uncertainty is not a 
problem to be solved, but rather an opportunity to be 
explored, often with a sense of play and boundlessness.
  *  Clear lines of responsibility but no restrictive 
boundaries. The emphasis is on collective approaches and 
solutions, not on territory.
  *  Decisions do not have to be made by consensus. 
Collective insights and ideas--not the achievement of 
compromise or consensus--are the primary goal.
  *  Selective use of outsiders for complementary insights 
and information. Special expertise can often play a 
catalytic role in reaching outcomes.
  *  Collaborations end. When the focus of a collaboration 
is achieved, the collaboration usually ends[3]

From an understanding of collaboration, one naturally 
proceeds to the activation of collaborative relationships. A 
strong commitment from senior administration is imperative. 
Targeted projects linked to strategic plans and pursued in an 
incremental fashion will have a better chance of success than 
a forced merger or an overly ambitious multi-goal project. 
The creation of new interdepartmental forums, with an 
emphasis on bringing together those people with the requisite 
expertise, will facilitate progress. If more formal alliances 
or organizational relationships solidify over time, then the 
preliminary collaborations will have yielded additional 
dividends. The dictionary tells us that the primary meaning 
of virtual is "being such in essence or effect, though not 
formally recognized or admitted." If we recognize the 
converging paths of information technology and libraries, and 
embrace the essential nature of collaboration, then the 
prospect brightens for a virtual information commons on our 
campuses.

====================================================

Footnotes:

1 "Current Issues in Higher Education Information 
Technology," _CAUSE/EFFECT_, Spring 1994, p. 6.

2 Michael Schrage, _Shared Minds: The New Technologies of 
Collaboration_ (New York: Random House, 1990), p. 40.

3 Ibid., pp. 151-63.


***************************************************

For further reading:

Battin, Patricia M. "The Library: Centre of the Restructured 
University." _Scholarly Publishing_ 17 (April 1986): 255-67.

Hammer, Michael, and James Champy. _Reengineering the 
Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution_. New York: 
Harper Collins, 1993.

Huwe, Terence K. "Information Specialists and the Cooperative 
Workplace: Challenges and Opportunities." _Advances in 
Librarianship_ 17 (1993): 1-31.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. "Collaborative Advantage: The Art of 
Alliances." _Harvard Business Review_ 72 (July-August 1994): 
96-108.

Katz, Richard N., and Richard P. West. _Sustaining Excellence 
in the 21st Century: A Vision and Strategies for College and 
University Administration_. CAUSE Professional Paper #8. 
Boulder, Colo.: CAUSE, 1992.

Long, Kevin B., and Beth J. Shapiro. "On Paths That Have 
Converged: Libraries and Computer Centers." _Library Issues_ 
14 (July 1994): 1-4.

Molholt, Patricia. "On Converging Paths: The Computing Center 
and the Library." _Journal of Academic Librarianship_ 11 
(November 1985): 284-88.

Rosser, James M., and James I. Penrod. "Computing and 
Libraries: A Partnership Past Due." _CAUSE/EFFECT_, Summer 
1990, pp. 21-24.

Schrage, Michael. _Shared Minds: The New Technologies of 
Collaboration_. New York: Random House, 1990.

Sproull, Lee, and Sara Kiesler. _Connections: New Ways of 
Working in the Networked Organization_. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT 
Press, 1991.

Woodsworth, Anne, and Theresa Maylone. _Reinvesting in the 
Information Job Family: Context, Changes, New Jobs, and 
Models for Evaluation and Compensation_. CAUSE Professonal 
Paper #11. Boulder, Colo.: CAUSE, 1993.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Arthur P. Young is Director of University Libraries at 
Northern Illinois University and an adjunct professor of 
library science at Rosary College. He currently serves as a 
member of the CAUSE Editorial Committee.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Information Technology and Libraries -- A Virtual Convergence