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


FROM THE EDITOR

This issue of _CAUSE/EFFECT_, which focuses on collaboration 
between campus libraries and information technology 
organizations, presented an excellent opportunity for CAUSE 
President Jane Ryland to elaborate upon the CAUSE Board's 
decision earlier this year to broaden the association's focus 
from information technology to information resources. The 
rationale for the change, according to Ryland, is that 
today's IT professionals must be concerned not only with the 
technology, but also the services and information people need 
to fulfill the institutional mission and improve 
administration. Clearly, our colleagues in campus libraries 
share in these concerns. As we meet on this broader playing 
field, it is critical for the good of our institutions that 
we come together not as competitors, but as members of the 
same team, each seeking to understand and appreciate the 
other's perspectives.

In his Current Issues article, which serves as an 
introduction to this special issue, Arthur Young points out 
that as librarians and information technologists realize how 
related their missions are, the shared goal of coordinated 
and effective access to information resources--including 
administrative, scholarly, and general information--must 
transcend issues of control and culture. The main objective 
now should be "exploiting points of convergence to advance 
campus information and technology agendas," forging deeper 
relationships across organizational lines. Dialogue, says 
Young, must begin with an exploration of the collaborative 
process.

Laying the groundwork for the experience-based articles in 
this issue is a piece by noted social scientist Sara Kiesler, 
who offers a definition of collaboration and identifies 
processes that make it difficult. Barriers to collaboration 
are also discussed by Widner and Lawlor, whose viewpoint 
shares ways such barriers have been overcome at their 
comprehensive state university.

It's one thing to understand the concept, and quite another 
to move on to actual collaborative projects. Promoting action 
is what this issue of _CAUSE/EFFECT_ is all about. In 
planning for it, we wanted to bring readers examples of real-
life campus library/IT collaborations that, for the most 
part, have been succcessful--although not without overcoming 
some of those barriers! We also sought to include articles 
written not from just a library perspective or just an IT 
perspective, but as much as possible from a combined point of 
view.

Such is the case with the Flowers and Martin article about 
the ups and downs of Rice University's collaborative efforts 
over a period of many years. The article represents the 
merged perspective of the staff who work cooperatively in 
Rice's new user-focused organization, established last summer 
to deliver the kinds of new services the changing environment 
demands.

Another article written collaboratively describes Indiana 
University's INforum program. What is unique about this 
collaboration is its focus on professional development, 
providing an opportunity for librarians, information 
technologists, and others at IU to explore commonalities of 
current and future careers in the information world.

A Good Ideas article by McMillan and Anderson of MIT's 
Information Systems and Libraries, respectively, deals with 
an operational challenge that took them by surprise, in spite 
of their having worked through the usual cultural 
differences: how do you prototype new tools and applications 
when your communities have different interpretations of what 
it means to prototype? Their solution--the Prototyping Tank--
is helping them to "move into the future while also 
delivering production services today."

As Young, Widner, and Lawlor all point out, much emphasis has 
been placed in the past few years on line management and 
organizational structure as key to bringing libraries and IT 
organizations together. But that doesn't necessarily work as 
envisioned, a case in point being the University of 
Minnesota's experiment in creating an Integrated Information 
Center. Nonetheless, this experience resulted in some 
positive outcomes and demonstrated the important role 
departmental information technologists play in supporting 
faculty and staff information needs. It is something to build 
upon.

Lowry's article about the University of Iowa's Information 
Arcade is rich with ideas about the potential for information 
technology to truly make a difference in teaching and 
learning, and Breivik offers a thoughtful overview of the 
need to take a holistic approach to planning and allocating 
resources for information technology.

As the information industry and the information 
infrastructure that supports it continue to expand, the 
question remains: how will we prepare professionals in the 
future to design and manage information functions, not only 
in academe but in government and the corporate world? The 
University of California, Berkeley has taken a first step 
toward answering the question by establishing a new School of 
Information Management and Systems. Excerpts from the 
document proposing the school are included in Berkeley's 
campus profile.