Enhancing User Services through Collaboration at Rice University This article was published in _CAUSE/EFFECT_ Volume 17, Number 3, Fall 1994. It is the intellectual property of the authors. 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 and that this block of information appears as part of the article. To disseminate otherwise, or to republish, requires written permission from the authors. For further information, contact Julia Rudy at CAUSE (303-939-0308; e-mail jrudy@CAUSE.colorado.edu). CAUSE is the association for managing and using information resources in higher education, located at 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 302E, Boulder, CO 80301 USA. This article is based on a presentation made in May of 1994 in Chicago, Illinois, at the Library Solutions Institute #3, "Building Partnerships: Library and Computing Professionals." Proceedings of the workshop will be published later this year by Library Solutions Press in Berkeley, California. Anyone who wishes to be notified when the publication is available should send e-mail to:charlotte@library-solutions.com ENHANCING USER SERVICES THROUGH COLLABORATION AT RICE UNIVERSITY by Kay Flowers and Andrea Martin ABSTRACT: Early attempts at collaborative efforts between librarians and computing professionals at Rice University led to the realization that some organizational restructuring was needed to effectively serve changing user needs. A new approach to delivering user services has not only benefited users, but also resulted in growth and skills development for staff. Cooperation between the library and the computer center at Rice University has had its ups and downs for thirty years. Cooperation was down in the summer of 1985 when the computing center proposed running the library's then new NOTIS system on the existing campus mainframe, and the library declined and purchased its own minicomputer. Yet by the summer of 1993, we had created a new department, User Services, made up of the personnel in several public service areas of the library as well as the public service areas of the computer center. Members of this staff group, although located in different campus buildings, are working to address information services for the Rice University community. This article discusses some of the milestones along the path from a position of no cooperation to a combined user-centered service organization, including collaborative outgrowths of this new structure. ENVIRONMENT Rice University is a small, private research university founded in 1912. It has a strong engineering and science program. Fondren Library has 1.5 million volumes with a staff of around 120. We face the usual budget and space concerns. Computing supports over 6,000 users with around eighty staff. Since Rice was one of the original Apple Consortium schools, we have a large installed base of Macintosh computers. We also have a wide deployment of Unix workstations in Engineering and Science, and are completing a campus-wide wiring project. Until recent reorganizations, the information systems support structure at Rice emphasized turf. We had an entrenched computing organization built around mainframe computing that had existed for thirty years. The library had its own systems group and ran its own machine, as did other academic and administrative departments on campus. The philosophy of "every department as its own kingdom" prevailed. But times change. EARLY COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS In 1984, a report produced by the Self-Study Committee on Computing contained several recommendations for changes in the way computing services were provided to the campus. In 1986, as a result of one of these recommendations, Rice hired a "computing czar," an associate provost responsible for all computing on campus. He, in turn, began to implement some of the other recommendations of the self-study, including a central computing information service and an expansion of computing resources to other locales, including the library. Since he recognized the potential for library involvement in several of these projects, he encouraged joint committees for planning and implementation. These projects were the first major steps in collaboration. Library in the Computing Center The self-study committee recommended a computing information service with one-stop shopping for those interested in purchasing machines. This idea was expanded to include common reference tools used by computing staff. The final product combined manuals, reserve copies of software, and journals with reference service to create a library for campus computing users and staff. As a new venture, the Computing Reference Area (CRA) required the services of a staff librarian to create the facility and manage the collection. In developing the partnership, the library contributed a librarian position and cataloging services, and computing provided funds and materials for the collection. This project had several outcomes. First, librarians gained experience working in a new setting. The systems environment in the computing center emphasized Macintosh and Unix, while the library was installing x86 machines for DOS and Windows- based software. While there were no major "culture collisions," staff noticed and discussed differences. The most obvious of these was salary. The salary differential between librarians and technologists became more salient to the librarians, particularly when hiring the librarian to manage the facility. While everyone agreed that this person could be a beginning librarian, or one with limited experience who could grow with the job, the computer center suggested the title "manager" for this position and suggested a salary that was $7,000 more than the then-current salary for an entry level librarian. In addition, having the librarian report in two areas created some management challenges, but communication between the two groups increased. Computing Lab in the Library Another self-study recommendation to extend computing led to the creation of a computing lab in the library. Known as the Center for Scholarship and Information (CSI), this lab was used to enhance the teaching of English through the use of computers. Planned at the same time as the CRA, the CSI also included video and software in an area containing viewing facilities as well as computers arranged in a classroom configuration, thus encouraging the use of technology in the classroom. Creating the CSI involved a collaboration of faculty, librarians, and computing staff. The project met with mixed results. As an electronic classroom, the facility was used actively by English and biology classes. As an experiment with technology, it experienced problems with limited space, inadequate funding, and staff turnover. Another problem was that, originally, the project was governed by a large committee of faculty, librarians, and computing professionals as well as the staff of the facility. Each group had different concerns and goals: faculty members were concerned with teaching in the classroom, librarians were concerned with collection and staffing, and the computing professionals were concerned with equipment and funding. Progress was hindered by the diffusion of responsibility and conflicts in interests. Eventually, the full committee ceased to meet, with day-to-day operations handled by the librarian with oversight for CSI and funding questions handled by computing. Campus-wide Information System Unlike the previous two collaborations developed as part of a formal planning process, the Rice campus-wide information system (CWIS) project was born out of chaos. Both librarians and computing professionals knew about developments in this area, but were unable to pull together enough resources to make the vision a reality. Finally, the assistant director of computing services and the assistant university librarian for automated services convened a group that developed a common vision of providing electronic information to the campus. From this initial meeting, RiceInfo was born. RiceInfo, a Gopher-based CWIS formally launched in the spring of 1993, has proved to be a powerful tool in the University. It provides access to a wide range of national and international databases mounted at other institutions in both the public and private sector and covering a broad range of disciplines. Some of RiceInfo's sources include LIBRIS, the library's online catalog; a database of research and grant opportunities maintained by our Office of Sponsored Research; the University's course catalog; and the Library of Congress catalog. RiceInfo has been cited in several recent publications as one of the places to surf the Internet.[1] With the RiceInfo project, both groups brought strength to the table: librarians in information organization and creation, and computing staff with software and hardware support. Librarians have assumed roles in verifying information in Gopher trees, locating new information, and suggesting tree organization. Computing professionals maintain all the software and hardware and load data. We share the task of contacting volunteers to be data maintainers. All of us have had uneven levels of cooperation in working with these information providers, but we have built a resource that is nationally recognized. Virtual Library Soon after the RiceInfo effort got under way, some librarians were asked to develop a plan for creatively dealing with electronic resources. They started work on a position paper identifying strategies to pursue for different formats of electronic information: software to be reviewed, hardware needed, and data to purchase or lease. As they worked they found they needed more expertise, and the original committee grew to include members of the computing center staff. The "Virtual Fondren" project, as this effort was called, identified desired tools and developed plans for their purchase. RiceInfo was selected as the best means for delivery of the Virtual Fondren electronic information, and resources were acquired as the first step in extending electronic access to traditional library information. As a result of this project, RiceInfo now includes some critical informational resources provided through purchase and subscription. Some of these resources are databases mounted using the WAIS software and searchable with keywords: Current Contents, a database of scientific journals and publications; the Modern Language Association Bibliography, a database of journals and books covering language, literature, and linguistics; and the Expanded Academic Index, an index of general periodicals in many areas. Other resources are provided remotely through subscriptions to services: CARL Uncover, a database of tables of contents of journals and a related document delivery service; OCLC FirstSearch, including access to the WorldCat database and others; and RLG's Citadel service, including the Avery Index to architectural information. COLLABORATIONS LEADING TO CHANGE By 1989, the original associate provost in charge of computing had become a vice president in charge of information systems, including the library, thus formalizing some of the ongoing collaboration. The first person to fill this job left in 1991 and was replaced by a man with a vision for technology in the classroom. As this vision was explored, more efforts at collaboration were undertaken with an emphasis on teaching and learning. Thus the stage was set for change. Electronic Studio Project In 1990, the Computer Planning Board of the University envisioned a new educational environment for the University-- the Electronic Studio--in which to prepare students for the world of the future. This vision involved an integration of information technology in the classroom and at the desktop. In 1992, with the hiring of the new information systems vice president, an intensive effort began to realize this vision on the campus. Originally compared to an architect's studio, the Electronic Studio is an environment for collaborative work with all necessary tools easily available. But unlike other types of studios, the Electronic Studio is not bound to a single place. The stage, models, and props of the Electronic Studio are built from complex webs of text, graphics, video, and audio. The productions organize these elements in novel ways to serve the needs of students and teachers from different disciplines. Written theories are transformed into demonstrations, and models into simulations. Audio annotations can be heard, and digitized video for demonstrations can be an integral part of collaborative work among teachers, students, and librarians. The Electronic Studio has provided the paradigm for most recent collaborations, for everyone is involved in providing the technology and information to enhance learning and research. Curriculum Development By 1993, the Electronic Studio project had begun to focus on creating prototypes for curriculum development. These prototypes involved librarians and technologists working to find appropriate solutions for faculty. Librarians assisted in locating information in all formats to be incorporated into the curriculum, while computing professionals assisted in working with the software available to provide the faculty member with the correct tools for presenting material. Student assistants provided scanning and documentation support. Each course had a leader, either a librarian or a computing professional, working with the faculty member and several students to develop the course. Survey courses in the history of art and architecture gained detailed image study guides, a national security policy course reviewed the conduct of the Persian Gulf War, and an introductory biosciences class recorded lab data online. The Electronic Studio curriculum projects provided a lab for experimenting with collaboration among librarians, computing center staff, and faculty. Each project also offered valuable insights into the possible dynamics of electronic studios. While each project required different expertise, all emphasized the collaborative nature of learning. Table 1 lists courses that were deployed in the 93-94 academic year. The 94-95 academic year will see the deployment of additional courses as well as an electronic reserve system. [TABLE NOT AVAILABLE IN ASCII TEXT VERSION] One aspect of these projects that is evident from the table is the wide variety of tools used in developing courses. The Virtual Notebook System, VNS, is collaborative client/server software based on the metaphor of a medical researcher's notebook.[2] Users record information on pages that can be shared with other members of the lab or class, thus encouraging collaboration over time and distance. Pages can include text, images, and graphics, and links to other applications, and notebooks of pages can be secured. Mosaic, a World Wide Web client, also integrates text and images as well as video and audio in its presentation of information. It offers wide access, but less security. AutoCad is familiar to most as a drafting tool, and Wavefront and xanim are used to animate and display drawings and renderings. More common software, such as newsreaders, can be used in the classroom to provide insight into current events, as was demonstrated in the course on the Gulf War. The scope of the Electronic Studio projects provided the impetus to develop the necessary infrastructure for future efforts of this kind. Service and support are critical to this infrastructure. With the expansion of computing in the classroom, the numbers and types of users expanded with the types of software supported, thus straining the service organization that was in place at the computing center. In addition, the types of questions asked broadened. Now, users of Electronic Studio materials could ask questions about the software, the hardware, or the information itself. As these projects began, the staff of the computing center was not in a position to answer these types of questions that more traditionally fell in the library's area. Yet, the question remained of how to provide quick, straightforward service for a group of users that would not have straightforward questions. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE The installation of network wiring across the campus, the increasing number of electronic library resources, the deployment of higher-end workstations in the labs, the prototype Electronic Studio curriculum projects with their wide array of software, and the migration to a new library system--all these projects served as catalysts for change. As a result of the increasing numbers of computing users, particularly whole classes of users, we were compelled to improve user services while being constrained by a freeze on staff growth. These constraints led to the creation, in the summer of 1993, of a new organization focused on users. Figure 1 shows the overall divisional perspective of the restructured Information Systems organization, with five major areas: * Administrative Computing--financial system, student information system * Networking Services--VM and DEC support, networking * Computing Services--user services, Unix systems support, business services * Fondren Library * Administration and Leadership--vice president, directors of each group. [FIGURE NOT AVAILABLE IN ASCII TEXT VERSION] We also had projects that crossed organizational boundaries. For example, the marketing and public relations team involved publications and consulting staff from computing with PR staff in the library. The training team combined training staff from the library with training staff from computing. The RiceInfo team combined reference librarians, systems programmers from Networking Services, and consulting staff. And the Electronic Studio team combined staff from all over the organization--networking staff, Unix systems administrators, divisional consultants, librarians, and grant-funded programmers. Within the new organizational model, users are the central focus, and User Services is the thread that binds the entire division. The new User Services group combines consultants, trainers, technical writers, and LAN specialists from computing with librarians from the reference and government publications areas. At the same time, we maintained a project team focus that allows us to address new tasks rapidly; some of the cross-functional project teams are shown in separate bubbles in the figure. The library perspective is shown in Figure 2. The library is organized into: * Technical Services--cataloging, database management, acquisitions * Special Services--satellite collections, Woodson research center, community services * Library IT--integrated library system, microcomputer support * User Services--reference, government publications, A/V services, training, publications, lab services * Administration and Leadership--librarian, heads of the other groups, some staff [FIGURE NOT AVAILABLE IN ASCII TEXT VERSION] The library also participates in the project groups described above and shown as bubbles in the figure. Again, users are the focus of the organization, with the various departments supporting them. User Services is in the area usually occupied by public services. Within User Services (see Figure 3 for this view), staff are divided into teams managed by team leaders or managers, depending on the size of the group. Groups include Consulting Support, Reference, and Government Publications and Special Services. Teams include LAN support, divisional consulting representatives, the training team, and the publications team as well as other special project teams. The team and group leaders meet weekly with the assistant director of computing services, who in turn reports to a board consisting of the Information Systems group directors. As the figure illustrates, users are still the central focus. [FIGURE NOT AVAILABLE IN ASCII TEXT VERSION] With our new organization, the focus is on serving customers. Customers have one interface to the organization, which implies that the rest of the organization must provide adequate backroom support. In the new group, librarians and computing professionals are working side by side as part of the same team. As the reference paradigm expands, computing consultants are learning about reference, and librarians are learning about computer consulting. Our vision for the future is a help/reference desk that is staffed by librarians and computer consultants[3] In implementing the new structure, we have experienced some challenges, primarily with differences in culture and tool sets. The culture of the library was passive-aggressive, whereas some computing staff bordered on aggressive-abrasive. This difference was very evident in project team meetings that would be dominated by computing staff opinions. Library staff often would remain quiet during meetings, allowing moderators to believe that consensus had been reached, but later would complain to their peers rather than discuss problems with the project group or management. Through weekly team-leader meetings, combined staff projects, combined social functions, and joint training sessions, we have begun to overcome some of these differences. By working together, staff from both computing and the library have come to appreciate their skill and knowledge differences, and create a relationship of trust and respect for their colleagues. In the case of tool sets, librarians favored PCs while computing staff used Unix. With some additional funding, workstations and training were provided for the librarians, who now compete for access to them. Due to an upper management constraint, we did not have adequate time to build consensus for the new organization. The initial staff meetings were difficult, with both groups claiming, "They're taking over." Librarians were anxious about answering software questions, and computing professionals were concerned that they would work the reference desk. However, through working together on projects, the staff have begun to create long-term relationships that will help the organization focus on future endeavors. COLLABORATIONS IN PROGRESS Since the reorganization, we have continued to embark on successful collaborations. Two examples, in progress, are the campus wiring project and the Information Arcade. Year of the Network In the summer of 1993, we began a project to extend the campus network to every academic and administrative office on the campus. Affectionately called "Year of the Network," the project involved library and computing staff from its inception. Both staffs share responsibility for delivering information sessions and training. The combination of the librarians' faculty ties with the technical depth of computing staff have led to positive experiences for many new customers. The project has been a lot of work--phase 1 involved 795 new ports in fifty-one departments. However, the experiences have led to increased interaction with our customers. Information Arcade The Information Arcade was proposed in the fall of 1993 as a showcase learning center in the library. Phase 1 will include small-group, computer-facilitated interaction spaces, areas for individual information exploration, an electronic text center, a curriculum development center, and an electronic classroom. When space for expansion becomes available in a few years, the concept will be expanded to include a combined reference/help desk. While this project has involved computing and library staff from its inception, several problems occurred. A multi-thread design process had several groups working in parallel without appropriate communication. We encountered political resistance to the first and later designs. Fondren Library was remodeled in 1989, but no space was added, and one area was remodeled for another department. Therefore, physical space in the library is a precious commodity, and several groups fought for their turf. We also had a re-emergence of the "computing is taking over the library" fear from staff and faculty. Most of these problems were overcome by expanding the planning committee to achieve a greater consensus. When the facility is completed in the fall of 1994, the library will become a center for information technology on the campus. Students will have additional workspaces, and faculty will have access to new services. We will also have a production center for future Electronic Studio curriculum projects. CONCLUSION Historically, the library has focused on the acquisition, organization, preservation, access to, and automation of information. Computing has traditionally provided machine cycles and tools, emphasizing technology with information provision as a by-product. The collaborations we have described build on these strengths, while providing the opportunity for growth for both groups and the development of new skills. Our new service model identifies information technology as the pillar of our operation, with the library and computing services as strategic partners. Given diminishing resources, we do not have time for turf wars. The kinds of changes that we are encountering demand a systematic, not incremental, response. Our experiences have led us to conclude that in creating collaborative projects, it is important to recognize that not everything works the first time, and some things may never work. However, given time to build relationships and foster communication, the kinds of collaborations that we have described are possible, and the potential gain in creativity substantial. In the present economic realities of higher education, such projects offer one way to make the best use of staff resources. ==================================================== Footnotes: 1 "Netsurf," _Wired_, December 1993, p. 126; and Loss Pequeno Glazier, "Internet Resources for English and American Literature," _C&RL News_, July/August 1994, p. 421. 2 G. Anthony Gorry, Kevin B. Long, Andrew M. Burger, Cynthia P. Jung, and Barry D. Meyer, "The Virtual Notebook System: An Architecture for Collaborative Work," _Journal of Organizational Computing_ 1 (1991): 233-250. 3 Additional information on the new organization is available in a recent publication by Kevin Brook Long and Beth J. Shapiro, "On Paths that Have Converged: Libraries and Computing Centers," _Library Issues_ 14 (July 1994): 1-4. ***************************************************** Kay Flowers is Assistant University Librarian and Director of Library Technology at Rice University. In the latter capacity, she works with the library automation group on the continuing implementation of technology in the library, including the installation of a new library system. She received her BA in English, sociology, and behavioral science from Rice and her MS in library science from the University of Illinois, and is currently completing an MA in psychology with an emphasis on human-computer interaction. Andrea Martin is Assistant Director for the Office of Computing Services at Rice University. She also heads the User Services group of the Information Systems Division, and is Project Manager for the Information Arcade. She has a BS in electrical engineering and a masters of music from Rice. She has served as a co-principal investigator for a NASA software evaluation and as a research associate for graphics projects sponsored by IBM and Apple Computer. ****************************************************** Enhancing User Services through Collaboration at Rice University