Course:LIBR559A/Yeh, S.-T., & Walter, Z. (2016, November).

From UBC Wiki

Purpose:

“With the development of digital technologies, various disruptive innovations have emerged that are gradually replacing academic libraries in the information-seeking process. As academic libraries become less relevant to their users, it is imperative that they develop strategies to respond to disruption. We highlight the fact that the service mission of academic libraries is in alignment with service innovation and propose that academic libraries respond to disruption by accelerating service innovation. Applying the Resources-Processes-Values framework, we recommend that, to facilitate service innovation high-level administrators become innovation leaders, foster an innovation-supportive culture, tie performance evaluations and rewards to innovation outcomes, and create dedicated innovation teams with high levels of decision-making autonomy. We also recommend that academic libraries involve their users and build partnerships with other libraries and with commercial communities to bring about service innovation necessary to respond to disruption.

Main argument:

The authors advocate for an institution-wide audit of values and goals combined with an understanding of current resources to set an understanding of the organization as it exists and then launch methods based, management supported, innovation initiatives.

Method:

While focusing on a service narrative the authors employ the Resources-Processes-Values (RPV) framework. The RPV framework employees “tangible and intangible assets, knowledge, and relationships that are owned and controlled by the firms,” analyzes “patterns of interaction, communication, and decision making,” and sets “priorities that enable [the firm] to judge what is attractive or important and should be pursued” (pp 797-8).

Topics:

System design, disruptive technology, innovation, organizational audit, organizational change, resilience

Novel ideas/weakness:

The authors propose an innovation based means by which libraries become able to combat the disruptive innovation currently changing the landscape. Focusing on an institutional audit of all resources and understanding where the organization begins is a fundamental first step. From institutional audits to imagining structures and ideas of what the institution wishes to become and situate itself in the future has the ability to (re-)address many systemic issues that arise from identity politics and which libraries are often loathe to confront.

Yeh and Walter propose linking reward and promotion within a library to successful innovation endeavors. This is a radical idea, moving academic librarians out of a publish or perish work cycle and public librarians out of a comfortable position of aging into benefits by seniority. However, it has the possibility to introduce a different publish or perish mentality: innovate or die; and in this case, innovate successfully or perish. So too, an organization risks reproducing systemic biases that are already present: those librarians who are more inclined to participate will still participate, those librarians who must participate due to diversity will still participate due to diversity. Innovation and disruptive innovation does not automatically lead to a change in work culture.

Page author: Erin Brown