The entire transcript from that discussion can be found here: http://bit.ly/1hQT0zK. Here's what came out of the discussion that may help me frame the class better:
Here are the questions that came up as well as some of the responses:
What's preventing you from getting outside of the physical library and meeting your patrons in their environment?
- Most of ours happens through our liaison program, but lots of librarians need more push.
- It's the how to get the "in" - don't want to show up uninvited, but don't know how to get themselves invited.
- If spending all day handling article requests, when do you reach out?
- If we're busy in the library, why leave? But think of all the unreached potential!
- I have the problem of geography: we're a 5 hospital system , yet I am "the" library staff.
- Expectation is that they come to me electronically (which is foolish).
- I was thinking that in my world, I'd be at the wrong hospital when most needed at another. Virtual works for that.
- Instead of trying to sell/pitch what we can do, she has been asking for time with key people to learn more about their environment.
- Schedule a meeting to "learn more about what they do..." And they love to talk about themselves.
- The key is that gentle suggestion of what we can do.
- I also like to sell systematic reviews assistance - because clinicians think about that but don't know where to start.
- re: explaining how we can help, I love to pull out our local information management competencies
- I think learning their language can help them understand the importance of what #medlibs can do.
- It takes awhile to learn the language a particular group uses. But it's also imperative to spin it back to the language you're familiar.
- People are probably more comfortable talking about what they do. Gives us the opportunity to selectively mention how we can help.
- I think if we can reference things they understand, then things click for them. Big time.
- I show a list of things the library wants their students/residents to know in terms of "competencies".
- I find our competencies a great piece for starting conversations, or to introduce at the right time. Others don't find this so easy.
- Having a good hook is good. Made a few contacts with informationist grant. Announcing a new resource is also good.
- My big hook is our competencies, and systematic reviews, and do you REALLY know how to search? Because I do...
- Don't discount newsletter. I've had calls from my job being announced in the latest to faculty.
- We were talking about marking within the library today using the hook of your search vs. our search.
- Best thing so far was being a part of the EBP committee
- After finding out faculty needs, finding common ground with my expertise. ex. info lit.
- I teach a session that way, finding common ground with my expertise - ex. info lit, ebp.
- Committee work is good. I didn't think one was worth it, but now I realize it is.
- Being on IRB has definitely changed perceptions about my understanding of faculty research.
- Not too hard, fair amount of listening - but similar job reqs (service, scholarship, etc.) btw fac + us helped.
- For searching, have 1 desperate fac get a "go find more articles" for a review AND you strike gold = user4life.
- One of the things we try to do is introduce new liaisons to key stakeholders, who we know are library friendly and helpful.
- We need to hire people with outgoing personalities if this is what is expected. Librarianship has officially changed.
- Review the work being done by those you want to talk with. Put your extrovert hat on, at least for events.
- Either that or at least those who are willing to step out of their comfort zone.
- In my case, reviewing NSG or allied health ed lit is part of my process.
- For some, another avenue to pursue.
- This is hard and critical!
- AAHSL has us counting transactions still... what other measures do we have?
- After you've done the work, you have to share it with administration and show value of impact.
- Repeat requests, new individuals asking for help, new opportunities/projects that arise from efforts.
- What we are interested in is connecting our users with the info they need. It's hard to quantify.
- Ours are "staying away in droves", too, except as an "internet café". Most library use is DIY or remote.
- Letters, emails from individuals, grants, and/or projects worked on, committee work within school/hospital.
- You're telling a story which helps, but would admin read all of that? or is it like a report to Congress that isn't really read?
- When we do some programs, we spend money on graphic design & send snail mail. With less snail mail, people pay more attention.
- "Value" is a key question. And one we may be faced with at any time. We need answers for that.
- I think report the highlights, those things that best meet needs of groups served.
- Not sure it can always be a number as every group is different, numbers may not always tell the story.
- Get notes from the VP from nursing that he is making a difference, improving care < - ROI.
- $$$$ talks. What do we contribute to patient care? What do we (and our resources) contribute to grant funding?
- Don't forget the stories! We've discussed this before, need to have stats and stories.
- VCU periodically pays for studies to measure the impact of library resources on research enterprise.
- I don't think the methodology is perfect, but it gives us some data from a validated approach.
- Yes, stories mixed with numbers. I'm trying to learn what those should be though. Patient care is high.
- Number of classes & consultations. # of grants work on along with research projects.
- Knowing the activity and engagement, I think that is huge ROI, but hard to monetize.
- It's amusing to me that libs worked so hard to make stuff available digitally, but now we're surprised that in-house stats are down.
- In general, our liaisons have no excuses. There is nothing to do in the library, we must get out to help people.
- We make everything available electronically, but do they really know how to use it?
- I have provided items for nursing and medical staff newsletters
- We also have to note changing users = new behaviors. UGs love chat service, even when in the building.
- I confess that I always enjoy patrons' surprise and appreciation when I tell them that I am happy to meet with them in their offices.
- People use the virtual library extended through digital content, but have no reason to physically use our building.
- IACUC has helped with understanding but almost nobody wants our help with search.
- I contacted "magnet status' people today; is my perception of EBP lib. use justified, formal lib uses?
- I think I want to be on the IRB (Shoot me now).
- Swamped now, why outreach to create more business.
- Are there any 'sacred cows' that could end?
- Are you helping people who have the ear of those in power? If so, fine. If not, you need to get those people.
- I also think there's a bit of luck in finding the right person, committee, etc.
- The key is flexibility. We need to be aware of our patrons' needs and help in the best way we can.
- I still think that a mix of personalities is best: not all patrons are outgoing & they can be overwhelmed by those librarians.
- Extroverts can be overwhelming to some. For those, more reserved people are more successful.
- Or outgoing enough but not overbearing. I'm middling myself. I think.
- Ideally, patrons would find a comfortable match amongst lib staff, yet another reason I question the liaison model.Liaison model makes LOTS of sense in many ways, but we have seen patrons NOT connect w/ "their" liaison, and be discouraged from working w/another librarian they feel comfortable w/. Hate to see wasted opp.
- We're testing a team approach to cover massive Health Studies dept. Some relationships pull towards on or another.
- If the Liaison doesn't make the connection, would anyone else succeed?
- Does it matter which liaison gets tapped for X, Y, Z? No - more need coverage to also do other cool stuff.
- And cross-training not an option, I suppose? Or not possible in these types of relationships?
- Liaisons need to understand their limits and refer to colleagues when needed.
- Cross training is in your best interest if you can. At least know about data and scholarly communication.
- That makes lots of sense to me - more coverage/expertise, more personalities = + likelihood of relationship-building.
- Is complete cross-training seen as encroaching on another's job too much though?
- We're working with clinical and basic sci liaisons for SOM. If one picks up a connection in the other area, that works for me.
- Knowing PubMed & MeSh well is not X training but allows you to work in all biomed if ref interview good.
- We don't tend to do FULL, but triage or tiered cross-training is useful - expert can remain the expert.
- I'd say if you're a liaison and unable to connect with a key person because of personality, it's better to refer to another.
- I think part of it is there also needs to be some trust between colleagues, not always territorial.
