Theme: DEFF review 2008 – the library as strategic partner
The research library can get an even more central role in relation to research and learning processes in the universities in the coming year. That was the main message from the review which DEFF carried out in September 2008. However, it was also stressed that this presupposes a targeted effort from the libraries and DEFF.
The review took the form of a seminar with presentations of papers and discussions over two days, which were subsequently summed up in a report with conclusions and recommendations. This report therefore represents an assessment of DEFF’s strategy, overall prioritisations and action lines in the light of international development within the field of libraries, education and research. The report was compiled by the DEFF secretariat in cooperation with the reviewers.
The reviewers are representatives from the English JISC and the Dutch SURF, both of which DEFF cooperates with through Knowledge Exchange. The report is moreover based on discussion papers about DEFF from DEFF’s programme groups and about the more general development from professor Hans Siggaard Jensen and deputy director Birte Christensen-Dalsgaard.
DEFF has previously conducted similar reviews in 2001 and 2005. This most recent review from 2008 was carried out towards the end of the previous steering committee’s term and can thus be included in the new steering committee’s strategic basis for decision-making.
In a strategic context the issues in the review can be divided into two areas: professional and organisational. The former includes a description of the development within research and education and the development within libraries and information technology as well as a number of professional recommendations. The organisational challenges stem partly from the professional problem issues, partly from a more concrete assessment of DEFF’s present organisation. In the following a number of the most important points within these areas are described.
Development within research and education
The previous review from 2005 described a number of development tendencies for research. They are still relevant, but in the latest review greater emphasis is placed on innovation as an increasingly important factor in the universities.
Innovation is defined as an idea that can create value in a social system – e.g in a market. Thus it is not sufficient for an innovation system to possess new knowledge, one also needs a good idea.
Traditionally speaking research and innovation were considered as separate domains, and it was expected that innovation would naturally evolve from research. However, increased focus has come to be placed on connecting research to innovation and on supporting the innovation process itself.
This endeavour can create new challenges for the libraries. Are the libraries – apart from their traditional task of supporting the researcher’s search for new knowledge – also to support the creation of value? This might for example happen with systems which to a greater degree can contribute to new ideas and inspiration. Either way the development within the library field and IT seems to provide the libraries with the opportunity to move closer to the research and education processes in the universities.
Development within library and information technology
The review points out that the library represents two core values: reliability and structure. The library’s role as information provider is becoming less central for both research and education, but based on the traditional core values the library can develop services to support processes within the field of research and learning.
The library can for example use some of the new technologies to structure scientific data and contribute to the interpretation of these. It may be technologies for visualisations or so-called mashups where data and functionality from different sources are integrated to a new application. In this connection the importance of open standards and dynamic systems, which facilitate integration with other systems, is stressed. With new technologies the library can contribute to structuring and mediating data in new ways.
Technological developments such as cloud computing, pervasive computing and mobile units likewise on offer new possibilities to the library. The library can be present on new platforms with services to the users, but at the same time the development challenges more traditional services. The weakening of the library’s role as information provider underlines the importance of the library moving closer to research and learning processes and contributing in new ways. These processes are still under development and research and learning processes generate for example an increasing number of data which the library can help handling. Apart from this a number of library fields such as for example explorative search and information literacy have many connections to more formal learning processes. The general picture of the technological development within the library field is thus a movement from collection to services based on the library’s traditional core values.
Professional recommendations
On the basis of experiences from Holland and England the reviewers reached similar conclusions. They stressed the fact that the library must be able to handle ’enhanced publications’ and ’packages technologies to structure scientific data and contri - and knowledge’ (models, visualisation and other non-text-based content) that appear as the result of research and learning processes. They also emphasized the need for the library to move close to the users, thereby gaining a closer integration with research and education. They furthermore felt that these endeavours could profitably happen on the basis of cooperation on virtual learning environments and virtual research environments.
The reviewers recommended an increased focus furthering Open Access also in relation to learning objects, and that the libraries should work with a more formalised and structured approach to information literacy. Finally, they highlighted a number of problems that cannot be solved by the libraries on their own. Thus they warned against major projects within central areas unless it is part of a prioritisation the universities. Open Access and publishing policies, information literacy and the libraries’ role in relation to virtual learning and research platforms were put forward as examples.
Organisational challenges
There was general praise to DEFF for the results and backing for the strategic direction. However, the reviewers did point out a number of areas where the organisation of the collaboration could perhaps be optimized.
It was emphasized that the steering committee’s role could be more explicitly determined. A distinction was made between a steering committee that actively determines direction and prioritisations, and an executive committee which to a greater degree challenges and controls the management’s plans and financial decisions. The reviewers felt that the steering committee ought to consider which role it wishes to fulfil.
As far as the programme groups were concerned their efforts were praised, but the reviewers thought that the groups might improve their communication skills in relation to which problems one wishes to solve and the connection with the overall strategic prioritisations. It would make it easier for outsiders to understand the solutions proposed. More explicit success criteria and measurable targets were also called for.
The organisation of DEFF’s programme groups has been based on a three-tier IT architecture. The reviewers did not find the organisation intuitively comprehensible and lucid, and they suggested an organisation based on a three-tier in: ’information supply’, information management’ and ’information literacy’.
They furthermore felt that DEFF ought to work out a strategy for what DEFF wants with the educational institutions and which role these institutions can play in DEFF’s overall strategy. Finally an increased focus on an ’advocacy role’ was proposed, where DEFF tries to promote certain points of view. This suggestion should been seen in the light of the opinion that many problem issues cannot be successfully dealt with without the universities’ backing.
The review thus underlined the fact that DEFF and the libraries have to engage the universities in strategic initiatives. It is for example not expedient to conduct library projects within e-learning and information literacy if these have not got a strategic priority with the mother institution. It is a challenge for DEFF to obtain this type of strategic coordination and to put the mother institutions under the obligation of attending to strategic library development.
Great challenges are likewise facing the individual library. The library must apparently offer ever more complicated solutions and IT services in order to appear attractive to research and learning environments. This may be difficult for the individual library to handle without close collaboration with other libraries. At the same time the library has to support a process focus and move even closer to local learning and research environments which may make coordination and keeping pace with other libraries difficult.
Publication may be found at the address http://www.bibliotekogmedier.dk/fileadmin/publikationer/publikationer_engelske/deff/annualreport_2008/index.htm