2CUL: A Case Study in Research Library Shared Staffing
Anne R. Kenney and James Neal
Need
• expand content coverage and provide deep subject expertise to support global collections in a joint capacity
• enhance access to research collections through shared delivery and borrowing privileges
• improve efficiencies from integration of technical services operation
Benefit
• build complementary global collections
• designate subject experts to acquire materials and provide in-depth research services for both institutions
• enhance access to the two collections through expedited delivery and on-site borrowing privileges
• securing faculty support and enthusiasm for these arrangements
• exercising collective bargaining in developing a Chinese purchasing/shelf-ready plan in collaboration with Hong Kong University and a Chinese vendor in Beijing
• analyzing digital preservation coverage for e-journal literature and discovering that only 20 percent of our e-journal holdings are in a trusted third-party archive
• investigate 2CUL e-book purchasing plans
• achieve flexibility in technical services by leveraging local talent and skills, eliminating some workflow redundancies, jointly purchasing some materials and services, and developing a web-based tool to automate much of the ordering process
• conduct a project scoping analysis to determine the feasibility and timing of a shared Library Management System (LMS)
• establish a 2CUL financial framework for tracking savings, costs incurred, costs avoided, and reinvestments made on both a recurring and one-time basis
Columbia University Libraries and Cornell University Library entered into a bold partnership in 2009, dubbed 2CUL, a play on their respective initials. 2CUL is a deep collaboration for providing enhanced collections, resources, and services to faculty and students at both institutions. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation generously supported the first phase of 2CUL (2009–2012).
Perhaps the most significant accomplishment of Phase 1 was building joint capacity to expand content coverage and provide deep subject expertise to support global collections. By pooling resources and limiting duplicative purchases, 2CUL has broadened the range of collecting in Asia, Latin America, and Russia/Eastern Europe. Equally significant has been the appointment of curators who serve both institutions in these areas. Two curators are situated at Columbia, where we share a curator for Russia/Eastern Europe and a curator for Latin America. The third curator, for Southeast Asia, is at Cornell’s distinguished Echols Collection on Southeast Asia.
In 2CUL Phase 1, our collective collection efforts took advantage of the existing staffing situation. One institution’s global resource area had staff vacancies, and one had subject experts who were capable of managing both collections and reference needs. We will consider three levels of deeper collection integration in Phase 2 (2013–2015). These efforts will be informed by our formal collection and usage analysis work, which will define the strengths of the respective 2CUL collections. On that basis we will set integration targets according to the following scale (with level 1 being the most integrated):
Integration Level 1: Integrated 2CUL Collection. One subject expert manages both CUL collections and the collection is integrated with minimal overlap for prospective acquisitions. In this case, one of the libraries may have a more extensive program than the other, and so one person will serve the particular subject needs (both collection development and in-depth reference) for both institutions. We are currently using this model for Slavic/Eastern European studies and Latin American studies. For Southeast Asia, one institution does not have a significant program in that subject, so the other institution serves as a resource for in-depth reference or instructional needs that arise.
Integration Level 2: Coordinated 2CUL Collection. Subject experts at both schools consult closely to shape complementary collections. In this case, there are significant programs at both schools, and therefore subject experts are positioned in both libraries. The collections and in-depth reference services are managed jointly by the experts at each university in order to focus on localized needs and reduce unnecessary redundancy. This is currently in place for our Southeast Asian studies programs.
Integration Level 3: Separate Self-Standing Collections. In this case there are very strong, critical programs at each school, and while some collaboration will be considered, it will not be a prime focus. For instance, Cornell’s agriculture collection is very strong, and Columbia will be able to rely on it to support its academic program focus on global sustainability.
Phase 2 collective collection actions will also focus on shared licensing, digital projects, shelf-ready cataloging, shared-buying trips, and a closer integration of collection analysis and use metrics to inform the collective collection.
Building joint collections and sharing subject specialists is becoming more commonplace, and one can point to the success of such coordination in the University of California system, the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC), and the Triangle Research Libraries Consortium, among others. If this were all that Columbia and Cornell envisioned in terms of shared staff, there would be little to distinguish 2CUL as a distinctive new model.
The first phase of the 2CUL partnership sharpened our understanding of the critical importance of deep vertical integration. 2CUL involves a large number of staff as a means to achieve economies of scale, build capacity, and create the enabling infrastructure to advance the partnership broadly across the two library systems. An area that has proved particularly intractable to deep collaboration is technical services, a function that currently involves many staff engaged in high-volume, duplicative activities that are also characterized by institutional distinctiveness and local practices. At present, technical services operations represent a little over 20 percent of the respective staffs of both Cornell and Columbia libraries.
The second phase of 2CUL (2013–2015), again funded in part by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, is ambitious in scope and depth. Building an integrated technical services operation will be based on two key objectives:
1. Reconceiving operations at each library to achieve integration across both campuses by realigning staff responsibilities, workflow processes, and reporting lines to reflect an integrated operation
2. Ensuring that all technical services staff on both campuses understand and embrace 2CUL as an institutional goal and view inter-institutional collaboration as part of normal library operations
Three functions in particular are ripe for integration: ordering new library acquisitions; licensing and providing access to electronic resources; and automated import, export, and maintenance of catalog data. Integrating operations in these areas will yield an appreciable reduction in the staff resources required to handle current levels of this work and will permit us to reallocate needed resources to new and evolving areas of focus within technical services. Areas under consideration include nontraditional metadata support for faculty projects and research, research data curation, support for other digital library initiatives, and further innovations in processing
We also hope to bolster support for services in other divisions of the library, such as collection development and the enhancement and maintenance of library resource discovery systems. Further, the creation of a 2CUL cataloging department within a merged technical services operation will immediately increase the scope of staff language and subject expertise for both institutions—skills that are crucial to fruitful and effective bibliographic access to our collections—as well as increase opportunities to engage in cost-recovery processing for other institutions lacking in this expertise. Finally, the operational integration of these two large divisions of Columbia and Cornell libraries will influence and help to sustain the mainstreaming of 2CUL across both institutions.
Both institutions believe that building an integrated technical services operation is critical for consolidating the partnership, supporting deeper combined collections, and developing new capabilities for meeting new needs. It will require work on a number of fronts, including:
1. A thorough and systematic review of all existing technical services policies, practices, and workflows at each institution, with a view towards reconciling them as much as possible
2. Development of 2CUL best practices, guidelines, and policies to undergird the integrated operation
3. A redefinition of job responsibilities reflecting cross-institutional organizational structures through which unnecessary redundancy can be eliminated and workflows harmonized to serve Cornell and Columbia jointly
4. The reassignment/redeployment of staff at each institution to expand capacity in new areas
5. The identification of competencies needed for success in this new environment and the requisite training and development opportunities for staff at both institutions
6. The adoption of a new organizational/reporting structure and culture
7. The creation of a formal 2CUL framework through which we can exercise joint bargaining power when negotiating with vendors and other third parties for services and content
Many aspects of technical services integration can be planned and tested within the separate systems currently used by Cornell and Columbia. Work completed in Phase 1 provides some examples. To enable Cornell staff to catalog Korean books for Columbia, we first had to agree on common workflow, procedures, and standards, requiring some change and compromise from both institutions. We then implemented a virtual machine approach that allows the cataloger’s workstation at Cornell to access Columbia’s Voyager database. As a second example, the Pre-Order Online Form (POOF) created in Phase 1 allows a selector to use a single input to initiate orders in both Columbia’s and Cornell’s Voyager system.
As we work to integrate management of electronic resources, our common use of SerialsSolutions systems will allow staff to maintain data for both libraries in a combined operation. We intend to extend these strategies to incorporate broader and more flexible access to each other’s Voyager environments, to further develop additional locally shared software, and to continue to search for vendor-supplied solutions to joint data maintenance problems as we begin to harmonize procedures and develop best practices for working together. These and new techniques that will emerge in the process can be employed more extensively as we begin to harmonize procedures.
The full benefits of technical services integration (TSI) will only be realized, however, when we are able to implement a common library management system that integrates data and workflows now occurring through separate software components. At this time, our explorations with various vendors and projects give us enough confidence to plan towards an implementation in 2015, but we will need to continue monitoring developments over the next two years and adjust plans accordingly. If new system readiness appears to be delayed, we will make more extensive use of the innovative techniques and workarounds noted above to realize benefits of staff and workflow integration within the next three years. On the other hand, if we see satisfactory progress towards new system implementation, we will do the necessary integration planning in advance but implement major changes only within the combined system.
We imagine a fully integrated technical services operation in which integration means that both campus units are part of a whole, specialization or particular functions are conducted at one campus on behalf of both libraries, and workflows are similar so as to support work sharing. For example, when one campus faces a backlog in technical processing, the other campus can pick up some of that work. We expect to realize efficiencies in selection and ordering of print and electronic resources, in data management for e-resources, in management of batch processing, in systems administration, and in more efficient use of specialized language and subject expertise.
Measurement of the collective full-time staff needed to perform specific functions before and after integration will provide concrete evidence of savings achieved and the ability to repurpose staff for emerging needs. This ambitious initiative will demand significant input from and discussion among current 2CUL staff under the direction of integration managers, who have been assigned at each institution.
The success of an integrated technical services operation will depend in large part on building a 2CUL culture that permeates the respective staffs at Columbia and Cornell. Phase 1 provided valuable lessons to guide this effort. The first lesson is: collaboration takes time. What may make sense conceptually does not translate easily into a shift in the way things are done. Change can be hard on staff, and they need to be supported in making the transitions and developing an understanding of the gains to be made. Second, cultural differences between Columbia and Cornell must be accommodated. Columbia Libraries has unionized staff; Cornell does not. Cornell faculty is more directly involved than Columbia faculty in changes affecting library operations. Third, for 2CUL to be fully integrated into the respective cultures of each institution, it has to be seen as providing more, not less, in terms of services, efficiencies, quality, responsiveness, and access to scholarship. Cost savings and economic challenges may have motivated the partnership, but they will not sustain it.
Mainstreaming 2CUL at the staff level in technical services will depend on integrating the 2CUL mission, vision, goals, and values into the staff’s everyday thinking and action at all levels across the two libraries. It is important that all staff be fully aware of 2CUL’s benefits and progress so that this shift in thinking and action can happen. Developing and implementing a staff engagement and communication plan to manage the transition to a different way of getting work done will be key to success. It will be critical to collect information about staff concerns/buy-in to the 2CUL model of collaboration and to engage staff at all levels and across the two libraries in the problem-solving process. This will tie their investment to the intended outcome of the collaboration. It also will be critical to secure the influence of the most effective opinion makers.
Another area in which we see great promise in terms of staffing is in technology innovation. In the second phase of 2CUL, Cornell and Columbia will explore a deeper level of technology innovation and collaboration across these three areas: major systems and services, platform and infrastructure, and pilot and “opportunistic” projects.
Major systems and services likely to require increased collaboration include integration and enhancement of a next-generation library system to support Technical Service Integration, innovation in search and discovery, and development and exploration of web archiving. Cornell and Columbia, along with several peer institutions, are developing technology infrastructure around systems including Fedora, Hydra, VIVO, and DPN. We expect to continue to share knowledge and increase our cooperation and collaboration related to digital preservation, repositories, data management, and forensics. Finally, technology teams from Cornell and Columbia will continue to seek out innovative projects that can leverage our respective expertise and enable new types of services, such as our recent collaboration on student newspapers, and potential projects related to research data and virtualization.
These objectives to integrate functions and share staff are necessary but insufficient to guarantee the long-term success of 2CUL. The collaboration must be understood and embraced beyond library walls. It will need to become an embedded partnership that is supported at the highest administrative levels of the two universities, within the campus communities, and throughout the library organizations. In sum, the major benefits of 2CUL will accrue once both institutions build and sustain a new and innovative research library future based on deep collaboration. The Technical Services integration and staff mainstreaming project will allow the two partners to engage all these issues in a significant division of library operations and will serve as a model for other institutions wishing to pursue similar partnerships.