A great university: a great library

Knowledge Management in Academic LibrariesKnowledge Management in Academic Libraries

Joseph J. BraninOhio State University Branin.1@osu.edu

Sally RogersOhio State University Rogers.19@osu.edu

Crit StuartGeorgia Institute of Technology crit.stuart@library.gatech.edu

ACRL Pre-conferenceBaltimore March 29, 2007

Knowledge Management in Academic LibrariesPre-conference Agenda

• 8:30 Introductions, Agenda, Outcomes

• 8:45 Basic Concepts of Knowledge Management and Their Application in Academic Libraries (Branin)

• 10:30 New Technology Tools, Services, and Competencies for Knowledge Managers (Rogers)

• 1:00 Reshaping Our Space and Public Services in a Knowledge Management Environment (Stuart)

• 2:45 Taking Knowledge Management Perspective and Practices to Your Own Library (All)

Knowledge Management in Academic Libraries Pre-conference Process

• Process: Short presentations, questions and discussion, group exercises

• Active listening, learning, and participation• We want this to be an interactive workshop• We will manage time, discussions, focus on topic

• Breaks and Lunch• 10:00 -10:30 Break• 12:00 -1:00 Lunch• 2:30 – 2:45 Break • 3:30 Finish

Knowledge Management in Academic LibrariesPre-conference Outcomes

• Understand the concept of knowledge management and some of its basic principles

• Critically examine examples of knowledge management work in academic libraries

• Apply a knowledge management perspective to your own work in academic libraries

• Share your ideas, experience, and opinions on usefulness of a knowledge management approach to work in academic libraries

Basic Concepts of Knowledge Management and Their Application in

Academic Libraries

http://library.osu.edu/about/preslibdir/acrl2007jb.pdf

Joe Branin8:45 – 9:30 am

Knowledge Management for Librarians Overview

1. The evolution of work (collections work) in academic (research) libraries: from collection development to collection management to knowledge management

2. What is knowledge management, and what is its value to librarians?

3. How can we apply knowledge management to all aspects of academic library work?

From Collection Development to Knowledge Management

1950-1975: Collection Development

1975-2000: Collection Management

2000- :Knowledge Management

1950-1975: Collection Development

Major environmental factors• Rapid growth in scholarship and

libraries• Rise of government sponsored

research• Professionalization of collection

management

Collection development

•Acquisitions and selection

•Collection building

Increase in Mathematical Literature

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

1870 1900 1930 1960 1995

Andrew M. Odlyzko, Tragic loss or good riddance? The Impending demise of traditional scholarly journals. Notices Amer. Math Soc. 42 (January 1995), 49

Growth in Scientific Journals

3 1 2 11 10 12 10 2246 52 51

76101

172154

212

509

739

847

561

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1700 1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

University Libraries and Scholarly Communication. Association of Research Libraries, 1992, p. 80

Growth of Publications

354,875

832,833

1,400,000

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

1975 1995 2006

715,500842,000

968,735

500,000

700,000

900,000

1,100,000

1980 1989 1996

2,690,000

4,340,000

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

1992 2003

Citations in SCI and SSCI“Scientific publishing in Transition: an Overview of Current Developments”, Mark Ware Consulting

UNESCO Worldwide Annual Book Titles

Articles in Scholarly Journals “Trends in Scientific Scholarly Journal Publishing in the US”, Tenopir and King

Worldwide Production of Original InformationIf Stored Digitally (in terabytes)

2002Paper 1,634Film 420,254Magnetic 5,187,130Optical 103

1999-2000Paper 1,200Film 431,690Magnetic 2,779,760Optical 81

Lyman, Peter and Hal R. Varian, "How Much Information", 2003. Retrieved from

http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/how-much-info-2003 on 3/24/2007.

U.S. Trade Book Production

18,07019,734

22,180 21,71323,265

22,378 22,91424,159

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

1993 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

U.S. University Presses Book Production

11,941

12,897

14,110

14,787

13,667

14,236

13,631

14,48414,746

10,000

11,000

12,000

13,000

14,000

15,000

16,000

1993 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

1975-2000: Collection Management

Major environmental factors

•budget constraints

•commercialization of scholarship in the sciences

•emerging digital technology

Collection management agenda

•collection policy development•materials budget allocation •collection analysis • use and user studies •training and organization of

collection managers• preservation •cooperative collection

development

Monograph and Serial Costs in ARL Libraries

Journal Costs by Broad Subject

$105 $114 $124 $135 $147$201 $211 $228 $242 $254$239

$265$294

$323$357

$539$582

$632$687

$736

$539

$598

$668

$732

$800

$926

$992

$1,058

$1,141

$1,211

$50

$250

$450

$650

$850

$1,050

$1,250

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Science (Non-U.S.)+30.8%

Science (U.S.)48.3%Social Scirnce (Non-U.S.)36.5%

Social Scirnce (U.S)49.3%

Arts & Human (Non-U.S.)26.4%

Arts & Humanities (U.S.)40.4%

Library Journal, April 15, 2001

Cooperative Collection Development

• Farmington Plan of the 1950s and 1960s• National Periodicals Center of the 1970s• RLG Conspectus of the 1980s• Center for Research Libraries, North Carolina

Research TriangleLessons Learned: power of local autonomy, highly decentralized system, difficulty of moving print around

Advances in the Digital InformationTechnology: Growth of the Internet

In 1996 there were 90,000 Web sites, and it is estimated that the Web doublesin size every 50 days with a new homepage added every 4 seconds(Nicholas Negroponte, Wired Magazine, 2-1-96)

Growth of the Web

800,000

1,457,000

2,229,000

2,942,000 3,119,000

1,570,000

2,851,000

4,882,000

7,399,000

8,745,000

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

10,000,000

1996/1997 1997/1998 1998/1999 1999/2000 2000/2001

Public Web Sites Total Web Sites

Web Characterization Project <http://Web Characterization Project <http://wcp.oclc.orgwcp.oclc.org/>/>

Type of Library Use by Group and Academic Area

Faculty

Health Sciences

Humanities/Soc Science

Science/Engineering

All Faculty

Graduate Students

Health Sciences

Humanities/Soc Science

Science/Engineering

All Graduate Students

Visit in person

1998 2001

37.9 28.1

60.7 56.4

49.3 41.8

47.3 40.6

79.7 59.6

82.5 72.1

68.2 45.1

77.7 59.6

Use office computer

1998 2001

76.2 75.7

70.2 76.7

64.7 75.4

71.0 76.1

39.8 50.6

47.5 56.1

57.4 69.4

48.1 58.5

Use home computer

1998 2001

40.5 43.4

47.1 51.5

23.6 33.9

37.4 43

49.2 59.6

52.0 62.6

32.6 42.5

45.7 55.2

University of Washington Library Newsletter Winter 2002

User Priorities

Delivering full-text to the desktopProviding electronic full-text access to older journalsMaintaining the quality of the Libraries' print collection

University of Washington Library Newsletter Winter 2002

Continuing Growth of Publication

OCLC: 2004 Information Format Trends

Pew Internet & American Life Project

Nearly three-quarters (73%) of college students say they use the Internet more than the library, while only 9% said they use the library more than the Internet for information searching.

Internet: The Mainstreaming of Online Life 1/25/2005

The Internet Goes to College 9/15/2002

2000 - :Knowledge Management

Major environmental factors• New digital information opportunities and

competitions• “De-centering” of the library in the academic

setting• Rise of the social consumer internet

Knowledge management• Information policy and architecture• Managing print and digital information

systems• Enterprise-wide content management and

information services• Reforming Scholarly Publishing

Knowledge Management Basics

1. Data, information, and knowledge2. Tacit and explicit knowledge3. The dynamic and social nature of

knowledge managementPeter Drucker, The Coming of the new organization,Harvard Business Review, 1988

Davenport and Prusak, Working Knowledge, Harvard, 1998

Special issue on Knowledge Management in Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002

Knowledge Management Definitions

Data = simple, discrete facts and figuresInformation = data organized for a meaningful purpose

Knowledge = Knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experience and information. It originates and is applied in the minds of knowers. In organizations, it often becomes embedded not only in documents and repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices, and norms. (Davenport and Prusak)

Explicit and Tacit Knowledge

Formally articulatedDocumentedStored in repositoriesReports, lessons learnedFixed, codified

Transferred through conversationsDifficult to articulate or unspokenHeld within self, personalInsight and understandingJudgments, assumptions

From Claire McInernye, JASIST, 2002

The Nature of Knowledge Management

Knowledge tends to happen in and among people; it is the social life of informationInclusive or enterprise-wide view of data, information, and knowledge

Managing expertiseCreating a culture of learning and of sharing knowledge

Dynamic process of creation, elicitation, and sharing (concern for life cycle of information)

Implications of Knowledge Management for Academic Libraries

1. We must concern ourselves with a broader range of information resources and services

2. Create a culture and environment for active learning and information sharing

3. Collaborate much more proactively and deeply with other libraries, information technology services, and users

Two Examples of Knowledge Management Practice in Academic Libraries

1) Managing print and digital collections in new and cooperative ways

• Future of print collections• Managing storage and access to print collections• OhioLINK and deep cooperation

2) Creating an institutional repository program for collecting a broad range of digital assets

• Digital content management• New competencies and service models for libraruy

subject specialists

Library Storage Needs

Low Memorial Library1894

Butler Library1934

Overcrowded Shelving Conditions

Less-than-ideal Storage Conditions

OhioLINK Resource Sharing

Student OhioLINK Borrowing

Interlibrary Lending/Borrowing at OSU

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Lending-OSU Lending-ARL Average Borrow ing-OSU Borrow ing-ARL Average

OhioLINK Research Databases

OhioLINK Electronic Journals

More than 6,400 titles in EJC

Cost Effective Purchasing Power

The OSU Knowledge Bank

Diverse SourcesUnified AccessIntegrated InformationTrusted Archive

A Proposal for Development of anOSU Knowledge Bank

Submitted to theOSU Distance Learning/Continuing Education Committee

June 21, 2002http://www.lib.ohio-state.edu/Lib_Info/scholarcom/KBproposal.html

ByThe OSU Knowledge Bank Planning CommitteeChair: Joseph J. Branin, Director of Libraries

Data Maps-MetadataData Maps-Metadata

high low

low

high

Relative emphasis of content in WorldCat

Stewardship/publishing

uniq

uene

ssBooksJournalsNewspapersGovernment docsAudiovisualMapsScores

Special collectionsRare booksLocal/Historical newspapersLocal history materialsArchives & manuscriptsTheses & dissertations

Freely-accessible web resourcesOpen source softwareNewsgroup archives

Institutional repositories •ePrints•Learning objects/materials•Research data

Lorcan Dempsey, OCLC

Center for Center for EpigraphicalEpigraphical and Paleographical Studies and Paleographical Studies ““Squeeze CollectionSqueeze Collection””

The Knowledge Bank Broadly Defined

The OSU Knowledge Bank project proposes to create a knowledge management system for the University that will support the creation, organization, storage, and dissemination of the institution’s digital information assets.

The Knowledge Bank will be both a “referatory”providing links to digital objects and a “repository”capable of archiving the increasing volume of digital content created at OSU for long-term use and preservation

Knowledge Bank Scope/Strategy

• Broad, comprehensive scope based on enterprise-wide “knowledge management” concepts

• “Federated” approach to knowledge management: coordination, not centralization

• Phased implementation based on user needs, and on strategic and funding opportunities

Digital Knowledge Bank at OSU

Online Published Material• E-books, e-journals,

government documents, handbooks

Online Reference Tools• Catalogs, indexes, dictionaries,

encyclopedias, directoriesOnline Information Services

• Scholar’s portal, alumni portal, chat reference, online tutorials,, e-reserves, e-course packs, technology help center

Electronic Records ManagementAdministrative Data WarehouseDigital Publishing Assistance

• Pre-print services• E-books, e-journal support• Web site development and

maintenance

Faculty Research DirectoryDigital Institutional Repository

• Digital special collections• Rich media (multimedia)• Data sets and files• Theses/dissertations• Faculty publications, pre-

publications, working papers• Educational materials

• Learning objects• Course reserves/E-course pack

materials• Course Web sites

Research/Development in Digital Information Services

• User needs studies• Applying best practice• Assistance with Technology

Transfer

WorldwideResources

Columbus & Ohio Resources

OSU Central Databases

OSU Academic Unit Databases

OSU Faculty Data

Knowledge Bank

Engine

Internet

OARNet

OSU SONNET Network

The OSU Knowledge Bank Model

Unified Access

Knowledge Bank TeamDiverseSources

Integrated InformationLeadership Training

Coordination Standards Technical Support

Business Partnerships

Collaborative Research

Enriched Instruction

+New Technology

Trusted Archive

New Roles for Academic Librarians as Knowledge Managers

• Librarians “can no longer meet the information needs of faculty and students through the traditional avenue of simply adding to their collections.” (The Mirage of Continuity: Reconfiguring Academic Information Resources for the 21st Century, Brian L. Hawkins and Patricia Battin, Council on Library and Information Resources & Association of American Universities, 1998)

• “With the incorporation of distributed technologies and more open models, the library has the potential to become more involved at all stages, and in all contexts, of knowledge creation, dissemination, and use. Rather than being defined by its collections or the services that support them, the library can become a diffuse agent within the scholarly community.” (Diffuse Libraries: Emergent Roles for the Research Library in the Digital Age, Wendy Pradt Lougee, Council on Library and Information Resources, 2002)

Group Exercise: Charting the Life Cycle of Knowledge

1. Try to imagine and list the major steps or stages in the life cycle of knowledge

2. Attach to these steps or stages the role of the academic librarian or library might play15 minutes for preparation, 15 minutes for reporting