University Community Engagement and the Strategic Planning Process

Abstract

Objectives- To understand how university libraries are engaging with the university community (students, faculty, campus partners, administration) when working through the strategic planning process. 
 
 Methods- Literature review and exploratory open-ended survey to members of CAUL (Council of Australian University Librarians), CARL (Canadian Association of Research Libraries), CONZUL (Council of New Zealand University Librarians), and RLUK (Research Libraries UK) who are most directly involved in the strategic planning process at their library.
 
 Results- Out of a potential 113 participants from 4 countries, 31 people replied to the survey in total (27%). Libraries most often mentioned the use of regularly-scheduled surveys to inform their strategic planning which helps to truncate the process for some respondents, as opposed to conducting user feedback specifically for the strategic plan process. Other quantitative methods include customer intelligence and library-produced data. Qualitative methods include the use of focus groups, interviews, and user experience/design techniques to help inform the strategic plan. The focus of questions to users tended to fall towards user-focused (with or without library lens), library-focused, trends & vision, and feedback on plan.
 
 Conclusions- Combining both quantitative and qualitative methods can help give a fuller picture for librarians working on a strategic plan. Having the university community join the conversation in how the library moves forward is an important but difficult endeavour. Regardless, the university library needs to be adaptive to the rapidly changing environment around it. Having a sense of how other libraries engage with the university community benefits others who are tasked with strategic planning

Understanding EBLIP at an Organizational Level: An Initial Maturity Model

“…Aligned with the internal driver to build a collaborative, evidence based library culture, is the external demand from university leadership for evidence based arguments to demonstrate why investments in university libraries should continue (Baker & Allden, 2017;Council of Australian University Librarians, 2016). Library directors have been found to use a variety of evidence sources to demonstrate the library's value within strategic planning activities (Lembinen, 2018;Newton Miller, 2018). Harland, Stewart, and Bruce (2017) reported that university library directors stressed the necessity of evidence in increasingly complex decisionmaking processes and in using evidence based value measurements to articulate the library's contribution to their university.…”

Evidence-based Practice

“…Abbott (2006) describes a research project within which the involvement of stakeholders was an essential feature as their input resulted in an increased understanding of the library's role in providing an engaging learning environment. In relation to strategic planning, emerging research is exploring how university libraries and library directors use a variety of evidence sources to demonstrate the library's value, including a focus on methods that involve library stakeholders in the process (Lembinen, 2018;Newton Miller, 2018). By developing a proactive approach that includes seeking, interpreting and using the input of staff, students and community, evidence-based practice approaches can clearly articulate the value of your library (Arizona State University Library, 2017).…”

Strategic Library Assessment: Aligning with Your University’s Strategic Plan

“…Respondents expressed that libraries use a variety of methods with surveys being the most popular followed by focus groups, interviews, and consultations. 12 Also in 2018, Springmier, Edwards, and Bass explored how academic libraries use data and strategic planning documents to communicate with their stakeholders and others with the hypothesis that a strong commitment to assessment would correlate with the presence of data on the library's website. The authors conducted a content analysis of 97 North American websites and scored them with a rubric.…”