![ORCID Icon]({"type":"image","src":"/templates/jsp/_style2/_tandf/images/orcid.svg"} "ORCID Icon"){kind=small}
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3708-866X
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT
From trial to implementation, technical services staff play an important role in shaping awareness and expectations of new or updated electronic resources. With appropriate message control during the rollout process, technical services staff can positively influence understanding and awareness of resources while keeping co-workers’ and patrons’ expectations in check. At the same time, by embracing this public service role, technical services acts as a full partner with public services in mediating resources to patrons. This article explores technical services’ public-facing role by describing a protocol for managing rollouts that emphasizes timing internal and external communications, providing training and support materials, and maintaining accuracy and objectivity in all rollout communications.
Introduction
As with friends and colleagues, first impressions matter for new or updated electronic resources. Without a clean launch and appropriate message control early in the delivery of a new or updated resource, library personnel and patrons’ perception of the resource can suffer, especially when the resource is highly specialized or involves non-standard authentication, search conventions, or content. Because technical services staff so often are the first to work closely with new or updated resources, and given their technical expertise and support responsibilities, they are well positioned to craft the messages that will lead to effective promotion, use, and support of the library’s collection.
Table 1. Rollout timeline.
Furthermore, how technical services handles rollouts directly impacts colleagues’ and patrons’ understanding and awareness of resources as well as their expectations for technical service’s role in mediating and supporting them. In other words, rollouts contribute to how technical services staff shape expectations with regard to these resources and to technical services itself. By embracing this public service role in the rollout process, technical services staff have an opportunity to act as full partners with public services in mediating resources.
During fall 2015, the technical services staff at Georgia Southern University embraced a public service role by adopting a new protocol for resource rollouts that explicitly times and structures internal and external communications to ensure that all library personnel are ready to support new or updated resources as they go live. This protocol focuses on providing appropriate lead-time notifications to public services staff and “training the trainers” prior to releasing external communications to patrons. Furthermore, this protocol integrates with activities of the library’s Promotions Committee to support a smooth transition to wider promotion of new or updated resources. Pursuant to shaping expectations for these resources, and for technical services’ role in mediating them, this protocol emphasizes consistent and reliable delivery of internal and external communications, providing timely training and support materials, and maintaining accuracy and objectivity in all communications.
This article will discuss in detail this protocol, its early implementation, and its impact to date. First, the authors will characterize the professional context for the protocol by discussing technical services’ developing role at the nexus of technical and public services. Next, the authors will describe the protocol in detail, looking closely at when and how information and support materials are released to ensure that technical services staff have achieved internal awareness and understanding of the resource prior to promoting it externally. Finally, the authors will review their experiences using the protocol, and discuss impact, lessons learned, and next steps.
Professional context
The decision by technical services staff at Georgia Southern University to develop a new rollout protocol originated in reflection on a growing professional awareness of the public service role of technical services, particularly at points of intersection with public service tasks. Affirming that “technical services is public services,” Hiatt describes the division between technical and public services as a false dichotomy, arguing that “patrons are direct customers of technical services work.”1 Most work performed by technical services staff—including cataloging, optimizing discovery tools, and managing electronic resource access—facilitates information discovery and delivery. Moreover, technical services staff often assist patrons with access troubleshooting and support directly or through public services staff. In the online information environment, Hiatt argues, the connection between patrons and technical services is more apparent than in the earlier print-dominated environment.2
Hiatt’s observations are especially relevant when placed in the context of patrons’ evolving service expectations. As Connaway argues in a recent longitudinal study of user behavior, convenience is paramount for library information seekers.3 Convenience trumps demographics, location, content, and all other factors when it comes to patrons’ information seeking behaviors, including age, gender, and student versus faculty status.4 In short, patrons typically do not care how services are provided or by whom. Most do not know about the division between technical and public services, nor should they. In order to provide the unified service experience that patrons want, technical and public services must work together in an intentional, coordinated manner. To do this, Laskowski argues, technical services should, “stress the importance of good public relations within the library, across the campus, and in the broader library community.”5
Because patrons place such a high priority on convenience, the question of how technical services staff roll out new or updated resources is of critical importance involving judgement about colleagues and patrons’ perceptions of what is new or changed about a resource, and what information is needed to understand and use the resource effectively. Thinking about this in terms of the electronic resources lifecycle as articulated in NASIG’s Core Competencies for Electronic Resources Librarians,6 technical services staff explicitly engage rollout processes during acquisition and provision of access. Also, because they remain invested in the ongoing quality of resource mediation to support efficient provision of support, technical services staff want to ensure that public services staff are well prepared to represent these resources to patrons and provide instruction on them. Given these considerations, taking an active public service role in rollouts of new or updated resources is well within the purview of technical services staffs’ professional roles and responsibilities.
To exercise this role as fully as possible, the technical services staff at Georgia Southern University have adopted a broad definition of what constitutes a new or updated resource. Resources that fall under this protocol include not only trials or recently acquired databases, but also new or updated consortial acquisitions, resources that have undergone noticeable platform or interface changes, significant new content or services added to an existing resource, and otherwise unchanged resources for which user inquiries or troubleshooting requests merit reintroduction of the resource. Furthermore, the technical services staff have adopted a broad audience for the protocol, including technical services itself, the library’s public services staff, university administrators and faculty, and students.
Rollout protocol
As previously described, the rollout protocol dictates the timing and structure of communications to ensure that all library staff are ready to support new or updated resources as they go live. The protocol provides a set schedule for providing internal lead-time notifications and instructional materials to public services staff prior to releasing any external communications to patrons. Leading up to the go-live date for a new or updated resource, public services staff receive at least minimum notification about the resource and have time to test, troubleshoot, and ask questions about it before patrons are notified. During this time, technical services staff benefit from public services’ feedback and are able to address any unidentified access or usability issues. When the go-live date arrives, the protocol further specifies the timing and structure of patron notifications. Consistently employed, this schedule supports mutual accountability among library personnel. Technical services staff are responsible for notifying public services staff of impending changes, while public services staff are responsible for preparing to support these changes through reference and instruction.
Table 1 illustrates the six stages of the protocol timeline with associated implementation and communications tasks. The first two stages, “Trial” and “Adoption and Staging” are performed only if either stage is required to implement or update the resource. In cases where the rollout is for an existing resource that does not require access-related configuration changes, these stages are skipped. The remaining four stages, “Go-Live Announcement,” “Go-Live 1 Week Notice,” “Go-Live Date,” and “Public Release” are completed for all rollouts.
As Table 1 shows, the timing of communications is set according to the go-live date, with “Go-Live Announcement” communications preceding go-live by 2 weeks and “Go-Live 1 Week Notice” communications by 1 week. According to the schedule, most configuration work is complete by the conclusion of “Adoption and Staging,” meaning that the resource should be available on the library website prior to delivery of the first go-live announcement to public services staff (i.e., liaisons) 2 weeks before go-live. While timing availability of the resource this way may result in early discovery by patrons, this approach has not been a problem to date. Rather, by completing configuration of the resource prior to the 2-week announcement, technical and public services staff are able to interact with the resource as patrons will. This supports increased familiarity with the resource, as well as allowing technical services staff to prepare support materials that more accurately reflect the user experience at go-live.
One week prior to go-live, technical services staff deliver the second go-live reminder e-mail as well as a support article on the library’s internal frequently asked questions (FAQ) site if the rollout is deemed sufficiently complex to require one. In both cases, the protocol specifies the structure and content of the e-mails to ensure that public services staff receive consistent, objective information about the new or updated resource and the status of the rollout. These e-mails include the anticipated go-live date, a brief description of the resource, access points, available support materials, and a timeline for the remainder of the rollout. This pattern is repeated for every rollout, reinforcing mutual accountability and trust in the process.
On many occasions, a rollout may be sufficiently complex to merit preparation of training and support materials for public services staff and patrons. For example, during fall 2015, the Zach S. Henderson Library at Georgia Southern adopted a print demand driven acquisitions model (PDDA) that involves patrons requesting new books through the library catalog using an embedded Google form. Because adoption of PDDA would involve changes to the catalog as well as replacing the library’s existing approval plan, the technical services staff determined that both public services staff and patrons would need training supports to navigate this transition. In such cases, the technical services staff prepare and release an internal FAQ article during the “Go-Live 1 Week Notice” stage. This FAQ article provides public services staff with additional support during the rollout period, as well as the basis for any public-facing FAQ articles released at go-live.
Generally, the “Go-Live Date” and “Public Release” stages are performed on the same day. At this point in the rollout process, technical services staff announce the new or updated resource publicly and provide the public services staff with final notification that the resource is now live and fully supported. According to the protocol, public notification includes release of an e-mail to the university’s faculty listserv, a blog post on the library homepage, and an external FAQ article providing support materials parallel to the internal FAQ article delivered to the public services staff during the “Go-Live 1 Week Notice” stage. Contents of the faculty listserv e-mail and blog post parallel content in the public services notifications, including a brief description of the resource, access points, and links to available support materials.
Final notification to public services staff includes an e-mail similar to the previous notifications. Also, similar to the internal FAQ article provided during the “Go-Live 1 Week Notice” stage, if the rollout is deemed sufficiently complex or likely to provoke concerns among university faculty, technical services staff may distribute “faculty-ready copy” with this final notification to support subsequent faculty and department-level communications. This faculty-ready language is prepared to be distributed verbatim or adapted as library staff see fit. Before distribution, technical services staff typically vet this language with public services staff and library administrators to ensure that it supports positive message control following go-live.
At go-live, public services staff are ready to take over public promotion and support of the new or updated resource. Meanwhile, technical services staff are able to turn their attention to access and troubleshooting support and to the next rollout. Because technical services staff strictly limit rollout communications to the notifications and support materials outlined in the protocol, the library’s Promotions Committee is able to plan further public promotion as it sees fit. This arrangement allows technical services staff to focus on providing accurate, objective information to colleagues and patrons during the rollout, while the Promotions Committee can focus on longer-term, higher-profile public promotions.
While each rollout entails a fair amount of work beyond configuration and implementation of the new or updated resource, technical services staff employ a number of strategies to keep the rollout process manageable. Because the bulk of the e-mails and blog posts share similar language and links, these are drafted on a single Microsoft Word template that includes the most common language and links. Once drafted, these e-mails and blog posts are approved in bulk. Furthermore, technical and public services staff work together to maintain the library’s internal and external FAQs using the Springshare LibAnswers platform. By using the same platform for both FAQs, staff can map content across internal to external FAQ articles. This linkage allows staff to create support materials once and repurpose them multiple times. Technical and public services staff regularly review the content of both FAQs for accuracy and currency. As the collection changes, support articles are revised or culled.
Impact, lessons learned, and next steps
Since adopting this rollout protocol in early fall 2015, technical services staff at Georgia Southern University have completed thirty-one rollouts for new or updated resources. Seven of these rollouts have been for new resources or for previously acquired resources that had not been adequately promoted at the time. Examples include the library’s acquisition of the New York Times Online, Choice Reviews Online, and OverDrive. The remaining twenty-four rollouts have been for updated resources such as WorldCat Discovery, or for significant content additions to an existing platform such as title additions to Films on Demand. In each case, technical services staff have consistently followed the protocol’s timeline and structured communications, establishing consistent expectations library-wide for how technical services introduces and supports new and updated resources.
While these rollouts’ impact on uptake and usage of new and updated resources is difficult to measure, anecdotally their impact on internal communications and patron support have been positive. Rollout-related communications and support materials have increased public services’ awareness of and preparation to support new and updated resources, as well as contributing to improved communication between technical and public services prior to go-live. Also, consistent presentation of rollout communications to university faculty has improved awareness, demonstrated most notably when the president of the university forwarded a rollout-related notification back to the library dean to indicate her enthusiasm about the addition of OverDrive to the collection. In several early cases, technical services staff employed the protocol to help resolve problems experienced by public services staff and patrons when the library’s consortium or vendors made changes to existing resources without adequate prior notice. In these cases, the rollout protocol helped to smooth misunderstandings and confusion between technical and public services staff while technical services worked to address these changes. In turn, this improved mediation to patrons.
Looking forward, technical services staff have begun work to align the rollout protocol with existing cataloging workflows, as well as to develop a similar “rollback” protocol for resource cancellations. Longer term, staff will explore opportunities to expand and formalize assessment of the protocol’s impact on resource usage and uptake, interdepartmental communications and collaboration, and public services’ attitudes toward technical services. As the library’s rollout and rollback practices continue to evolve, technical services staff anticipate increased collaboration with public services on rollout-related tasks.
Conclusion
Informed by a growing awareness of technical services’ public service role, the technical services staff at Georgia Southern University adopted its rollout protocol with the expectation that, by increasing technical services’ involvement in mediating new and updated resources, several benefits would follow. To date, these benefits have included increased awareness and understanding of new and updated resources among public services staff and patrons, improved communications between technical and public services staff leading up to and following go-live, and improved mediation of resources to patrons. While execution of this protocol comes with additional tasks for technical services staff, so far they have absorbed these tasks well and anticipate increased collaboration with public services going forward.
Georgia Southern’s early success with this protocol suggests that resource rollouts present a prime opportunity for technical services units to develop and assert their public services role in mediating resources to patrons. As previously suggested, how technical services rolls out resources directly impacts colleagues and patrons’ understanding and awareness of them as well as of their expectations for technical services’ role in mediating and supporting them. By shaping these expectations, technical services staff encourage reflection on how technical and public services staff can best work together to support the same goal: meeting user needs.
| Stage | Week ± | Date(s) | Implementation tasks | Communication tasks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trial | ☐ Obtain base URL(s) ☐ Verify IP range at vendor ☐ Verify proxy settings ☐ Create A–Z list link assets ☐ Test link assets (local, remote, mobile) | ☐ Trial open notice to liaisons ☐ Trial participant notices ☐ Adoption decision ☐ Trial close notices | ||
| Adoption and staging | ☐ Configure link resolver ☐ Catalog (database & journals) ☐ Set OCLC holdings ☐ Test link resolver and catalog assets ☐ Draft internal FAQ post | ☐ Release adoption notice to liaisons | ||
| Go-live announcement | Go-live −2 weeks | ☐ Liaison training | ☐ Release liaisons Go-Live announcement | |
| Go-live one week notice | Go-live −1 week | ☐ Finalize internal FAQ post ☐ Draft external FAQ post ☐ Draft faculty-ready copy ☐ Draft blog announcement ☐ Draft Faculty announcement ☐ Liaison training | ☐ Release liaisons Go-Live reminder ☐ Release internal FAQ post | |
| Go-live date | 0 | |||
| Public release | Go-live +1 day max | ☐ Revise internal FAQ post ☐ Finalize external FAQ post ☐ Finalize faculty-ready copy ☐ Finalize blog announcement ☐ Finalize faculty announcement ☐ Liaison training | ☐ Release liaisons Go-Live release announcement ☐ Release faculty-ready copy ☐ Release external FAQ post ☐ Release blog announcement ☐ Release Faculty announcement |
Notes
1. C. Derrik Hiatt, “Technical Services Is Public Services,” Technicalities 35, no. 5 (2015): 8.
2. Ibid., 9.
3. Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Timothy J. Dickey, and Marie L. Radford, “‘If It Is Too Inconvenient I’m Not Going After It’: Convenience as a Critical Factor in Information-Seeking Behaviors,” in The Library in the Life of the User: Engaging with People Where They Live and Learn, edited by Lynn Silipigni Connaway (Dublin, OH: OCLC Research, 2015), 132–134. http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/2015/oclcresearch-library-in-life-of-user.pdf (accessed July 14, 2016).
4. Ibid.
5. Mary S. Laskowski, “Technical Services for Changing Times: Adjusting Our Image, Our Skills, and Our Mission,” Library Leadership & Management 29, no. 4 (2015): 7. https://journals.tdl.org/llm/index.php/llm/article/view/7139/6346 (accessed July 14, 2016).
6. NASIG Executive Board, “Core Competencies for Electronic Resources Librarians,” NASIG, http://www.nasig.org/uploaded_files/92/files/CoreComp/CompetenciesforERLibrarians_final_ver_2016-01-26.pdf (accessed July 14, 2016).