The case for international collaboration in academic library management,human resources and staff development

Abstract

The internationalization of higher education and the continuing expansion of technology as a means for learning and sharing information have radically changed the way in which academic and research libraries offer services and perform outreach. New skills, retooling, re-visioning, and hiring for a rapidly changing environment are essential to maintaining a vibrant and responsive workforce. Library associations offer opportunities for training, sharing expertise, engaging in joint ventures and collaborating to innovate and remain relevant. While international collaborative efforts between library associations are becoming more frequent, these have largely focused on user services. An exploratory study of library associations globally was conducted to determine the level of past efforts and the desirability for greater international exchange between library associations in the areas of management, human resources and staff development. The results of this study indicate a strong desire for greater dialogue especially regarding staff development and library management.

Keywords

Global perspectives on libraries and information academic libraries administration and management personnel library associations

Introduction

Institutions of higher education worldwide are deliberately focusing on internationalization to meet the needs of an increasingly global environment, which now functions across both physical and virtual borders. According to the International Association of Universities (IAU):

Irrespective of contextual differences within and between countries, nearly all higher education institutions worldwide are engaged in international activities and are seeking to expand them. Engaging with the world is now considered part of the very definition of quality in education and research. (IAU, 2012: 2)

The charge for internationalization has affected all aspects of the university mission and values. Developing and implementing strategies to address internationalization include expanding collaboration and research agendas, deepening international outreach, integrating new technologies, strengthening study abroad programs, broadening student and faculty recruitment practices, and creating strategic curricula for an increasingly diverse population.

Academic libraries are at the nexus of the university’s internationalization due to their quintessential role of supporting the mission and vision of the university, including research excellence and student achievement. They have a rich history of engaging in international activities that span cultures, philosophies, ideologies, geopolitical lines and historical perspectives, including: support for international branch campuses, expansion of foreign language and special and area studies collections, nurturing international partnerships, supporting and engaging in research, and serving international students and study abroad programs. The 21st century ushered in a rapidly evolving environment with shifting user behaviors, expectations and needs of libraries. Dewey (2010: 4) summarizes the impact of this new environment where the library

must, in a global way, create, collaborate and connect scholarship for and with users at a level never seen before to ensure lifelong learning and the ability to solve the world’s continuing challenges inclusive of all cultures, time periods, and approaches.

The response to this sentiment is evidenced by the increasing number of shared national, regional and international academic library projects, services and programs as well as networks and joint ventures such as the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR), development of the SHared Access Research Ecosystem (SHARE) in North America, the Southeast Asian Consortium for Access and Preservation (SEACAP), and the Matariki Network of Universities (MNU) Library Benchmarking Project. Open access, digitization, shared collections, shared storage, preservation, scholarly communication, cataloging and many other key services of the academic library are expanding their outreach beyond local and regional borders into international collaborative efforts.

The internationalization of higher education and the continuing expansion of technology as a means for learning and sharing information have radically changed the way in which academic libraries offer services and perform outreach. These realities suggest the need for new and vital competencies, reinvigorated visions, flexible management styles and creative recruitment strategies. Envisioning, learning, creating, and implementing systems, procedures and skills to respond to the rapidly changing academic environment are crucial for maintaining the integrity of the academic library. Library directors and human resources and organizational development professionals recognize the need to cultivate a new workforce through creative approaches to defining and organizing roles, hiring personnel and deploying and retraining existing staff who can conceive, build and implement changes to ensure the most effective engagement of the library in the academy. The challenges for human resources in recruiting and retaining qualified faculty and staff cannot be underestimated. Staff development is equally important to the profession. Best practices and environmental scans are effectively shared among regional and national libraries through longstanding consortia and association relationships such as the Association of European Research Libraries (LIBER) Working Group on Leadership and Workforce Development and the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Personnel Administrators & Staff Development Discussion Group. A natural outcome of the growing number of international partnerships and projects within academic libraries is an increase in related research, publications, conference proceedings, and webinars. The subjects of international collaboration and sharing of best practices in the areas of academic library management, human resources and professional development, however, are less well represented in the literature and at conferences.

To create a better understanding of current and past international collaborative efforts, and to gauge interest in increased dialogue between library associations in the areas of management, human resources and professional development in the academic library, the researcher conducted an international exploratory study. Two methods of data collection were utilized: a survey and focus group to assess not only the level of engagement of library associations but also the perceived benefits and challenges in addressing the internationalizing of academic library management, human resources and staff development functions.

Literature review

Internationalization of higher education

According to the American Council on Education (ACE) Center for Internationalization and Global Engagement (CIGE) Report of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Global Engagement, ‘In the 21st century, higher education is explicitly, and fundamentally, a global enterprise’ (ACE-CIGE, 2011: 5). The focus on internationalization is due in part to the proliferation of global challenges, rapid advances in information and communications technologies, as well as an increasingly linked global economy. These realities require expertise beyond the traditional frameworks and boundaries within which we live and work, strong collaboration skills, language and cultural aptitudes, and robust leadership skills for students who will be entering the workforce. A full review of the literature pertaining to the internationalization of higher education globally is beyond the scope of this article. In order to understand the magnitude of the changes occurring it is, however, useful to note large-scale efforts to broaden the scope of higher education in educating for international citizenry.

In 2013 IAU conducted its 4th Global Survey. The Internationalization of Higher Education: Growing Expectations, Fundamental Values Report (Egron-Polak and Hudson, 2014), which draws on the results of this survey of more than 1300 higher education institutions in 131 countries, confirms that universities worldwide are actively internationalizing their operations. The report considers the biggest risks and benefits of internationalization and highlights important considerations and best strategies. The ACE report on Mapping Internationalization on US Campuses (ACE, 2012) is the result of a survey of 3357 institutions. The report recognizes that educating for global citizenry requires a pervasive and comprehensive approach and for this reason the survey assesses many aspects of campus internationalization including: articulated institutional commitment; administrative structure and staffing; curriculum, co-curriculum and learning outcomes; faculty policies and practices; student mobility; collaboration and partnerships. The results of the survey indicate that internationalization has accelerated on campuses in recent years especially in the areas of internationalizing the curriculum, engaging in strategic partnerships with overseas institutions and expanding international student recruitment and staff (ACE, 2012: 6).

On 11 July 2013, the European Commission, the European Union’s executive body, launched a new strategy for the internationalization of higher education (European Commission, 2013) in an effort to address the challenges of globalization through changes in higher education. Immediately preceding the announcement and in anticipation of this new strategy, the European University Association (EUA) conducted a membership survey dedicated to the issue of internationalization which ‘demonstrated that 99% of institutions surveyed either have an internationalization strategy in place (56%), intend to develop one (13%), or have considered internationalization in other strategies (30%)’ (EUA, 2013: 7). Internationalization of Higher Education in East Asia: Trends of Student Mobility and Impact on Education Governance (Mok and Yu, 2013) examines the strategies of seven countries and universities responding to globalization and the unique challenges of establishing education hubs and transnational collaboration in East Asia. In 2008 the African Network for Internationalization of Education (ANIE) was developed with the aim of ‘enhancing the understanding and development of the international dimension of higher education in Africa by expanding both knowledge and building, strengthening and sustaining a cohort of competent professionals in this field’ (ANIE, n.d.). The first Latin American and Caribbean Higher Education Conference (LACHEC) for the internationalization of higher education took place in 2009 in recognition that the process of internationalization is a key element to ensure quality of education. Equally important is the European Association for International Education (EAIE) Barometer: Internationalisation in Europe study conducted in the spring of 2014. The study was conducted in recognition that ‘internationalization of higher education has become increasingly complex and far reaching over the past years, challenging the skills and knowledge of all involved’ (EAIE, 2015). Though the results are not yet available publicly it is noteworthy that one of the aims of the survey is to reveal trends and challenges of the internationalization of higher education in Europe in order to inform daily practice and direct the implementation of strategies and procedures.

This is only a sample of the many efforts being made to understand, collect and share information regarding the demand to educate global citizens who can navigate an increasingly complex and connected world.

Internationalization of academic libraries and the increase in international collaboration

The factors that are propelling the transformative and evolving internationalization of higher education are also at work in the academic library. The literature portrays a rich tapestry of themes related to internationalization, including deep organizational transformation and critical collaborative ventures. For the purposes of this study we consider ‘internationalization’ of the academic library broadly as referring to efforts within the field to respond to the demand for education, research and services that are increasingly global.

In ‘Mapping academic library contributions to campus internationalization’ (Witt et al., 2014), an article based on the results of a study of the contributions of academic libraries across the US to campus internationalization, the authors found that ‘although internationalization activity has increased in responding libraries, explicit articulation of it in planning documents often has not occurred’ (Witt et al., 2014: 21). The internationalization of the academic library is taking place largely through collaborative efforts undertaken to create ‘an open symposium for facilitating exploration and exchange within an academic community, a meta-library ecosystem for powerful collaborative capacity, and a knowledge trust for providing enduring, barrier-free access for all research inquiry’ (Neal, 2014a: 613–614). This effort has largely been a practical and entrepreneurial venture. We witness the creation of ‘barrier-free access’ and an ‘open symposium’ through the emergence of many large-scale collaborative efforts. This is exemplified by the global shift towards open access and the proliferation of institutional repositories with such collaborative efforts as Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC), an international alliance of over 800 academic and research libraries from Australia, China, Europe, Japan and North America; the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) with institutions from 35 countries and four continents founded in 2009 ‘to facilitate the global repository community of practice and a world-wide virtual repository network’ (COAR, 2012); and LAReferencia, a network of repositories including nearly 100 institutions from nine countries in Latin America.

The internationalization of academic libraries can also be seen in the acceleration of cooperative digitization projects such as the Digital Library of the Caribbean (dLOC). This cooperative provides users with access to Caribbean cultural, historical and research materials held in archives, libraries and private collections. Through dLOC 38 partners from ‘educational, research, governmental and non-governmental institutions aligned for the purpose of facilitating efficient access to electronic collections about the Caribbean’ (dLOC, n.d.). We also see growth in the number of national and international collaborative digital portal projects, which aim to provide seamless access to archival resources on a certain topic or concerning a certain region. In Europe, the establishment of the Archives Portal Europe (APEnet) network (2009–2012) in which 19 European national archives contributed was expanded and enhanced as the Archives Portal Europe network of excellence (APEx) in 2012. APEx is the single online access point to an ever-growing network of European archives with over 800 contributing institutions (APEnet, 2014).

We witness the drive to collaborate in meaningful ways to represent the global mandate in professional gatherings and partnerships such as the establishment of the International Association of Scientific and Technological University Libraries (IATUL) Library Twinning Initiative in 2011. The purpose of this initiative is to create ‘urgently required synergies’ by forming ‘close and long term bonds of mutual cooperation and support, by joint ventures and by setting up an efficient communication infrastructure for the exchange of experience through electronic means and personal meetings’ (IATUL, 2015). Another example of strategic international collaboration is the Benchmarking Project of the Matariki Network. This project is comprised of seven universities from seven countries working together to assess and compare library effectiveness. Amos and Hart (2013: 11) express the benefits of such collaborative efforts clearly by stating that:

Collaborating at an international level offers this project the benefit of more scope to assess measures that could perhaps be achieved at a local or regional level. It expands the potential to identify best practice and the range of what each partner could learn from one other.

James G. Neal addressed the topic of ‘Radical Collaboration’ in his Academic and Research Libraries Hot Topics presentation at the 2014 International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) General Conference and Assembly (Neal, 2014b). As a follow-up to his presentation the IFLA Academic and Research Libraries Section Blog is asking for contributions from readers regarding ‘big questions’. This virtual discussion in itself is an example of the growing emphasis and importance of a global academic library dialogue.

Internationalization in the areas of academic and research library management, human resources and staff development

The talent, expertise, dedication, vision, and innovation of academic library personnel have created this vibrant and flexible global culture through which we have evolved and continue to grow as part of the broader internationalization of the academy. As such, the continuing success and strength of the academic library are critically tied to key internal efforts to strengthen and enhance staff competencies and training programs, recruitment practices and strategic planning. These areas lie at the core of the academic library and encompass the areas of management, human resources and staff development. We see the importance of such topics reflected in library leadership training programs such as the 2012 ARL/ACRL Human Resources Symposium (ARL, 2012). Library leadership programs are abundant, local as well as large-scale such as the University of Hong Kong Libraries Leadership Institute, and the ACRL/Harvard Advanced Leadership Institute for Senior Academic Librarians. In response to the urgent need to evolve a new type of leadership for academic libraries, LIBER launched the International Leadership Development Programme in 2011. This two-year program is aimed at the next generation of senior leaders in European Research libraries and focuses on developing more internationally oriented directors (Roche, 2011).

While a substantive body of literature addresses large and small-scale global collaborative efforts in such areas as direct services, policy advocacy, resource sharing, licensing, and archiving, only a small proportion directly relates to management, human resources and staff development. This is surprising given ‘that we have moved from an era of equilibrium to a new normal that is an era of constant dis-equilibrium’ (Brown, 2012) in which transformative change takes place routinely in academic libraries and the need for new skills and ways of working require greater and greater flexibility and innovation. A few notable international collaborative projects are worth mentioning however. The Joint Task Force on Librarians’ Competencies in Support of E-Research and Scholarly Communication is a collaborative effort between the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL), COAR, and LIBER. The purpose is to create a toolkit:

that will help to build capacity in libraries for supporting new roles in the area of scholarly communication and e-research. The toolkit will allow library managers to identify skill gaps in their institution, form the basis of job descriptions, enable professionals to carry out self-assessments, and act as a foundation for the development of training programs for librarians and library professionals. (LIBER, 2013)

Many other studies have been conducted on library competencies but seldom do they compare competencies across countries or outside traditional boundaries. An exception to this is a recent survey of reference service competencies with over 2400 respondents across 13 countries (Saunders et al., 2013). The results of this study highlight some important similarities and differences that ‘could help reference librarians to manage and meet the expectations of their international patrons’ (Saunders et al., 2013: 34). It also provides an opportunity for building a joint curriculum of reference competencies that span cultural boundaries.

There are many yet untapped opportunities for international collaboration and sharing of best practices in the areas of management, human resources and staff training. The ARL Position Description Bank (ARL PD Bank) launched in February 2013, is an example of a large collaborative project that could be expanded more globally as a shared resource. The ARL PD Bank is a collection of position descriptions (PDs) from major academic and research libraries in the US and Canada. The purpose of the ARL PD Bank, which currently includes nearly 1500 records and 108 registered institutions, is to foster the sharing of information through a browseable and searchable collection of PDs (ARL, n.d.). This type of project, if expanded internationally, would assist in tracking the evolution of positions in academic libraries, and create greater opportunities for dialogue among participating institutions informing them of recruitment and retention practices globally. In recent years there has been an increase in the number of scenario projects championed by library associations such as the Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL) Libraries of the Future project. SCONUL represents all university libraries in the UK and Ireland and the Libraries of the Future project was established to help those running academic libraries plan for the future by creating three scenarios that can be used to inform long-term strategic decisions. In June 2010, ACRL released Futures Thinking for Academic Libraries: Higher Education in 2025 (ACRL, 2010) to prompt academic libraries to consider what might affect the future of higher education. Similarly IFLA’s Trend Report, started in 2012, is designed to help identify high-level societal trends which will affect our future information environment (IFLA, 2013). These types of strategic planning and library management tools would benefit from a more connected international dialogue to expand the scope and create broader synergies.

Research design and methodology

The Academic Library Management, Human Resources, and Staff Development Study of International Collaboration was conducted as an exploratory study of library associations and their affiliates serving academic and research libraries worldwide. The research team consisted of one academic library human resources and staff development manager from the United States and one research assistant from Spain with experience in several European academic libraries. Two librarians, one from Canada and one from the West Indies, agreed to be part of the research team but were then unable to participate. The study focused specifically on committees, discussion groups, roundtables, sections, and other groups/units within library associations serving academic and research library management, human resources and professional development functions. The goal of this study was to explore three research areas: (1) past international collaborative initiatives; (2) the level of interest in increased collaboration and/or sharing of best practices internationally; and (3) perceived rewards and barriers to engaging internationally.

The research employed a mixed-method design in which both quantitative and qualitative approaches were used to collect data. An online survey, conducted in June 2014, targeting associations, sections, committees, roundtables, discussion groups, and other groups/units focused on academic library management, human resources and staff development within library associations was used as the primary research method. In addition, a focus group took place at the IFLA General Conference and Assembly in Lyon, France in August 2014.

The survey questionnaire consisted of 20 items divided into the following categories: (1) Past Collaboration; (2) Desirability for Future Collaborative Efforts; and (3) General Information. The Qualtrics online survey software was used to create the survey, which included both closed and open-ended questions. Six questions addressed past collaborative efforts, their rewards and challenges. Ten questions focused on the desirability for future collaborative efforts, including one question on perceived disincentives to and one question on perceived rewards of international collaboration. General information on participant library association affiliation, contact information, and interest in participating in the focus group completed the survey. Prior to distribution, the questionnaire was reviewed by a number of colleagues and approved by the Internal Review Board (IRB) office of the author’s institution.

Study population and response rate

Considerable effort was made to identify leaders of library associations and their interest groups (sections, committees, roundtables, discussion groups, and other groups/units) worldwide focused on academic and research library management, human resources and/or staff development. Representation was sought from all 10 IFLA Congress regions and international association groups. IFLA has identified five general regions (Africa, Asia and Oceania, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, and North America) which are further divided into10 sub-regions (Region 1: South, Central and East Africa; Region 2: North and West Africa; Region 3: West and Central Asia; Region 4: South and East Asia; Region 5: South East Asia and Oceania; Region 6: North and East Europe; Region 7: West, South Europe and Balkans; Region 8: Caribbean and Central America; Region 9: South America; and Region 10: North America) (IFLA, 2006).

Through online searches, and the use of Google Translate, a list of 84 target groups representing all 10 IFLA regions, illustrated in Figure 1, were sent a preliminary email to gauge interest in participating and identify the most appropriate person within the association. The email was sent in English and Spanish explaining that the survey itself would be in English only.

Figure 1.

Number of invitations to complete survey by region.

Of these 84 identified contacts 43 responded positively with a confirmed contact and were sent the survey link on 9 June 2014. Most contacts were the association group’s key representative such as the chair, co-chair, president, vice-president, convener, or co-convener. All 10 IFLA regions were represented in the 43 positive responses. The survey was open for three weeks and closed on 30 June 2014.

Responses to the survey were received from 36 leaders of library associations and their affiliated sub-groups. Of these one was eliminated as a duplicate entry. Overall, 35 entries were considered valid, equating to over 81% of the 43 confirmed contacts who were sent the survey link.

As Figure 2 demonstrates, all five large IFLA regions were represented by survey respondents. The only sub-region not represented was Region 9, South America.

Figure 2.

Number of survey respondents by region.

Survey results

The heart of this exploratory study is to better understand the extent and nature of past efforts and the desirability for continued and future efforts that enable international sharing of best practices, discussion of policy frameworks and strategies, and collaboration in the areas of management, human resources and staff development within the academic library. Throughout the survey the word ‘group’ was used to reflect the respondent’s specific association committee or other affiliated interest group. Respondents were asked to respond to questions based on their role as leader within their association rather than on behalf of their respective library or as a venue for their individual perceptions.

Category 1: Past collaboration

Category 1 includes six questions regarding collaborative efforts in the past five years including greatest rewards and challenges.

The first question asked: ‘To your knowledge, in the past 5 years, has your group collaborated or shared best practices with library associations or affiliates serving academic libraries from other countries or regions, in any of the following areas? Library management; Human resources (HR); Staff development; Unsure; No.’

The aggregate results are as follows: Library management 29%; Human resources (HR) 23%; Staff development 34%; Unsure or No 55%.

When analyzing the data by region as demonstrated in Figure 3, we notice that human resources was among the least common except in North America where it ranked second along with staff development. We also notice that all three international organizations responded ‘no’ to this question indicating that there had been no collaborative efforts or sharing of best practices in the areas indicated in the past five years.

Figure 3.

Percent involvement in past five years by region.

When asked what types of activities were involved, 81% of respondents selected conference/symposium and 56% selected speakers. Other options were consultation, presentation, project, publication, research, and library fellowships. All of these were selected between 31 and 38% of the time. Research was the least common response with 19%. The option to add other efforts included discussion group, webinars and staff attachment program. Of the 16 respondents who had indicated activities in these areas 79% agreed or strongly agreed that the goals of these joint activities were met.

The top three greatest rewards identified by respondents (Figure 4) were the exchange of practices (69%), sharing of expertise (69%), and developing an international network (50%). A close runner-up was discussions with 44%. The greatest challenges identified were the cost (50%), technology (25%), and socio-cultural challenges (25%).

Figure 4.

Rewards of international activities by percent of responses.

Category 2: Desirability for future collaborative efforts

Category 2 includes 10 questions regarding interest in future collaboration and sharing of information with library managers, and human resources and staff development professionals from other countries or parts of the world including potential rewards and disincentives.

Of the survey participants 91% responded to the general question: ‘Members of my group would be interested in learning of the work of academic library managers and/or human resources and staff development professionals from other countries or parts of the world.’ Of these 75% either strongly agreed (41%) or agreed (34%) with this statement. Another 19% selected ‘neither agree nor disagree’ and 6% disagreed. No participants selected ‘strongly disagree’. Comments to this question included:

Formal and informal interaction with field experts and colleagues always remained helpful in learning and innovation.

It’s always beneficial to learn about best practices from other countries. We seem to have similar problems.

But also:

We are … focused on more local issues.

And:

The focus of our group is so US centered that we have not thought to further explore extra-national perspectives on our important questions. But it is probably something to consider.

The next four survey questions explore more deeply specific areas of interest. First a general question asks participants to select a level of interest for collaboration in the three foci of this study: (1) management; (2) human resources; and, (3) staff development.

The data demonstrates (Figure 5) that there is interest in connecting with colleagues internationally in all three areas but that the greatest interest (‘extremely interested’ and ‘very interested’) lies in collaborating on staff development and management.

Figure 5.

Level of interest by research area.

Only one respondent indicated a lack of interest in all three areas.

Delving deeper into the content of each focus area, the survey asked participants to indicate specific topics of interest. It presented 12 topics: four in the area of management (strategic planning, change management, organizational structure, succession planning); five in the area of human resources (competencies, compensation management, recruitment, employee relations, benefit package); and three in the training area (training practices, training resources, staff development). The topics selected by 20 respondents or more, were ‘competencies’, with 24 positive responses; ‘training practices’; ‘strategic planning’; ‘training resources’; and ‘staff development’. Topics selected by 10 respondents or fewer were ‘employee relations’; ‘compensation management’; and ‘benefit package’, with only five positive responses. The findings for these last three topics as the least popular were expected because these areas of human resources are governed by country, regional, area, and organizational specific rules and regulations and are consequently largely inflexible and though interesting, may have little practical application to other groups.

Additional topics of interest were ‘leadership skills’, ‘marketing of library services’, ‘policy development’, and ‘project management’.

Overall the area of human resources was of least interest, except for the topic of competencies. One might argue that the topic of competencies is higher because it is so closely related to staff development, which is the area that held the most interest.

The numbers of positive responses to each topic were aggregated into their respective focus areas (management, human resources, staff development) and the percentage for each IFLA region calculated (Figure 6).

Figure 6.

Percent of positive responses by focus area and region.

In this graph we notice that ‘staff development’ held the highest ranking in all five IFLA regions except for North America where management topics took the lead. In Europe ‘management’ and ‘staff development’ topics received equal standing. Also of interest is the fact that ‘human resources’ topics received the lowest percentage of positive interest in all five IFLA regions even with the high ratings of ‘competencies’ noted above. International groups reflect a different pattern, being the only group where ‘human resources’ topics received the highest number of positive responses.

When asked to share additional examples of collaborative efforts participants felt could be applied at an international level for library managers, and/or staff development and human resources professionals, five forms of hosting were mentioned: fellowship (three times), staff exchange (twice), visiting librarian (once), internship (once), and job attachment (once). Mentoring was mentioned twice. In addition various types of collaborative international training schemes were indicated: ‘short and intensive courses’; ‘collaborative workshops’; ‘international courses and programmes’; ‘doing webinars together’; ‘online courses’; and ‘accreditation of continuing professional development activities, perhaps leading to international qualifications’. These examples fall within the area of ‘professional development’.

Two survey questions addressed the disincentives and rewards to international collaboration. The cost of international collaboration was indicated as a disincentive by over 76% of the 33 respondents to this question, with ‘complicated logistics’ and ‘lack of transferability of practices’ as the second most commonly selected disincentive with a 48% response rate for each. ‘Time commitment’ was fourth with 10 responses (30%), where ‘socio-cultural differences’, ‘increase of complexity of project management’, and ‘lack of sufficient technology’ were all under 20%. It is interesting to note that ‘cost’ was also selected as the greatest challenge for international collaborative projects that took place over the past five years, with 50% of respondents selecting this option.

Eight options were given to indicate what participants felt would be rewards to international collaboration and/or sharing of best practices for their group (Figure 7).

Figure 7.

Rewards of international collaboration and/or sharing of best practices by percent of responses.

All of the provided choices were selected over 40% of the time indicating a strong emphasis on the benefits of working with academic libraries globally. Over 77% of respondents felt that by engaging with other associations and their affiliates internationally the most significant benefit would be greater innovation in the academic library. Respondents felt that by engaging more internationally, managers, and human resources and staff development professions would be better able to support the scholarly activities of the academic library, have greater insights into ways of improving internal processes, and strengthen their competence for providing responsive training opportunities.

Benchmarking was the only other reward noted by respondents.

Category 3: General information

This category included voluntary contact information and library association affiliation. Also included was an opportunity to explore the topic further by participating in a focus group at the IFLA General Conference and Assembly in Lyon, France in August 2014. Twelve respondents indicated interest in participating in the focus group.

Focus group results

On 18 August 2014, a focus group was held to present in person preliminary results of the survey and discuss further the desirability for greater engagement of library associations and their affiliates in international collaboration and sharing of library management, human resources and staff development practices. Seven people representing four library associations (ARL, the LIBER Leadership and Workforce Development Working Group, the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), and the American Library Association (ALA) International Relations Roundtable) attended the session.

Participants acknowledged the need to internationalize the management structure of the academic library in order to remain current and vibrant in the pervading internationalization of the academic institutions served. The open discussion indicated a clear and strong desire to increase opportunities for dialogue by creating stronger links internationally, collaborating and learning from each other. Ideas included opening and encouraging applications from international participants to leadership training programs such as the LIBER Library Leadership Development Programme (LIBER), the ARL Leadership Fellows program (ARL), and the Leading Change Institute programs. Participants also felt there would be great benefits to sharing curriculum design concepts. While this discussion included the areas of academic library management and staff development, human resource concepts such as compensation management, recruitment and benefits were conspicuously absent from the conversation.

When asked about the ways in which greater collaboration might be undertaken, participants opined that starting on a small scale outside of any specific library association structure would be most productive. They speculated that this looser structure would make for a more dynamic interchange, exploration and innovation while creating strong international partnerships. Participants felt that the annual IFLA Conference and General Assembly could provide an opportunity for meeting in person, discussing collaborative efforts and opening the opportunity to a greater number of library association leaders.

Findings and discussion

This exploratory study provides an empirical snapshot of the extent of past initiatives and desirability for greater international dialogue among library associations in the areas of management, human resources and staff development as they pertain to the academic library. The author considered the research successful from the perspective of establishing a baseline of information and foundation for context for generating further dialogue and exploring opportunities for collaboration and international engagement.

Findings related to past collaborative efforts revealed that 55% of respondents were unsure or not aware of any international collaborative efforts or sharing of best practices by their group in the past five years. For the remaining 15 respondents, staff development (34%) and library management (29%) projects were more common than efforts related to human resources topics (23%). Although 55% indicated that they were unsure or not aware of international efforts in the past five years, 75% indicated that members of their group would be interested in networking with professionals from other countries or parts of the world. This signals a strong disposition for increasing international dialogue. The areas of greatest interest were ‘staff development’ with 36% extremely interested, and ‘library management’ with 30% extremely interested where ‘human resources’ was only selected 18% of the time at the extremely interested level. This correlates with past efforts in favoring staff development and management over human resources operations.

Twelve collaboration topic choices were provided to participants within the three study areas. The highest level of interest was in ‘competencies’, ‘training practices’, ‘strategic planning’, ‘training resources’, and ‘staff development’. This again affirms the strong interest in topics that pertain to retooling, rethinking and cultivating a workforce that is agile and responsive to rapidly changing priorities. When the 12 topic choices were aggregated into the three study areas (management, human resources, staff development), 100% of respondents from Africa, Asia and Oceania, and Latin America and the Caribbean rated staff development as the highest priority for international collaboration. The topics with the least interest were ‘employee relations’, ‘compensation management’, and ‘benefit package’, all within the area of human resources.

The focus group also affirmed a fundamental desire and need to share curricular agendas and programs and begin collaborating on developing leaders and staff with a vision for reshaping the role of the library in the academy and the way it offers services. During the focus group discussions the areas of interest for international collaboration all applied to leadership development, training and curricular design.

Questions regarding the rewards and challenges of international collaboration and dialogue were included in both sections of the survey, past collaboration and desirability of future collaborative efforts. ‘Exchange of practices’ and ‘sharing of expertise’ were rated the highest rewards for past activities. Participants felt that by working together, sharing expertise, and building partnerships and alliances their members would gain insights to improve processes and be better equipped to support the training needs and scholarly activities of academic libraries. It was ‘fostering greater innovation’ that was selected the most often as an outcome of working together internationally. This indicates the recognition among library association leaders, that innovation is indeed needed as the academic library continues to undergo radical transformative change and becomes increasingly global and cross-disciplinary.

Library associations recognize the challenges of creating and nurturing an international dialogue regarding key support functions to the academic library: management, human resources and training. Barriers to international collaboration cannot be minimized. Learning, working and collaborating across cultures require additional resources, time commitment, cross cultural skills, and creative use of technology. According to survey respondents, ‘cost’ was the greatest challenge for past activities (50% of respondents) and is anticipated to continue to be a challenge (76% of participants). ‘Complicated logistics’ and ‘lack of transferability of practices’ were selected by nearly 50% of participants. While ‘technology’ was selected as a challenge by 25% of participants who had collaborated internationally in the past, only 18% thought a lack of sufficient technology would be a disincentive in future efforts.

In summary, participants in both the survey and focus group expressed an overwhelming interest in establishing greater synergy between library associations globally in the areas of staff development and management applications.

Conclusion

Overall, the author found that library associations and interest groups addressing academic library staff development, human resources and training realize the importance of building partnerships internationally to more effectively inform practices and meet new challenges. It is evident from the literature and the deep discussions taking place in academic libraries regarding radical change and shifting roles that retooling and developing new competencies are essential. Innovation is required and innovation is spurred by investigating, discovering, learning and thinking in different ways, expanding perspectives, and experimenting with models and ideas outside traditional boundaries. Participants in this study realize that sharing knowledge and experience, cooperating on complex projects cross-culturally, and engaging with professionals who have looked at the same issues and come up with different answers, could inform and add value to the development of responsive training and management solutions. It is much less evident whether traditional human resources questions would benefit from such exchange given the lack of transferability of many practices.

This exploratory study offers a baseline of information regarding the desire for greater international collaboration between library associations and interest groups serving academic library management, human resources and staff development professionals. It presents opportunities for further research and creative dialogue regarding appropriate venues for increasing collaboration internationally.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Acknowledgment

The author thanks Alba Nogués Espasa for her assistance on this study as a research assistant. She was instrumental in finding contacts in library associations globally and conducting a literature review. The author would also like to recognize library association leaders worldwide who participated in this study.

References

ACE (2012) Mapping Internationalization on US Campuses. Available at: http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Mapping-Internationalizationon-US-Campuses-2012-full.pdf (accessed 11 November 2014).

ACE-CIGE (2011) Report of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Global Engagement – Strength through Global Leadership and Engagement: US Higher Education in the 21st Century. Available at: www.acenet.edu/news-room/documents/2011-cige-brpreport.pdf (accessed 26 October 2014).

ACRL (2010) Futures Thinking for Academic Librarians: Higher Education in 2025. Available at: www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/issues/value/futures2025.pdf (accessed 22 December 2014).

Amos

Hart

(2013) International collaboration for quality: A case study of fostering collaboration across an international network of university libraries through an activity based benchmarking project. In: Proceedings of the 34th IATUL conference, Cape Town, South Africa, 14–18 April 2013. Available at: docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1957&context=iatul (accessed 15 November 2014).

ANIE (n.d.) About: Our Aim. Available at: anienetwork.org/content/african-network-internationalization-educationanie (accessed 11 November 2014).

APEnet (2014) Welcome to the Archives Portal Europe. Available at: www.archivesportaleurope.net (accessed 15 November 2014).

ARL (n.d.) ARL Position Description Bank. Available at: www.arl.org/leadership-recruitment/arl-position-description-bank#.VLcVeydCiSU (accessed 12 December 2014).

ARL (2012) HR Symposium. Available at: www.arl.org/component/taxonomy/term/summary/684/44#.VLcS-SdCiSU (accessed 14 November 2014).

Brown

(2012) Changing How We Think About and Lead Change. University of Southern California. Available at: http://www.slideshare.net/johnseelybrown/ff12-brown (accessed 22 November 2014).

10.

COAR (2012) Frequently Asked Questions. Available at: www.coar-repositories.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/ (accessed 15 November 2014).

11.

Dewey

(ed.) (2010) Transforming Research Libraries for the Global Knowledge Society. Oxford: Chandos.

12.

dLOC (n.d.) About dLOC. Available at: www.dloc.com/dloc1/about (accessed 15 November 2014).

13.

EAIE (2015) The EAIE Barometer: Internationalisation in Europe. Available at: http://www.eaie.org/home/in-the-field/barometer.html (accessed 11 November 2014).

14.

Egron-Polak

Hudson

(2014) Internationalization of Higher Education: Growing Expectations, Fundamental Values. Executive Summary: IAU 4th Global Survey. Paris: International Association of Universities. Available at: http://www.iau-aiu.net/sites/all/files/IAU-4th-GLOBAL-SURVEY-EXECUTIVE-SUMMARY.pdf (accessed 4 January 2015).

15.

EUA (2013) EUA Membership Consultation - Internationalisation in European Higher Education: European Policies, Institutional Strategies and EUA Support. Brussels: EUA. Available at: www.eua.be/publications/eua-reports-studies-and-occasional-papers.aspx (accessed 8 December 2014).

16.

European Commission (2013) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: European Higher Education in the World. EUR-Lex. Available at: ec.europa.eu/education/policy/international-cooperation/world-education_en.htm (accessed 11 November 2014).

17.

IATUL (2015) IATUL Library Twinning Initiative. Available at: www.iatul.org/resources/iatullibrarytwinninginitiative.asp (accessed 15 November 2014).

18.

IAU (2012) Affirming Academic Values in Internationalization of Higher Education: A Call for Action. Available at: www.iau-aiu.net/sites/all/files/Affirming_Academic_Values_in_Internationalization_of_Higher_Education.pdf (accessed 26 October 2014).

19.

IFLA (2006) IFLA Congress Regions as Determined by the GB at the GB Meetings in March 2006. Available at: conference.ifla.org/files/assets/wlic/general/documents/ifla-congress-regions.pdf (accessed 29 November 2014).

20.

IFLA (2013) IFLA Trend Report: Building the Trend Report. Available at: trends.ifla.org/about (accessed 22 December 2014).

21.

LIBER (2013) Library and Repository Communities Join Together to Identify New Competencies for Academic Librarians. Available at: http://libereurope.eu/news/library-and-repository-communities-join-together-to-identify-new-competencies-for-academic-librarians/ (accessed 3 January 2015).

22.

Mok

K-H

(2013) Internationalization of Higher Education in East Asia: Trends of Student Mobility and Impact on Education Governance. New York: Routledge.

23.

Neal

(2014a) A new age of reason for academic libraries. College & Research Libraries 75(5): 612–615.

24.

Neal

(2014b) Radical Collaboration: Libraries Working Together in New Ways – ARL Hot Topics. IFLA. Available at: www.ifla.org/files/assets/academic-and-research-libraries/publications/radical_collaboration_-_arl_hot_topics_ifla_2014_-_8_20_14.pdf (accessed 15 December 2014).

25.

Roche

(2011) LIBER Leadership Development Program: Building a high-level seminar for the next generation of senior leaders. Library Connect, Partnering with the Library Community. Available at: http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/articles/roles-professional-development/2011-12/liber-leadership-development-program-building-high (accessed 4 January 2015).

26.

Saunders

Kurbanoglu

Wilkins

. (2013) Culture and competencies: A multi-country examination of reference service competencies. Libri 63(1): 33–46.

27.

Witt

Kutner

Cooper

(2014) Mapping academic library contributions to campus internationalization. College & Research Libraries, crl14–619. Epub ahead of print 27 May 2014.