A simple plan? Reflections on how a library service secured investment for a new library management system

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to report and reflect on how a UK academic library secured investment for a new library management system. This is written from the perspective of the former Head of Service. This is a professional article which describes the organisational context and the stages of the initiative, including planning and implementation. The article sets the organisational context of the Library Service, which was formed out of the merger of 5 libraries. The author highlights issues which staff identified with the library management system (LMS) and the initial information gathering exercise to assess alternatives. The article describes an initial failed bid for investment and stages of hiatus due to unexpected events like COVID-19. The article describes how the Library developed a wider vision, and lobbied for wider support for digital changes through a cross-organisational group. The article describes the second bid for investment, and key features of this which made it successful. The author offers reflections on the failure and success of the project, and lessons from the experience. The article highlights that contextual evidence is vital to secure investment in library initiatives. It indicates that a story-telling approach to writing a business case can be powerful, in addition to market and sector data. It highlights the attributes and skills which library leaders might need in order to drive forward major strategic change. The author highlights some considerations for future policy and research, particularly around how library leaders can be equipped with skills.

Context

RNN Group is a group of UK further education (FE) colleges in South Yorkshire and North Nottinghamshire. (Outside the UK, FE is sometimes referred to as tertiary education). The organisation was originally formed out of a merger of separate colleges and training bodies. The organisation provides teaching and learning for 16 to 19-year-olds and adult learners at a variety of levels, including functional skills, vocational courses, degrees, and apprenticeships. A wide spectrum of subjects are delivered, including healthcare, engineering, construction, visual and performing arts, animal care and computing.

At the time of the initiative, the Library Service consisted of 5 libraries across 4 campuses. The libraries had been merged into a single service when the separate colleges merged in 2016 and 2017. The libraries included 4 FE libraries for students up to Level 3, and a University Centre library for higher education (HE) learners (those at Level 4 and above).

Collectively, the libraries had over 60,000 monographs in stock, 4000 online journals and a collective bank of 250 ‘drop-in’ computers for learners to use. The libraries served a diverse community of learners. In each library, staff would issue items using 1D barcodes and the security gates were electro-magnetic (EM). No self-service or RFID systems were in place.

Library management system

After the colleges merged, the library catalogues were migrated onto a single library management system (LMS). This was the system which had been used at Rotherham College for several years. Once the newly merged organisation began to settle, library staff began to identify issues with the library management system (LMS). This was based on internal feedback from Library customers and staff. Issues included:

Poor user experience

• No single sign-on options – learners could not sign into their library account.

• No mobile-responsive interface – the library catalogue worked on desktop devices, but not mobile devices.

• Lack of compliance with 2018 accessibility standards – the catalogue did not include key functions which screen-readers could require.

Unreliable processes

• Unreliable issuing – books would jump from one user to another, resulting in unreliable records.

• Unreliable reservation processes – reservations across sites were complex and the process was easy to get wrong.

• Unreliable overdue processes - overdue reminders had to be generated manually by each library.

Technical limitations

• Lack of security updates – the system received infrequent version updates, which was a concern in light of Cyber Security priorities.

• Minimal compatibility with self-service issuing – the system had limited compatibility with self-service protocols like SIP2.

• Required bespoke software (not browser-based) – staff could only use the system with software installed on specific PCs. It could not be accessed off-site without remote desktop software.

These issues caused difficulties with daily Library processes, and the system was not scalable for a complex, multi-site library.

The system limitations seemed to affect learners’ engagement with the Library. In particular, the absence of a mobile-friendly interface and the absence of single sign-on made it difficult for staff to promote usage to learners. Expectations of digital products were high, particularly as learners were increasingly using mobile apps and services in other areas of their lives. For example, learners were using mobile apps for bus tickets and tools like WhatsApp for communications.

Library staff tried to resolve issues with the supplier. While some customisations were possible, these took a long time to implement and did not meet all requirements. Some issues could not be resolved at all, so we decided to look at alternatives.

Information gathering and analysis

Library staff identified key LMS products, based on information from the CILIP Showcase and online research. They created a shortlist of products which met requirements and where there was a clear fit. For example, library staff ruled out a system used primarily by corporate libraries, which did not have the functionality the service needed.

Library staff conducted an analysis of typical LMS products used in the sector. This was done through contact with other FE colleges and by online research. This provided a clear overview of which college used which system. It highlighted that the service was an outlier and was significantly behind comparable organisations. Based on this research, 5 products were shortlisted. Library staff contacted shortlisted suppliers and organised demos. Staff then obtained quotes for each and liaised with Finance to see if they could negotiate lower quotes and what this would affect in each package.

Failure and hiatus

The Head of Service drafted a business case for investment (a capital bid), for submission in March 2019. The first draft included technical detail and comparison to the sector and available products. This included less detail on the context and purpose of the changes. It sounded like a simple plan!

All capital bids for IT equipment or software needed to be endorsed by IT, before being submitted to senior leaders. Upon discussion with the Head of IT, the Head of Service found he did not want to support it. This was because it was speculative and not linked to a broader strategy. There was an impression that the service was trying to solve an isolated ‘Library problem’, rather than something of wider strategic importance.

At this stage, the Library did not have the support or evidence from across the college to demonstrate that this was a critical investment. While the bid included a strong set of market analysis, our capital bid was less convincing on how a new system would benefit the specific organisational context. For example, there was no explicit feedback from staff or learners on the limitations of the system.

Due to circumstances, a new LMS became a much lower priority. The Library had a staffing restructure, and then appointed a new permanent Head of Service. The Library absorbed a recruitment freeze and a non-staffing budget reduction. This meant that short-term operational matters, like keeping the libraries staffed, took priority over longer-term strategic problems. A change in college leadership started to refocus thinking on to the strategic issues which needed to be solved.

Developing a vision of the library

After a hiatus, the Library started to revisit this in October 2019. The new Head of Library Services set about creating a vision of the Library in the future. This was drafted as a scene-setting narrative written in the present tense. This presented an overall vision of the Library in 3 years’ time.

Writing this vision helped clarify the ideas about the future of the service and make these more coherent. In particular, it underlined that the Head of Service was aiming to introduce self-service book issuing.

The vision demonstrated how a new LMS was a vital first step in achieving the aim to move to self-service. A new LMS would give compatibility with RFID and self-service technologies. These in turn would free up staff time to focus more on more face-to-face learner support.

In the vision of the Library these technological tools were now more tightly linked to pedagogical goals around blended learning and Google Suite. The new bid highlighted that this would help our learners to develop their digital skills and take ownership (both important in an employment context). The vision articulated the reasons for modernising the service, not just the technical reasons for doing so. Modernisation was firmly driven by our organisation’s goals.

The senior leader was impressed with this and was now more supportive of endorsing a capital bid for investment. The colleges established a Digital Strategy Group, which included a cross-section of staff. This was a forum for digital strategic planning, to support the group’s shift towards a blended learning curriculum. This was an ideal forum to lobby for support for investment. This group produced a Digital Strategy for the college, and as part of this the Head of Service successfully lobbied for commitments on Library investments. This included a specific aim of implementing a new LMS, single sign-on, RFID and self-service.

Revised capital bids

The Head of Service drafted a series of capital bids. These included investment in self-service and RFID and a new LMS. Each bid included some of the original detail on the sector and costings. Each bid set out the realisable benefits to learners in coloured boxes, so it was easy to read. The revised bids recognised IT priorities like cyber security in the bids (a hot topic in the education sector at the time).

The bids set out the benefits of each bid by aligning these with our strategic key performance indicators (KPIs), using relevant reference numbers. The submissions included reference to the Digital Strategy commitments in the bids. The documents focused on the experience of customers rather than any inconvenience to staff. The bids also included relevant legislation, such as the 2018 Accessibility Regulations and General Data Protection Regulations from 2018.

The Head of Service provided quotes for 5 different products. In the bids, a clear distinction was made between the one-off implementation costs (where capital was needed) and ongoing annual costs (which could be covered by our annual budget). The submissions included details of VAT and itemised quotes for each. This meant the bids were supported with a range of evidence, from both the wider sector and the Library's internal organisational context.

IT endorsed the bids. They understood the rationale and strategic benefits, due to the work in Digital Strategy Group and better communication between Library and IT Heads of Service regarding direction of travel. Several capital bids were submitted in March 2020. The week coincided with the relocation of the Library at North Notts College (Worksop) so it was a busy week for the service.

Staying the course during COVID-19

Two weeks after submitting the capital bids, the organisation faced the initial COVID-19 UK lockdown in March 2020. A new LMS again became a lower priority as the college responded to the crisis. The organisation faced many challenges as staff and learners adapted to working at home. In the initial weeks, the situation highlighted that learners could not log in to their library accounts to see what they had on loan. Library staff could only access the ‘back-end’ of the system by logging on via Remote Desktop, which was not reliable, particularly in the first few weeks of the COVID-19 crisis.

In Summer 2020, one of the libraries permanently closed (as part of a campus closure planned before COVID-19). This meant staff had to weed books, pack these up and relocate other books to other libraries in the group. This was a major project and the service did this with limited staffing, because there were still many COVID-19 restrictions in place at this stage.

There was a clear message from senior leaders that sticking to our strategic plan was important, despite the crisis. The Head of Service presented the ‘Library 2022’ vision to Library staff and started to introduce the notions of self-service and more modern libraries.

Success

The Head of Service received a positive response to the capital bids from senior managers. While not all the bids were successful, they were happy to support the bids for the new LMS and a single self-service machine at our University Centre Rotherham. To ensure the Library could demonstrate maximum value, they asked that the Head of Service re-submit the bid so that it grouped together multiple items in a ‘package'. This was because - combined - the proposed products had a tangible impact on learners.

The capital bid was approved and in the Autumn Library staff were able to go back to suppliers for revised quotes and reconsider our options. At this stage Library staff consulted with colleagues in IT and Business Intelligence and involved them in technical discussions with suppliers. When the service had identified a preferred supplier and product, staff consulted with Finance colleagues on costs and a negotiation strategy. Staff then liaised with Information Governance on GDPR and the small print of the agreement. Involving colleagues with specific professional expertise at this stage meant that the procurement and implementation went smoothly and there were no surprises along the way.

Implementation

The implementation of the new LMS was the easy part! This involved technical work, discussions, system configuration and data migrations which took place between October 2020 and February 2021. The system was formally launched in February half-term 2021. As this was in the middle of the UK’s latest ‘stay at home’ lockdown, the launch had a low profile. At this stage, the Library was heavily involved in the distribution of laptops to learners in digital poverty, which took priority over other work. The advantage of the relatively soft launch was that this gave Library staff plenty of time to become familiar with the new system for the next academic year in September.

The new system gave us single sign-on (using Google sign-in), the ability to self-renew and self-reserve items, and compliance with web accessibility. The new system was browser-based, meaning it could be accessed on any device by learners and staff. Features like the virtual bookshelf browsing feature were a useful way to engage people from home. It also crucially enabled the service to install a self-service machine at University Centre Rotherham in June 2021. This was the first library in the group to have a self-service machine. The new LMS sped up services for learners and made it easier for them to take ownership of their Library account.

Reflections

The process of implementing a new LMS took over 2 years in total, so this indicates that patience and resilience is required. The wait was partly due to natural lead-in times (for example, when the financial cycle started) and partly to unexpected operational challenges.

Writing skills

The initiative highlighted that library leaders need a vast array of writing skills. The ability to summarise complex ideas and needs in a concise format (in bullet points and boxes) for a capital bid is critical. Knowing how to present detail on the numbers and data is important so it fits with the flow of the capital bid.

But there is also a need to create compelling stories, which have a natural flow and are relatable. The narrative style of the overall vision was a more powerful way to persuade leaders of the overall picture. There is a broad suite of writing skills for leaders to develop, and the ability to flex writing styles seems important. Writing the Library vision helped to crystallise ideas and articulate these into a coherent plan.

Influencing skills

A key element was in building a strong base of support for the project across teams. This underlines the importance of advocacy, negotiation and influencing skills (Goulding et al., 2012). The failure of the initial bid for investment was partly due to a lack of support across college.

In contrast, the successful bid drew on a commitment from our cross-college Digital Strategy Group and on an improved understanding from IT about why the service wanted this. This came from both informal and formal communication channels, an aspect which Harland et al. (2018) highlight. Involving relevant teams like Finance, IT and Business Intelligence when selecting and procuring the product was important. This helped the implementation go smoothly, as there were no surprises, and these teams were able to plan their workload ahead.

Intent and confidence

The experience demonstrated that it can be easy to lose sight of major strategic issues when managers are trying to address operational issues. Trying to manage service delivery during staffing reductions and the COVID-19 crisis made it challenging to focus attention on deeper structural questions. In a crisis situation, leaders need to have strong intentional focus and thinking skills, in order to prioritise strategic needs.

Operational and strategic matters were more closely entwined than staff realised. For example, staff particularly felt the impact of the recruitment freeze because the libraries were highly reliant on old-fashioned technologies and systems, and did not have self-service.

The initiative discussed in this article indicates that leaders need confidence to be pro-active, propose new ideas and be bold. Part of good leadership is sometimes in taking a risk in trying new ideas (Goulding et al., 2012).

Organisational alignment

Creating a ‘big picture' narrative of what the organisation wanted the service to be was critical. The Head of Service realised that it was important to focus on a wider vision, rather than just fixing isolated functional or technical problems. Clear alignment with the wider strategy was the key to securing support for the initiative (Harland et al., 2018).

The initial bid focused perhaps too much on the minutiae of technical difficulties, such as how electro-magnetic security was depreciating, rather than key organisational issues. This is not a unique problem – in a study of 63 Library strategic plans, Saunders (2016) found that only 17 aligned their strategy with wider organisational goals.

The second bid was successful because it was reframed as part of a wider plan for the Library. This was supported by evidence and data gathered at an early stage. With the big picture vision in place, it was much easier for senior leaders to see how this system was one of the components which would help introduce significant change.

User insights

The initial bid placed too much emphasis on inconveniences for Library staff. There was not enough direct feedback or evidence from learners. Even verbatim quotes or examples of individuals’ experiences would have helped.

The revised bid focused on the learner’s experience. The customer’s experience was front and centre. This underlines that user insights are a vital component in developing a service which is high-quality (Stavroula and Eugenia, 2018).

Next steps

The new LMS equipped the libraries with capabilities for RFID and self-service. Starting the self-service at one site was a great way to test and become familiar with the new system. It gave a flagship library, which could be used as an exemplar to help the others modernise. In a later capital bids cycle, we secured further investment for implementing self-service at the other libraries. Starting at one library seemed a good way to demonstrate value to senior leaders on a small scale, which could be used to persuade them that the success could be replicated elsewhere.

There were lots of technical elements to consider going forward. The new LMS had so many features we did not initially use, such as online payments for fines and SMS messaging for overdue reminders. With the eventual introduction of self-service, the libraries would need to consider investment in ID card entry for its doors. Securing the new LMS was certainly not the end of the evolution of the service, which reinforces the view that service development is an ongoing process.

Regrets

One major lesson learnt from the project was that the Library did not fully evaluate the impact after the implementation. As the implementation was during one of the COVID-19 lockdowns, it was a soft launch. However, it could have been better evaluated in terms of how it improved the experience of learners and demonstrated return on investment (ROI). As Saunders (2016) points out, not evaluating or sharing progress against plans has a detrimental impact on accountability and reputation of any organisational library.

There were some lessons here on change management. At times, it felt like staff were overwhelmed with the speed of the eventual changes to the new LMS. There was perhaps more work which could have been done to explain the impact on Library staff and to take them on this journey. While managers can plan strategically and share a vision, they still need to be mindful of the emotional ecology associated with change. Sometimes change is difficult to accept and process, no matter how well it is managed.

Implications

This was a complex initiative and a scenario which may be familiar to seasoned library leaders. For library leaders in practice, this highlights the need for a broad palette of skills like persuasion and evidence-gathering.

For policy, there is an argument for including a greater focus on strategic planning in LIS curricula. This could include the technical detail around how to gather information and present costings. It should also include a less tangible skill around building compelling stories and narratives.

For research, there is a place for more research into the attributes library leaders have in these situations. It would be worthwhile examining how far attributes and skills are shaped by on-the-job experience, and how far training can supply these. This would help inform current and future leaders on how they can develop skills or seek sources of support.