RLI 278 14 March 2012R esearch Library Issues: A Quarterly Report from ARL, CNI, and SPARCarc Bringing Scenario Planning Home to KU group provided for their respective scenario’s strategic options and in how their input was described on the corresponding Post-its. As a result, when the larger group worked with these materials to identify broad strategic options, it was challenging to make reasonable comparisons or determine points of connections. These challenges eventually ground efforts to a complete halt. The facilitators took this opportunity to stop the process and open up a frank discussion on what alternatives in workshop process might make more sense to the group and move us forward productively. Real-time recommendations evolved, based on the materials we had available and the needs revealed while attempting to work with these pieces. Based on all suggestions from workshop participants and facilitators, we experimented with other workflows not specifically outlined in the workshop guide. This included a question-and-answer period for groups to obtain further information from one another and use of a round-robin reporting technique. The round-robin process was particularly effective. Prior to implementing it, each group presented a comprehensive reporting of its own robust strategic options. There was often considerable overlap of ideas across groups and it was time-consuming to hear the same information reported over and over again. With the round-robin technique, we moved quickly from group to group, each time contributing one new option that was not currently on the board. The result was a faster compilation of ideas without unnecessary duplication. Eventually, through this type of small- and large-group interaction, the attendees pulled together a set of strategies with the potential to work across the envisioned set of future possibilities. Outcomes When the ARL scenario-planning project was initiated, we envisioned a relatively seamless movement from scenario-planning outcomes to the development of KU Libraries’ next strategic plan. The university, however, launched a comprehensive campus strategic planning process during the same time period. In an effort to align the libraries closely with the campus vision and direction, we delayed further local action after the workshops. Our goal was to delay library planning until we had a thorough knowledge and understanding KU’s future directions. Fortunately, the libraries sought and achieved considerable opportunity to participate in the campus planning activities, and we were able to bring insight from the scenario project to the broader campus-wide discussion. As a result, we did not lose the benefits of the scenario-exploration efforts while waiting for the campus plan, titled Bold Aspirations,3 to unfold. The strategic thinking associated with analyzing the scenarios, and the in-depth exploration of alternative futures, influenced our contributions to the campus plan. It also created an ideal foundation for the libraries’ own strategic-planning development that would soon follow. The power of the scenario exercise existed in the transformational nature of the process, not in achievement of a final product. When the completed KU plan was announced, the libraries chose to model their own strategic- planning efforts directly on the campus process. This included a Strategic Planning Steering Committee with broad, library-wide representation. The committee oversaw and coordinated the efforts of multiple working groups. The committee also drew heavily on the goals and strategies from the Bold Aspirations document, in order to shape the focus of the libraries’ planning work.
Previous Page Next Page