SPEC Kit 339: Innovation and R&D · 55
administration in the context of the need to prioritize in our use of library resources (funds, staff time, floor space,
technology).
Based on the success of the initial implementation, and available funding, the library may decide to continue or expand
use of an innovation project.
Currently, this happens on a case-by-case basis, depending on the type of innovation, whether and how it supports
strategic priorities for the library and campus, and what resources are needed to integrate it into mainstream library
operations. The experience with the Technology Prototyping Service may help the library identify more straightforward
approaches to moving from experiment to production service.
Depending on the nature of the service/product, presentations are given to a variety of groups: executive group,
department heads, faculty council. After deliberation, a decision is made whether to move into production.
Depends on user demand for the service/product and on the feasibility or success of the experiment.
Determined on a case-by-case basis.
Discussion at Dean’s Library Management Group and then typically through a project team that conducts further
investigation and makes recommendations.
Discussion in departments and in the senior leadership group. If recurring funding is needed, the dean’s approval is also
needed.
Discussions among department and branch heads with their associate university librarians or associate library directors,
depending on the library. These project ideas are then discussed among the associate university librarians or the library
directors, depending on the scope.
Feasibility and funding are considerations to moving an experiment to production.
Generally, internally sponsored initiatives have a goal of becoming a part of the Libraries’ portfolio, so the planning
efforts involved include necessary resources. Grant funded projects result in final assessments of sustainability, which
may include folding the effort into the Libraries’ operating budget.
I like to instill the values of lean startup—in this manner measurements and metrics are build into the process. We
try to use more of an agile approach—adapting based on use and other insights which the idea, product, or services
is being developed. I think the waterfall approach of launch and then wait-and-see assessment does not translate to
“innovation” so that’s why I selected no to the questions above. Most of our R&D does not “assess,” instead we build/
measure/learn, we constantly adapt and pivot.
Investigatory Project Charter with assessment at the end and a recommendation to move forward with an
implementation, and then discussion by library executive.
It’s usually the case when we start an R&D project that we assume it is being done in order for us eventually to have a
production service, so part of the original proposal (e.g., to a funding agency) outlines the success criteria and the steps
to move it to production.
Ongoing consultation among the SLT, especially if there are resourcing issues.
Ordinarily, there is a verbal report and recommendation to responsible administrator(s) of the perceived benefit for
users (or efficiencies for staff) balanced against estimated resources (one-time and ongoing funds, space, and staffing)
required to attain and sustain the desired production result. This is not always a formal and rigorous analysis. In some
cases it is obvious.
Previous Page Next Page