SPEC Kit 304: Social Software in Libraries · 79
21. Please provide the following information about the ad hoc social software committee/team:
Name of ad hoc committee/team Position title of ad hoc committee/team leader Year ad hoc
committee/team was created Number of ad hoc committee/team members Position to which the
ad hoc committee/team leader reports. N=2
Committee Name Committee Leader Created Members Reports to
Task Force on Extending
the Web Presence (Web
2.0)
Ancient &Medieval Studies
Librarian
2008 8 Director of the History
&Humanities Reference
Department
Library 2.0 Working
Group
Digital Projects Librarian 2007 11 Digital Library Center Chair,
Support Services Director,
Technical Services Director
Comment
“It’s largely been exploration and then coordination through the Library 2.0 group. It’s not yet organized.”
22. Please briefly describe the organization and management of social software initiatives and
activities in your library. N=16
Decentralized
“Individual librarians and staff are responsible for many of these initiatives. However, several standing and
ad hoc committees are working on some social software applications, and virtual reference services are fully
integrated into the Reference department. In addition, exploration of social software by library employees has
been encouraged through the UCI Libraries Learning 2.0 Program, which was organized by the Libraries 2.0
Learning Team.”
“Ideas, proposals, experiments, and pilot projects are generally developed by individuals, departments or
teams, in collaboration with the Libraries’ IT division. Recommendations for moving forward with projects for
library-wide implementation are brought to the Libraries’ management team and the University Librarian.”
“Both blogs and Wikis had their beginnings in experimentation in departments. In the case of Wikis a
proposal was made regarding an implementation strategy and a task force appointed for this role. In the case
of blogs, a task force met and made recommendations for approach and software. It has been followed by
individual implementations. There is currently coordination of implementation approach for blogs and Wikis.
A technology staff member provides training. For chat, a college liaison librarian represented the Libraries
in the formation of AskColorado. Management falls with that state group. The proposal for LibraryThing is
coming from a standing online catalog committee. A staff member is currently experimenting with Flickr.
RSS has been coordinated by the Web master. There is expansion of RSS use on the horizon through the
ExLibris XServer according to a plan from a task group. In summary, the usual process is that staff experiment
first then the software can involve other organizational management. A draft guide has been created on
21. Please provide the following information about the ad hoc social software committee/team:
Name of ad hoc committee/team Position title of ad hoc committee/team leader Year ad hoc
committee/team was created Number of ad hoc committee/team members Position to which the
ad hoc committee/team leader reports. N=2
Committee Name Committee Leader Created Members Reports to
Task Force on Extending
the Web Presence (Web
2.0)
Ancient &Medieval Studies
Librarian
2008 8 Director of the History
&Humanities Reference
Department
Library 2.0 Working
Group
Digital Projects Librarian 2007 11 Digital Library Center Chair,
Support Services Director,
Technical Services Director
Comment
“It’s largely been exploration and then coordination through the Library 2.0 group. It’s not yet organized.”
22. Please briefly describe the organization and management of social software initiatives and
activities in your library. N=16
Decentralized
“Individual librarians and staff are responsible for many of these initiatives. However, several standing and
ad hoc committees are working on some social software applications, and virtual reference services are fully
integrated into the Reference department. In addition, exploration of social software by library employees has
been encouraged through the UCI Libraries Learning 2.0 Program, which was organized by the Libraries 2.0
Learning Team.”
“Ideas, proposals, experiments, and pilot projects are generally developed by individuals, departments or
teams, in collaboration with the Libraries’ IT division. Recommendations for moving forward with projects for
library-wide implementation are brought to the Libraries’ management team and the University Librarian.”
“Both blogs and Wikis had their beginnings in experimentation in departments. In the case of Wikis a
proposal was made regarding an implementation strategy and a task force appointed for this role. In the case
of blogs, a task force met and made recommendations for approach and software. It has been followed by
individual implementations. There is currently coordination of implementation approach for blogs and Wikis.
A technology staff member provides training. For chat, a college liaison librarian represented the Libraries
in the formation of AskColorado. Management falls with that state group. The proposal for LibraryThing is
coming from a standing online catalog committee. A staff member is currently experimenting with Flickr.
RSS has been coordinated by the Web master. There is expansion of RSS use on the horizon through the
ExLibris XServer according to a plan from a task group. In summary, the usual process is that staff experiment
first then the software can involve other organizational management. A draft guide has been created on
