Record of Meeting - Parkland Regional Library

Record of the Libraries Advisory Group (LAG) Meeting
March 12, 2012
Attendees: Cindy Hunter (Bashaw), Suzanne Moore (Bentley), Carley Binder (Blackfalds), Darvy
Gilbertson (Brownfield), Deb Cryderman (Camrose), Joanne Merrick and Marg Reid (Carstairs),
Donna Christensen and Inez Kosinski (Didsbury), Kelley Andres (Donalda), Carol Griner (Eckville),
Laurie Hodges Humble and Valerie Fitzgerald (Innisfail), Norm Savage (Killam), Marilyn Thiessen
and Lesley Winfield (Olds), Myra Binnendyk (Penhold), Norma-Jean Colquhoun (Ponoka), Jean
Keetch (Rimbey), Cathie MacDonald (Rocky Mountain House), Paddy Birkeland (Spruce View), Mary
Zazelenchuk (Stettler), Shannan Sword (Sylvan Lake), Marquita Bevans (PRL), Ron Sheppard (PRL)
Meeting facilitators: Karyn Goodwillie and Colleen Schalm (PRL)
Small group facilitators: Fran Kimmel (PRL), Lauralee Gilmour (PRL), Susan Grieshaber-Otto (PRL),
Joanne Mokry (PRL), Sharon Thompson (PRL)
1. Creating a Group Vision for LAG
Purpose: To create an atmosphere of respect and purpose by coming to a consensus on the guiding
principles of LAG.
Working in small groups, participants discussed three questions related to developing a purpose
statement and guiding principles for LAG meetings. Thoughts and ideas were then shared with
the large group. Consensus was reached on the purpose and guiding principles for LAG meetings
as well as valuable outcomes for participants:
THE PURPOSE OF LAG:
To communicate and connect with each other face-to-face in order to share ideas, explore
challenges, and find solutions. (We recognize that face-to-face communication is often the most
effective.)
To develop regional consensus and consistency in processes and procedures; to actively
participate in region-wide decision-making and exploration of relevant topics; and to take
information and decisions back to share with other staff in our local libraries.
To learn together as a group and from one another; to find our common ground (personally
and as libraries); and to draw on each other’s strengths, wisdom and experiences.
To become aware of and prepare for innovations and initiatives - be they national, provincial,
regional, or even local.
To build new and deepen existing relationships between libraries and with Parkland staff; to
see the headquarters building, support staff, and processes; and to socialize with each other
over lunch.
1

LAG GUIDING PRINCIPLES - FORMAT:
Include a mix of small, diverse group work and large group discussions, as well as case studies
as appropriate; keep the informative aspect, and break the day up into smaller portions.
Include as many libraries as possible through the use of technology (e.g. YouTube clips,
Twitter [#prllag], videoconference or webcasts) and by attracting staff from libraries who
haven’t traditionally attended.
Send out agenda and information package in advance so participants have time to think about
things before the meeting. The expectation is that attendees will come prepared to contribute
to discussions and participate in decisions. Those unable to attend have the opportunity to
express thoughts and opinions to Parkland librarians prior to the meeting.
Have realistic time allotments for topics/activities and don’t overload people with
information.
Increase the number of meetings if necessary to avoid information overload and to allow for
topics to be fully explored and decisions made.
LAG GUIDING PRINCIPLES - PROCESS:
Come with an open mind; be respectful of all opinions and points of view; be willing to
contribute even when it takes me beyond my comfort zone.
Bridge the gap between larger and smaller libraries by recognizing their different needs, by
keeping in mind what is best for ALL libraries (not just my library), and by sharing and
celebrating individual libraries’ successes and failures (innovative libraries take risks and what
didn’t work for you might work for someone else).
Observe civility and best behaviour in both small and large group discussions, including:
o Listen actively and attentively
o Discuss and participate enthusiastically
o Ask questions when you don’t understand
o Allow and encourage others to contribute (we need the wisdom of all for the wisest results)
o Confine the discussion to the topic at hand
Honour the commitment of those who attend (decisions are made at LAG meetings on behalf
of all libraries and can be implemented without further consultation)
“What would consultants do” The openness and support we get from our consultants is a
good model for the type of environment we want to create at LAG meetings.
VALUABLE OUTCOMES FOR PARTICIPANTS OF LAG
Having the opportunity to change my mind
Gaining a clearer understanding of what is happening and why (including the need for and
rationale behind system-wide standards and processes)
Knowing the reason for decisions, helping to make decisions, and experiencing a sense of
accomplishment from making decisions
2

2. Info Spree
Purpose: To share information from Parkland in an efficient and useful format.
Background information was sent out with the LAG agenda a few weeks before the meeting.
Topics in the Info Spree included: reports on the status of action items from the November 7 th
LAG meeting, Parkland’s fall satisfaction survey results, and the fall large print survey results;
IT update; cataloguing practices for eReaders with and without titles; subsidies available to
attend the Alberta Library Conference; new charges for plastic membership card sleeves and
geocaching as a library program.
These topics were reviewed and discussed in small groups. Following the small group
discussions, two items were brought forward to the large group:
Clarification on the Alberta Library Conference subsidies: the deadlines for the LAA and
ALTA subsidies are May 31 st . Delegates attend the conference in April and submit their
subsidy application by the deadline for that year’s conference.
Discussion and decision about cataloguing (and lending) eReaders:
o Is loading Kobo books onto more than one device against the terms of service
Kindle specifically states that books can be loaded on up to 6 devices; Kobo does not
prohibit multiple downloads, does not address library use, and does not specify the number
of legal downloads.
o Local only vs. region-wide lending of devices. Are there settings in Horizon so that only local
patrons can request/borrow eReaders Or can Horizon be configured so patrons must physically
pick-up and return devices at the owning library
Although it is possible to make patrons pick up an item at the owning library, there is really
no way to physically prevent them from returning a device to another library. One option is
to institute a fine for devices not returned to the home library (e.g. $10 fee if not returned to
the home library service desk).
Decision: Marquita will set up Horizon so that devices must be checked out at the owning
library. Parkland will also investigate the possibility of making eReaders requestable only
by local patrons for those libraries who wish such a restriction.
NEW: charges for plastic membership card covers:
The Alberta Library (TAL) is now charging for these sleeves so Parkland can no longer distribute
them to libraries without charge. There will be a minimum order of 50 sleeves and all orders
must be in multiples of 50. The cost is $10.75 per bundle of 50. Sample pricing:
50 sleeves $10.75 250 sleeves $53.75
100 sleeves $21.50 500 sleeves $107.50
3

3. Discussion Topic: Lending procedures for patrons with fines
Purpose: To reach a consensus on procedures for sending items to patrons with outstanding fines of $10
or more.
In a large group discussion, every library had the opportunity to voice an opinion. Some
expressed concern about “protecting” library material from problem patrons. Others talked
about the power of an item sitting “right there on the holds shelf” as an enticement for patrons
to pay down their library fines. It was noted that there is never a guarantee of getting library
materials back from any patron. Also, each library has the right to develop relationships with
their own patrons and to determine whether patrons are in good standing. Regionally,
Horizon has been configured to flag any patron with more than $10 in outstanding fines.
(Local policies may be more restrictive.) Participants agreed that we need to trust each other
not to lend any library’s materials to patrons unless they are in good standing. It was also
acknowledged that staff in all libraries need to be, and are, cognizant of treating all shared
material with the same respect we give to the items we own ourselves.
Decision: Owning library will send the requested item to the patron’s library. Staff at the
patron’s home library will check out the item if/when the patron is in good standing. For ship
to patron items, the owning library will contact the patron’s library before shipping if there are
outstanding fines of over $10.
4. Discussion Topic: Working with library boards
Purpose: To share information about library managers working together with their boards, specifically
success stories and strategies for managing difficult situations.
The topic was discussed in small groups with a large group “round up” at the end to share
discussion results. Ideas generated include:
Board members need training in order to be effective. Sources of training include Alberta
Library Trustees Association (including resources and links on their website), Board
Development Program within Alberta Culture and Community Spirit, and Parkland
Regional Library (including information and links on the website).
A board orientation procedure is a good way to inform new board members of board versus
library manager’s roles. Library managers see value in participating in the orientation
process for new members. One library also gives each new board member a flash drive
containing all important documents (e.g. bylaws and policies, plan of service, minutes from
past three meetings, Libraries Act and Libraries Regulation, links to ALTA, etc.)
Board members must understand that they are accountable for their responsibilities and
that they can be held accountable for what they do and do not do.
A board member who misses three consecutive meetings is deemed to have resigned under
the Libraries Act. When this happens, the board chair informs the municipal council and
4

sends a letter to the resignee. To avoid being recorded as missing from a meeting, there
must be a motion to accept the reason for that board member’s absence in the previous
meeting minutes. (i.e. Board members must indicate why they cannot attend the next
meeting and the board accepts the pending absence and records it in the minutes)
Effective board recruitment includes having current board members and library staff
approach people they believe would be effective trustees and by “talking up the library” to
such people.
Additional notes from the small group discussion on working with library boards are in
Appendix I.
5. Consideration of a region-wide membership drive
Purpose: To examine the possibility of a region-wide membership drive in fall 2012.
Ron presented the rationale for a region-wide membership drive (low library membership
rates – less than 20% - throughout the system) and asked for feedback from the whole group
on whether they felt their boards would support such an endeavour. All participants felt that
their boards would support the idea in principle and they liked the idea of working together to
help increase local library membership numbers. Concerns were raised about finding the
balance between attracting new members versus the loss of income. Points included:
Free new memberships may alienate existing members.
Free memberships and renewals may cause some existing members to renew early so
as not to be charged.
Free or reduced card fees will affect the projected budget for this year.
Free cards might create possible conflicts with plans at member libraries for similar
ventures in 2012 or early 2013.
One solution identified was to offer “three months for free” trial membership to get people in
the door and hooked.
Decision: LAG attendees would like Parkland to further pursue options for some type of
region-wide membership drive.
5

6. Evaluating the process
Purpose: To determine if today’s facilitated meeting format is suitable for LAG and what future
adjustments are necessary.
Each small group spent a few minutes discussing the new format of the LAG meetings and
provided written feedback on whether they felt the process was effective as well as
suggestions for future meetings.
Evaluations indicated that participants were happy with the changes to LAG and felt it was an
effective experience. Overall, the use of small group discussion was seen as a positive way to
have a more interactive and personal discussion in which all members were willing and
comfortable to share their ideas. It was good to have a Parkland representative at each group
to help facilitate discussion and ensure ideas were captured and not lost in the heat of
discussion. It was also beneficial to have individual groups report back their ideas to the
larger group. One group reported that they felt the revision of LAG demonstrated that
Parkland is listening and responding to its constituents.
Participants appreciated the mixture of small group discussion for some topics and large
group discussion for others and felt comfortable being pre-assigned to a small group in order
to provide diversity of experience, geography, and community sizes. This format also helped
break up the day and set an atmosphere in which people could comfortably get refreshments
or take a health break at their leisure.
While the morning activities of creating a vision for LAG were recognized as necessary and
useful to provide clarity and set the tone for future meetings, participants are looking forward
to reassigning this time for discussion of topics. In particular, groups would have appreciated
more time to discuss the Info Spree portion of the agenda. One suggestion was that future
meetings might include small group work in the morning and large group work in the
afternoon.
Meeting attendees appreciated receiving background information in advance as it saves time
at the meeting and creates a more informed discussion because participants are able to read
and think about the topics prior to the meeting. Being invited to submit topics for discussion
ahead of time is appreciated as well.
The biggest challenges reported were related to the difficulty of hearing all participants speak,
especially for those with softer voices. The room set-up for small group discussions meant that
not all participants were facing each other, so that also made some of the large group
discussion more difficult.
The full comments from the evaluation process are recorded in Appendix II.
6

APPENDIX I
WORKING WITH LIBRARY BOARDS: NOTES FROM SMALL GROUPS
Have an orientation process in place for new board members/trustees (library board member
and library trustee are synonymous)
o Every new board member should get a board package with all the documents they
need (in a binder or on flash drive) such as plan of service, roles/responsibilities,
bylaws & procedures, Libraries Act & Regulation, etc.
o Library manager does the orientation (for consistency)
Board members (both new and existing) need training in order to be effective trustees
o Encourage trustees to attend ALTA workshops, Alberta Library Conference
o Trustee orientation with Ron is helpful
o Alberta Culture and Community Spirit has a free board development program for
trustees (they come to you) - they review your bylaws, policies, etc. and then tailor the
workshop to what you need
o The orientation must clearly inform trustees what their roles and responsibilities are;
that their role as a trustee must be taken seriously; and that the library board is an
employer
o Board needs to take responsibility for their roles and not offload to library manager -
board needs to be accountable for their responsibilities
o Provide facts and figures about the library to help trustees become advocates
Recruiting new members
o Talk to existing board members (clarify expectations)
o Advertise in the library or local community newsletter or in the local paper
o Get board members to actively look for new members
o The board increases in number when considering building a new library
Micromanaging
o Establish clear roles (part of orientation)
o Clarify roles/responsibilities of board vs. staff - board should concentrate on big
picture, don’t waste time on things that are not their responsibility to deal with
o Micromanaging is not good. Get another board member to mention it
o Show the board you are trustworthy and you will be trusted
o Sometimes the board needs to share/suggest how to deal with specific situations.
o Another issue can be staff going to library board rather than manager (also not
understanding the roles of each)
7

Board meeting agenda – who makes it
o Setting the agenda is the responsibility of the Chair (whether Board or committee), with input
from other trustees, committee members, and senior staff. Responsibility for the agenda should
not be abdicated to the Board Secretary or senior staff, though they may provide assistance.
(The Handbook, Alberta Library Trustees Association, 2009, p. 21)
Want/need to know more about the budget process – setting and working with the budget
throughout the year
Successes and challenges in working with boards:
o Board members don’t commit; will only attend meetings but do nothing else
o Trustees who don’t regularly attend meetings but don’t miss 3 consecutive meetings
o Overworked board – used to fill in as volunteers, no longer can
o Volunteer burnout – major issue in small towns
o Trustees should withdraw from the board if they aren’t able to do some work for it
o Difficult to get them doing what they should when trustees don’t have too much
interest in the library
o Will let me run the library
o Board really helps and works as a team. Very helpful
o Board composition changes over time – eventually negative members may leave
8

APPENDIX II
EVALUTING THE PROCESS: NOTES FROM SMALL GROUPS
1. Pre-meeting information package (timeliness and relevancy)
Excellent, good, or loved it - reported by all groups
Gave managers a chance to talk to staff about topics before the meeting
Saves time for everybody and creates more informed discussion
Not too early to get lost, but early enough to have time to read it
Yes, information was relevant
2. Group vision process
Unnecessary to go through it twice (small and then large group) - too long of a review
Review of input brought clarity; good clarification and good to set tone
Shorten process: bit long, got off topic, didn’t need to go over it again
Process in general was good; necessary, but not needed in the future
3. Topics of discussion
Relevant, good (reported by all groups)
Good to split topics into some small group and some large group discussions
Ability to submit topics ahead of time is a plus (reported by 2 groups)
4. Clear purpose (discussion topics, meeting, etc.)
Yes, good (reported by all groups)
Less off topic discussion; less negativity during discussion
Format was explained very well
Good to move along when needed
5. Usefulness of discussion formats (small group discussions, etc.)
Like small groups to allow personal discussion, but they take more time
Small groups were better: more chance to participate; our group was exceptional! More
interaction in small group and more people comfortable speaking up
Like big discussion
More half and half with small and big discussions; morning for small groups and large
group in the afternoon
Good to hear from other groups; points from each group written down so nothing is lost
Excellent; really good format; built relationships with different people and ideas
Not so many topics (e.g. Info Spree)
Placement is good
Provides opportunity to change my mind
9

6. Facilitation process
Good to have PRL person at the table (e.g. to take notes to allow ideas to flow)
Never yawned, no foot-tapping; sat on the edge of my chair to listen (this is unusual for me
at LAG meetings)
Effective; wasn’t too dry, relaxed feeling
Too much repetition of facilitation
Good timekeeping in the second half of the day (use of alarm); good - kept us on track
Felt rushed sometimes; would have liked more time to discuss things
7. Do you feel that this new format will improve the value of LAG for you
All groups reported they liked the format overall better than previous LAG format
Good to have flexibility to switch back and forth between large and small groups
Felt more comfortable to get up for a bio break; didn’t miss having an official break
Not sufficient time after small group discussions and the end of discussions to allow for
digestion
There was more open discussion at the end
Liked that there was no picking on specific libraries but rather examination of processes
Like consensus
Can’t always see who’s talking; cannot see everyone’s faces
Cannot hear soft voices, especially when facing another direction; can never hear Ron, his
voice is too soft
Seating facilitated equality of all participants
Didn’t mind sitting in the same group for the entire day; felt comfortable with being preassigned
to a small group
8. Do you have other suggestions
More time was needed to discuss topics in the Info Spree (reported by 2 groups)
Mix groups up (even though our group was the best!); we need to share our gifts with
others
9. Additional comments:
More chocolate
Lunch was delicious
Special thanks to Anna for the great lunch!
Overkill on bathroom info
Soup could have been warmer (or maybe bowl was too cold)
PRL is listening to libraries and responding by doing this (also with website changes)
10