What would you say ya do here? (Part Duex)

In the space of about a week, I’ve done several introductions to my work and my team.  Each introduction had a different time box from, literally, a minute to around twenty minutes. 

After I had created a few speaking notes for the short version of my shameless self-promotion, it decided it would be a good idea to create three separate introductions I could use in a variety of scenarios. 

The Hit-and-Run: This is a thirty second pitch at a very high level about what I/the team does.  It really doesn’t go into any detail beyond 1) We exist and 2) We find stuff and offer insight.  It’s intended for hallway conversations, initial introductions, and briefly high-jacking meeting when you see an opportunity for shameless promotion.  The point is to be fast, but memorable.  

Speed Dating: This version is meant primarily for meetings where I’m not the spotlight, but someone maybe says “Adam, tell us a little about how you can help.”  Ideally, it shouldn’t take more than five minutes.  It’s more detailed than the Hit-and-Run, and includes deeper information on the types of products we produce, high level examples to give the audience something to associate with, and trigger points on when to engage me/the team.  Because I have a limited time span, I try to compare the services I offer to other services (both within the organization and externally) that they might know about.  Again, the goal is to remember that someone exists to with information resources. 

New Employee Orientation: This is fairly detailed explanation of not only my work, but the team at large.  It shouldn’t take more than twenty minutes (people start to glaze after that point), and is targeted at new employees, people outside the department, and management (as a demonstration of value).  It includes everything above as well as the specific teams I work with, what the other pieces of my team do and how they can help, and a detailed explanation of my/the teams deliverables.  I also bring along concrete examples of research we’ve produced in the past to give an idea of what they can expect when they engage me.  Depending on the crowd, I might also introduce specific information sources people can search on their own.  

Ideally, in creating these three versions of an introduction, one would create the long version first and then reduce it as needed for the other two.  I built my three introductions from smallest to largest and I think doing it that way was more challenging. I wanted to add information to the shorter introductions as I built the longer introductions. 

Of course, each of the scenarios is modable based on the specific situation.  And I keep copies on my laptop and in my portfolio so I can pull them out on short notice for nearly any occasion. 

A little upfront prep has hopefully save me time (and face) down the road. 

What Is Your Value Proposition?

“What Is Your Value Proposition?” By Anne Rogers Director of Research & Knowledge Services at Cargill

This was a timely post on SLA’s Future Ready 365 blog given my rant on value added service last week. 

Of particular interest was Rogers’ bit about the reference interview as added value: During a project to evaluate scientific reference service, I had a key client, a chemical engineer, tell me that one of the most valuable services we provided was to help him refine and express clearly the research/business problem he was trying to solve. We’d been thinking about reference interview skills as a means to an end, not a value added capability in itself. And guess what? The ability to work with individuals or teams to facilitate creation of a clear, actionable problem statement is a critical skill applicable in many areas.

I didn’t think about it during my previous post, but helping people refine their problem/issue/task/whatever is a HUGE value add that I’ve been complimented on before.  Librarians are kind of this weird bartender of information issues that, by listening to people, help them figure out their real problems are, not just what they think they are.  And let’s face it, sometime Corporate America races forward to find the “answer” without really knowing what it’s trying to solve. 

What People Don't Get About Working in a Library

Loved this short article fromThe Atlantic.  

What People Don't Get About Working in a Library

"Value Added Service"

Oh how I hate the term “value added service…” 

It’s an expression bandied around in Corporate America to talk about what you should be doing above and beyond the work that you do because apparently, that isn’t enough.  As a specialist, I’ve always thought the work one was hired to do was inherently “added value.”  (My smartass answer has always been: Try doing your own damn searching and see what you find compared to I find and you’ll see the value I add.)

A colleague of mine (we’ll call him The Mercenary Philosopher) and I were discussing a recent initiative this week and I was telling him I wasn’t sure where I could contribute.  I was struggling to find my role in the initiative because, as a researcher, I don’t make the widgets, I help make the widgets better. And that’s a precarious position to be in in modern Corporate America, especially when you have a position that appears on the surface as if anyone can do it.  If you’re not showing your direct value, you’re in danger of being cut. 

The Mercenary Philosopher then said something triggered a minor epiphany.  He said that while knowledge of resources and how to manipulate them gives me an edge, no one thinks about that part of my job.  To provide the “added value,” he said that I need to be part of the decision making process, and that means giving insights and recommendations on the content I find. 

Of course, I’ve been hearing about the profession taking this track since grad school.  I’ve sat through entire conference sessions on it.  But I’ve been very resistant to it.  I’ve prided myself on not providing insight or commentary and only providing the raw information for others to make the decisions.  My guiding philosophy when I managed the library was to act as an intellectual Switzerland where people could get information to make decisions for themselves.  Looking back, that may have been a mistake.  Or at the very least, it was a model more fit for public and academic settings. 

While finding and delivering information is important, for librarians to survive in embedded environments (and maybe everywhere else), they’re going to need to provide the “value add” of insight and involve themselves (subtly) in decision making.  This might be as formal as a white paper, or a simple as pointing out patterns you see in the literature.  Either way, it’s about providing an educated opinion on the content that only a librarian could retrieve. 

Of course, this got me thinking back to whether or not I’m just a glorified “analyst” like the other 20,000 “analysts” in my company.  And I suppose I am.  But the combination of the search skills and the ability to synthesize and hypothesize is perhaps what makes embedded librarians the most bad ass best analysts. 

Down Time

When I’m not working, I feel lazy.  It’s a product of my Catholic upbringing.  Idle hands and all that…

But the nature of research work is such that it’s often feast or famine.  When I was part of a traditional library setting, I was either really busy, or waiting for the phone to ring.  (Granted the latter is rare in both cases.)  Being an embedded librarian is pretty much the same.  Librarians are, by nature of the career, somewhat reactive.  We wait until we are called on for help and then we jump into action. 

Currently, I’m feeling lazy because requests for assistance and research are at a low.  This is pretty natural at my company for July and August.  People are taking summer vacations, getting their ready kids ready for school, hitting the golf course, etc.  They’re not initiating projects. 

When I start feeling lazy, I start looking for things to do.  This year to make myself feel productive, I’ve switched from research mode to organization mode.  My department has two collections of electronic material that could use some organization and I’d like to use my “down time” to at least give some thought about how that could be done, and if possible, start on it.  (Actually, my partner already has an idea that will likely work. I just need to polish it up.) 

Other activities I sometimes/should engage in during “down time” include:

• Sitting in on more meetings for the teams I support.  Admittedly, when I get busy with requests I sometimes don’t attend as regularly as I should. 
• A “health check” with the teams I support.  Asking them… Am I providing valuable information?  Is there anything they’d like to see that they’re not getting?  Am I being a pest?
• Professional reading/continuing education.  I’m nervous to engage in these in the new department though.  It’s a very heads-down area and I’m afraid taking time for self-development, even if it is work related may be seen negatively. 
•  Ask colleagues if they need help with work they’re doing.  
•  Marketing & outreach.  You can never do too much of either of these activities. 

 All that said, as soon as I post this I’ll probably get a flood of requests.