Yesterday I took a quick trip to Ellis Library to read up on competitive intelligence.  Maybe it’s just me, but the majority of what I found was managerial business stuff that an MBA student would read. Don’t get me wrong. Business and administration books have their value, even though I’m not interested in them, but it seems odd to me that everything I found focused on supply chains and the like.

Does anyone know of something that I should be reading?

Every time I get anxious, a Kirkregaard quote pops into my head.

“Anxiety is the dizziness of freedom.”

If that’s the case then I’ve been too free at work lately. To be sure solo-librarians always operate independently, but I’m quickly finding that without a group to coordinate my activities with it’s hard to “hone in” on key priorities. Sure, I know what my patrons need and what I’m doing. I can explain everything I’m working on in detail too. The catch is – it seems – solo librarianship requires the librarian to sit down from time to time and the establishment of goals. More rigid goals than usual. Without something to hold on there’s nothing, and I’m wondering if anyone else has had this experience?

I expect so, but as a solo I’m detatched from external opinions. Interesting.

Roy Tennant, the Senior Program Manager for OCLC Programs and Research, wrote an article that as someone interested in digital libraries, and as someone who appreciates the Neitzsche derived reference, just… plain… owns! Yes, that’s right. I referred to an article from the Library Journal as “owning.”

Spurred on by a book titled “Print is Dead,” Tennant makes the point that print dosen’t seem to be going anywhere. Instead he notes that we are moving to a mixed media environment. I’ve has suspicions as much for a while, but the fact that Jeff Gomez’s book was printed in PRINT seems to make the title either one of two things: 1. suspect (or) 2. an obvious attention grabber.

The full post can be found at here.

*Warning* The following post is more of a rambling internal thought processes than anything else. Be prepared. *Warning*

Libraries are almost always collaborative organizations so when I started work at MoDOT I wasn’t surprised to find out that my library was part of several networks. The MTKN (Midwest Transportation Knowledge Network) and the TPF-5(105) (Transportation Library Connectivity Pooled Fund Study) are two efforts to encourage the promotion of library services to transportation agencies; the idea being that better information helps encourage better performance. Lately, however myself and several others have come against a dilemma. Transportation libraries each have specific focuses, but it’s difficult to collaborate in building a uniform collection standard across all agencies. Transportation agencies share common purposes – especially State DOT’s – but they are also as unique as the customers they serve. Is it possible that there are certain publications that all transportation libraries should have?

On one hand, the possibility that all transportation libraries should have certain materials is very real. Useful too. Every State builds highways, and roads and bridges.  But, on the other hand, the possibility that a standardized benchmark could exist is tempered by local disparate needs. Transportation libraries are alike but not that alike… are they?

I don’t know.

To make matters more complicated, at least in my library, the majority of information isn’t owned but merely accessible. The Pooled Fund and MTKN each ensure that I have access to nearly everything other transportation libraries do. This aside makes me wonder… do I still need to focus on collection development? Am I seeing an emerging trend? Should I, as MoDOT’s Librarian, treat my library as a stand-alone repository or is it OK to lean on my partners. Things are working now, and I’m helping to provide material to my patrons without relying on collection development standards, but what if the other Pooled Fund and MTKN members jump ship? They need to look out for their interests after all.

I wish I had an answer, but the more I think about it the more I think about it them more I believe I’m seeing something new. I think I’m seeing the emergence of a library network that doesn’t deal with things like they used to.

I suspect that any “standards” for collection development should be geared toward ensuring I “do my share” to collaborate… and no more. The material is already there. Everybody seems willing to pool it. So long as there isin’t abuse by group members and everyone continues to pitch in it’s possible that things are this way to stay.