This Regional Design Workshop took place at Utah State University, in Logan, Utah, on January 14-15, 2009.

Photographs from the workshop are located on Flickr, with tags oleproject and utahstateuniversity.

Day 1 (agenda & presentation slides)

Participants were welcomed by Library Dean Rick Clement.

Attendees included 25 participants from:

• Brigham Young University
• Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA)
• University of Utah
• University of New Mexico
• Utah State University
• Utah Valley University

Library departments or roles represented included:

• Acquisitions
• Administration
• Collection Development
• Cataloging
• Circulation
• Digital Projects/Initiatives
• Reserves
• Interlibrary Loan
• Electronic Resources Management
• Serials
• Special Collections
• Systems

ILS’s in use at these libraries are

• SirsiDynix

Beth Warner then gave a presentation about the overall goals, activities and timeline of the OLE Project.  Questions followed the presentation.

The participants then split into small breakout groups to identify major business processes and workflows the library was involved in.  The breakout groups came back together to discuss the processes identified, group the processes into broad categories, and add any missing processes.

During a working lunch, participants were given colored dots (5/category) and asked to prioritize processes into the following categories:

• Core: a process that is an absolutely necessary part of any system, which all libraries perform
• Significant: not a core process, but still important
• Shift: a process that could be shifted to another unit / system outside the library
• Stop: a process that we could stop doing completely

Following voting, facilitators tabulated the results while the group listened to presentations on Service-Oriented Architecture, and Business Process Modeling.

The results of the Process Prioritization exercise were presented to participants and reviewed.  Questions the group considered during the discussion included:

• Review categorization of processes
  • Do the categories make sense?
  • Are there processes that need to be combined?
  • Are there processes that are duplicated across functional areas?
  • Are there processes missing?
  • Are there processes which we should get rid of?
• What are the rewards and risks of pursuing these priorities?
• How would you limit the scope of what is core vs. what is not core given these priorities

The participants then split into two breakout groups to model one of the “Significant” business processes identified in the previous exercise.  The processes modeled were:

• Authority Control
• Interlibrary Loan

Coming back together as the full group, participants reviewed the process maps, and discussed any missing tasks, potential changes, efficiencies, etc.

We wrapped up the day with an open discussion or what worked well, and what could have been improved about the day’s workshop.

Participants adjourned to a reception at the Dean’s home and an optional dinner gathering at Hamilton’s Steak House for a well-deserved break after a long day!

Day 2 (agenda slides)

Participants were welcomed back to Day 2 of the workshop with a discussion of lessons learned and outstanding questions.  Outcomes of the discussion included:

<to be added>

The participants then split into two small breakout groups to discuss one of the “Shift” or “Stop” business processes identified in the previous day’s exercise.  The processes discussed were:

• Course Reserves
• Patron Record Loads

Coming back together as the full group, participants reviewed the discussion outcomes, and discussed any missing impacts, risks, efficiencies etc.

Following a short break, we spent the remainder of the morning developing and discussing “blue sky” ideas for the future ILS.  Participants were encouraged to Dream big – if you could created a system to do the work of the library, what would it be? and Pretend it’s magic and there no restrictions.  Results of the discussion can be found here.

The workshop was adjourned with a big thank-you to participants for their input and to the facilitators:

• Mary Ball, consultant
• Mary Roach, University of Kansas

The OLE Project partners would like to thank the Utah State University library staff for their great local preparations and arrangements, and their wondeful hospitality during the workshop!