Internal Communication Task Force

Archived

Comment Form

The purpose of this form is to offer all library staff an opportunity to speak up about issues that relate to internal communications in the MIT Libraries. We also plan to hold a town meeting near the end of October to present some ideas and to collect your feedback.

Please note that this topic INCLUDES the committee structure of Public Services. A number of comments have already been passed on to us by the Organizational Issues Task force, which gathered a great deal of staff input during the course of their work. We include the OITF list here to give you a flavor of the issues already raised. Please take a few moments to add your own thoughts.

With thanks,

Rebecca Aaronson (rja), co-convener
Jim Eggleston (jceggles)
Keith Glavash (kglavash), co-convener
Kate Gyllensvard (kag), link from Process Communications
Kevin Harrison (kaharris)
Peter Munstedt (pmunsted)
Katy Poole (kkpoole)
Sarah Shreeves (sls), link from Organizational Issues
Louisa Worthington (elworthi)

Communication:
• Need better communication up, down, and across (including between functional groups, across libraries, and within divisional libraries)
• libraries lack a common vision and a sense of leadership; priorities are not communicated
  --more full staff meetings might help address this
• branches feel isolated from divisionals
• need better communication between public services and collection services, but a good informal network exists between public and collection services
• staff web works well
• horizonal communication between smaller units works well
• lack of social interaction between staff in all units
  --place for expanded LSA role?
• there is less sharing of information especiallly financial and administrative
• need to encourage people to speak up
• need more direct communciation – a better system to make sure the right info gets to the right people
  --need more clarity about roles
• teams tend to have good communication internally and are able to communicate out effectively as well
• local processing enables better communication with local circulation
• misc: need more library orientations for non-librarian and librarian staff
• misc: need better email lists (consistent names for the lists with right people on them)
• misc: better and more consistent signage

  Committees:

  
  What works:

• committees promote communication across units
• allows for input from staff
• C3, BOG, DLG/TSAC, NERD, and the Circ Committee work in general
• circulation representation on PSAC important
• Steering Committee:

  --Final stop for decision making
  --necessary for sensitive policy and personnel issues

  What doesn't work:

• lack of communication about committee work and make-up
• need to broaden committees make-up
• Library Council powerless and non-participatory
• DLG lacks authority
• PSAC could be more functional and dynamic
• no direct local processing representation on any policy/decision making committees (like BOG, CMG)