Minutes of February 17, 2005 meeting

IB, PC, SC, YL, RM [chair], GMS, MT [recorder]


  1. Communication between functional groups
  2. SIRSI reports for the Spring
  3. Report from TSC
  4. [Insert Topic]
  5. [Insert Topic]

1. Communication between functional groups

We discussed communication between functional groups. How do we cooperate between teams? Do we have informal redundant conversations? Is there a better way to communicate so that we’re not telling different people the same thing over and over? Or worse yet, telling different people slightly different things? Can we use the TL meeting to discuss this so everyone is in on the discussion? Can we prepare for TL meetings so we can bring problems to work out, instead of only reporting as a round robin?

One way would be to log in problems throughout the month, so that we don’t forget to bring up problems and any solutions found to the TL group so that we aren’t forced to always reinvent the wheel.

How to we identify problems as the come up? One way is to notice “spikes” of occurrences of the same thing happening that is a problem. Then we can note the problem, and the solution, if found and report it to the other team members, other teams, and other campuses.

Decisions also have to be communicated. Posting of addendums to procedures should take place. This could happen on the web pages or on a bulletin board. When a procedure is updated, perhaps the changes could be highlighted in some way. People in the teams also need to be emailed to let them know that a procedure has been updated, so that they can look at and possibly print out a new one for themselves. This will help stop people working with outdated procedures, or being aware that there was a change, but not being exactly sure of the change.

We discussed what was necessary to create a bulletin board. Ian and Yuhwei will be working on this in the next month. Team leaders could post to the Bulletin board whenever something changed.

As far as using the Team Leaders meeting as a forum for problems, we all felt comfortable bringing things up in the meeting. It may make sense to work things out immediately, and bring the resolution of the problem to the meeting.

How do we evaluate the success/failure of our team? We need to view this as a workflow process. It would be a good idea to do a study of how long it takes to do tasks. Perhaps by doing a weekly assessment (keeping a log) every 2/3 months. By looking at the weekly log that is done periodically, we can see how long it takes to discuss a problem, do routine work, or train.

We can also use a log to be sure that we are doing the tasks that are appropriate to our team. Sometimes, we take on tasks that we shouldn’t do, costing us time and efficiency when the task is done incorrectly. We should keep an overall assessment of tasks and meetings and assess what things cost us time without a return.

Formally reporting back and forth between TL meetings, and other meetings that we go to is important. Things we learn from other groups can have an impact on how we work. We have to know how our department, procedures, and work impacts on other departments, and also how things like circulation/public services policies and practices impact on us. The History project, Douglass Rationalization and Weeding projects have all brought home this fact. Ad Hoc discussions go on all the time. These discussions are good for learning about how we interact with other teams and other parts of Access/Collection Services, but it is important that we pass this information on to the rest of Collection Services staff. An example of this is the circulate box on the item screen. When it needs to be clicked or unclicked is knowledge that someone with Access Services staff will know, but is not intuitive to a Collection Services staff member. Other issues, such as when overrides are needed or which sublocations circulate are also important.

Conceptual understanding is important. We should be aware of the work that each part of our department (Access Services and Collection Services) does. Circulation and Public Services work impacts Collection Services, and vice versa.

We brainstormed ways to achieve these goals. Presentations of what each team does for Collection Services would be one way to go. Also, updating procedures and posting them to the websites would also be good. Updating and posting is especially important for routine Serial control record issues, temporary serial controls for inventory projects, how orders and serials acquisition/orders interact, claim issues, and holdings issue.

We also determined that agendas and minutes from functional groups should go to the listserv for all Access/Collection Services personnel. The email address for this is NB_ACC_COLL_SERV@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU. Also, whenever a procedure or policy is updated, we should send notification to everyone in the department using this same address.

We need to work on changing the culture so we can work on workflow issues in a way that everyone is kept informed, and is encouraged to give input that is necessary to increase efficiency. A good example is the inconsistent format form, which needs comments and has only received a few comments. It then needs to be brought to TSCWG and approved. We also need to get input from Public Services on how items are requested, because it does have an impact on the format we would want to use. If we have all the information we need, we can come to a good decision. We have a lot of resources both within Collection Services, and in Access Services we can, and should tap.

852 and common patterns documents were mentioned. The most up-to-date have been posted on the NBL webpage. PC and MT will work to perhaps reorganize the 852 document to make it easier to reference.

We discussed being comfortable bringing problems to the Team Leaders meeting. The consensus was that we were. We still have work to do in order to have the two hubs mirror each other in procedures. We decided that it was appropriate to take issues to the Team Leaders meeting to discuss, and take possible solutions and policies/procedures to TSCWG for final approval.

Andrew requested a copy of the procedure for BATCHWITH withdrawals. MT will write one and post it to the HRMT web page, as well as sending it to Andrew.

Processing will be evaluated for who does oversight, and updating of procedures for work and future training. We briefly discussed communication of LER, weeding, and superceded.

2. SIRSI Report for the spring

A new SIRSI release will be done during spring break. Testing will be done from March 1 to March 10. Gracemary will post the form on the T:drive so we can assign people to check for functionality on the test system. The release notes will be posted on the TSB webpage.

Training documentation using SIRSI page captures (screenshots) should be restricted to Rutgers University only. The look of the SIRSI system is proprietary, and SIRSI does not want this going to people who are not SIRSI customers.

3. Report from TSC

Associated materials final procedure should be approved soon by TSCWG.

Gracemary will be setting up a selectors listserv for communicating about weeding, selection, etc. Included on this listserv will be MT, GMS, RM, and PC, as well as the selectors.

Title changes are now to be done RUL wide—this includes DANA and ROBESON libraries. GMS will write a guide for selectors on how to recognize a title change. In the future, we will most likely be changing the Serials control records to receive multiple copies for different locations on one control record. We will be working with the distribution tab in order to do this.

Bindery fund codes will be updated for NBL. ELPX (current online resources fund code) will be broken down. Paper copies for online material, if required, will be assigned to the appropriate research library.

HRMT and DBM will be working more in concert in regards to holdings issues, and BibCat and Cataloging will be working in concert for cataloging issues.

Processing will be evaluated for who does oversight, and updating of procedures for work and future training. We briefly discussed communication of LER, weeding, and superceded.

LincPlus will not go to DANA, it will stay in NB only.


  1. Interdepartmental and Intradepartmental communications need to be emphasized and improved. This includes updating web pages, participating in list servs, and bringing problems/solutions to the Team Leaders meetings.


  1. IB and YL—set up test Bulletin Board for CSD
  2. All Team Leaders—set up sampling week for your team and track activities/times. Also, start presentation for CSD meeting that will cover functions of your team.
  3. MT/PC—make sure most up-to-date 852 and common patterns documents are on the CSD website.
  4. MT—resend different formats form to team leaders for input.
  5. GMS—Bring final version of associated materials to TSC and get approval. After approval, send to Team Leaders/web personnel for posting. Send SIRSI release notes to Team Leaders. Set up Selectors core Listserv.
  6. MT—Send updated LSM Weeding Procedure to Team Leaders and Weeding personnel. Send to Andrew for posting to HRMT website. Inform Access/Collection Services staff that the most recent procedure is posted on the website.


  1. SIRSI report training session will take place in the spring
  2. [Insert Pending]
  3. [Insert Pending]

Next meeting: March 10, 2005: Alexander CSD Conference Room
Time: 1:30 PM

Next recorder: Ian Bogus
Back up recorder: Salvatore Cardinale

URL: http://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/rul/staff/groups/team_leaders/minutes/team_leaders_05-02-17.shtml
Website Feedback  |  Privacy Policy
© Copyright 1997-, Rutgers University Libraries