Results of a Brief Survey on Portfolio Management

Two months ago, in preparing to talk to a class of MLIS students at Catholic University about project portfolio management, I sent a very quick and totally unscientific survey to the Digital Library Federation’s Project Managers Group about their practice of portfolio management at their libraries. I asked two questions:

1. How many of you or your organizations are doing something like project portfolio management (however you or your orgs understand that term)?

- YES / NO / KIND OF / I DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT

2. And if you are (or kind of), how are you tracking projects? In other words, what system, platform, process are you using to gather, hold, and review the information about your project portfolio?

I got 11 responses (thank you everyone for responding so quickly!) Here is a summary.

Who is doing PM?

  • 9 said yes,  1 said no (but they will in the future),  and 1 said “I don’t know what you’re talking about.”
  • Of the 9 who said yes, 7 said they were doing portfolio management in a limited way or were developing the capacity to formalize or expand their portfolio management process. 2 have a process in place that is already developed enough for their needs.

Why do it?

  • standardize the project intake process
  • work prioritization at the project level
  • resource allocation and planning
  • reporting out and up on our work

Tools, processes, and documentation:

  • By far, the most popular tools combination was Jira (for issues) + Confluence (for documentation). A few were also using the Greenhopper add-on for Jira which supports agile project management.
  • MS Project
  • Liquid Planner
  • Spreadsheets, to track roles and responsibilities and assign resource percentages

Documentation and Process:

  • Scope documents: very important for defining projects, documenting project goals and objectives, requirements, deliverables, success criteria, assumptions, constraints, and team members. As one responder noted, “The scope document is a useful tool for communicating up the chain.”
  • Work breakdown structure
  • Project selection/prioritization criteria and process
  • Project review meetings and portfolio review meetings

Challenges:

  • project priotitization
  • keeping information up to date
  • resource allocation and resource forecasting
  • knowing how much capacity we have and how many projects we can accomplish

It seems that for many of us, portfolio management is very much a work in progress. Most of my respondents are working to establish processes that help them gain a strategic view of their project work and enable them to plan future project work. Rather than adopt sophisticated project and portfolio management platforms, the majority are using commonly available and relatively simple tools like spreadsheets, wikis, and issue tracking software for their project documentation and tracking.

At the same time, they are formalizing their project documentation and portfolio review processes. Scope documents are an important way to define projects, deliverables, and constraints. Respondents are interested in better predicting staff time on projects and forecasting how many projects they can support going forward. A number are seeking ways to better prioritize and organize projects, and they hold regular meetings to review portfolio issues.

While several respondents acknowledged that keeping project and portfolio information current is a challenge, none said that it was a deterrent to practicing portfolio management. On the contrary, the benefits certainly seem to outweigh the costs.

Are you practicing portfolio management? What tools are you using? How is it working for you and your organization?

 

Posted in Digital Libraries, Organizational Culture, Project & Portfolio Management, Tools | Leave a comment

Is “seamlessness” really a useful goal?

A number of us at NYU Libraries just emerged from a 2-day strategic planning retreat. We did loads of good work and have the draft of a plan that should keep us busy for the years to come.

There were several words that kept creeping into our writing and then coming up for discussion/debate over the two days, including “holistic,” “integrated,” and “seamless.”

Coincidentally, just this morning on twitter Tito Sierra @tsierra (MIT) and Lorcan Dempsey @lorcanD (OCLC) had a conversation about interfaces and they used the phrases “logically seamed” and “well seamed” in order to “avoid the hubris of ‘seamless’” (to quote Lorcan). (Note: Lorcan took the phrase “well seamed” from Peter Burnhill, @strollerman).

Tito’s original post was about Columbia’s beta CLIO interface: ”Columbia University Libraries CLIO Beta unified library search application is very impressive http://cliobeta.columbia.edu/ ”

Tito went on to explain: “I like Clio beta because it provides an integrated, logically seamed (not boiled down), interface to heterogenous lib content”

In the NYU Libraries strategic planning retreat today, I agreed with the drift of our own discussion that “seamlessness” is not necessarily an achievable, or even useful, goal. Seams in data and interfaces exist for specific (technical) reasons and their exposure can indicate something about the complexity of the information landscape that we can’t or don’t want to completely hide. The seams can act as signposts (or warning signs?) for the user about what might be happening behind the scenes.

Though the expressions suggested by Tito and Lorcan are clumsy, I do also like the fact that they hint at the importance of decision-making about how to stitch and when/how to expose or smooth out seams, rather than attempt to obliterate them entirely.

Every good seamstress knows how important good seams are, how they help define and shape the garment. (Did you happen to see the Alexander McQueen “Savage Beauty” exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum? Here are a few seams worth considering: Plato’s Atlantis, It’s Only a Game, and Eclect Dissect).

Rather than aim for seamlessness, let’s think more about how to seam artfully and to strategically reveal to the user the construction of our search environments.

Posted in Digital Libraries, Library services, Tools | Leave a comment

An infographic with poorly sourced and inaccurate “facts.”

A week or so ago I received a request from someone suggesting that my blog readers might enjoy an infographic “about how Wikipedia is redefining the way we research,” and asking for my thoughts about it. This graphic, entitled “Wikipedia redefining research and eliminating encyclopedias” was posted on 3/15/2012 to Open Site and is making its way onto other websites.

I don’t disagree that Wikipedia is contributing to a change in the way we do research. What I do disagree with is pushing poorly researched promotional or “educational” materials that rely on misleading information. Since she asked for my thoughts, I wrote a reply and I share it here with you:

You should could [sic] have made the links in your list of sources clickable so people could more easily check your facts, which seem to have some serious problems.

For example, you say that library use is declining by 11%. But you got that figure from an article (link below) about library use of one single public library in concord NH. That same article contradicts your figure for nationwide use of libraries, and quotes the ALA’s “State of American Libraries” report. The 2011 “State of” report states that “The library-use figures that emerged from the poll were up several percentage points from a year earlier, testament both to Americans’ entrepreneurial spirit and libraries’ role in nourishing that spirit.”
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/224794/library-use-declines-by-11-percent

The U Calgary website you link to is a wiki page that appears to be written by a group of students. Their credentials and affiliations are not provided; their information about libraries is naive and inaccurate; although they are from the U of Calgary they appear to be describing public libraries rather than academic libraries, yet their survey asks about campus libraries. They, like you, provide a list of links to resources but, like you, don’t provide direct citations for any of the “facts” you are sharing.
http://wiki.ucalgary.ca/page/Libraries_vs._Wikipedia

I’m not going into the information in the rest of your graphic because I can only assume the other figures you provide are equally untrustworthy as the ones I looked into.

Beware poorly sourced and inaccurate “facts.”

Posted in Library services, Research, Reviews | 1 Comment

Testing plugins to embed bib citation feeds into WordPress posts/pages, 3/2012

This was just a quick test I did this evening to see how to embed bibliographic citations into a wordpress post using Mendeley and Zotero feeds. I don’t know at what point a citation collection would become too large for these plugins to function properly.

I’m interested in comments and suggestions for other methods that you like and find easy to manage.

I did three tests:

  • Test 1: “Embed RSS” Plugin
  • Test 2: “Mendeley” plugin
  • Test 3: “Zotpress” zotero plugin

Test 1: “Embed RSS” Plugin http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/embed-rss/

Install plugin and use shortcode to embed any RSS feed into a page or post.

Below is an RSS feed from a Mendeley public group I set up for this test, displaying the first 20 citations in my Mendeley group library of 27 citations.

I’d like to be able to display all of my 27 Mendeley items. I’ve set the rss feed widget to display “all” and then “150″ items but it only seems to display 20 maximum citations. I don’t know if this is a limit of the widget or Mendeley.

To get an rss feed from Mendeley: create a pubic group, put some citations in it. Go to group home page. The URL should be something like this: http://www.mendeley.com/groups/1999023/vinopal-s-test-mendeley-group/
Append feed/rss to that URL to get the rss feed URL.

Comments:
I can’t get the code to work in this post. The odd thing is the exact same code, copied and pasted, works in a page. See here: http://vinopal.org/sandbox-2/

Odd, too, that the description of the plugin says specifically that it’s designed to work in posts.

Oh well.

Continue reading

Posted in Reviews, Tools | Leave a comment

WordPress.com vs. WordPress.org

In order to more intelligently advise scholars about their options for creating websites, I’ve started investigating various website hosting platforms. I want to compare features and highlight the plusses and minuses of each for blogging, website hosting, content delivery, etc. Some scholars are very technically savvy, and some are not. I want to help them make informed decisions by understanding the differences among the various tools and services, and the tradeoffs between customization and the technical skill/investment needed to maintain whatever is customized.

In my first review I compared wordpress.com with wordpress.org.

Note: Special thanks go out to Miriam Posner (Emory University), Megan Perez (University of Arkansas), and Francesca Socolick (New York University) for their comments and contributions in creating this draft document.

This is a work in progress. I’d love to get feedback on what I’ve written so far.

Next I’m going to look at Blogger. Stay tuned!

Update 4/2/2012: In December 2011 I turned this into a spreadsheet and added Blogger to the comparison. Anyone can view this document. Please add comments to the spreadsheet so I can improve the information. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EJKlDPnRZXS7wnTiz1Rt44n9v00qrN8MbNavqiz6VE8/edit

Posted in Library services, Publishing, Reviews, Teaching/Learning, Tools | Leave a comment

Project Portfolio Management for Academic Libraries: A Gentle Introduction

Pre-print for “Project Portfolio Management for Academic Libraries: A Gentle Introduction,” College & Research Libraries.

Abstract:

In highly dynamic, service-oriented environments like academic libraries, much staff time is spent on initiatives to implement new products and services to meet users’ evolving needs. Yet even in an environment where a sound project management process is applied, if we’re not properly planning, managing, and controlling the organization’s work in the aggregate, we will have difficulty achieving our strategic goals. Project portfolio management provides a way to ensure that this project work supports the organization’s strategic vision, the active projects represent the highest priorities of the organization, and there are enough resources to accomplish all the project work at hand.

Posted in Digital Libraries, Library services, Organizational Culture, Project & Portfolio Management | 3 Comments

The “Collaboration Continuum,” Viewpoint, and Communication

I’ve been thinking about how collaboration in its various forms can have a profound influence on how we view and interpret the world around us, and thus how we communicate about it.

Collaboration Continuum Models

There are various models of the collaboration continuum — the range of engagement in collaboration from none to full integration. Just Google the phrase “collaboration continuum” to find plenty of examples. Here are a few:.

  • UCSF document on building community partnerships identifies 5 stages in the continuum: Networking / Coordinating / Cooperating / Collaborating / Integrating
  • model available through the ACT for Youth website uses the same 5 stages but also illustrates that as collaboration evolves over time from Networking to Integrating, “Turf” thinking decreases as “Trust” increases.
  • Another model represents the stages as “five C’s”: Contact / Cooperation / Coordination / Collaboration / Convergence. Overlaying this model are left-to-right arrows showing increasing investment, risk, and benefit as one moves from contact to convergence. (I can’t remember where I found this model, so I can’t include a link here.)

Typically, as you move toward a more integrated or intense level of collaboration, you benefit from increasing levels of commitment, shared values, and trust, and, if done right, possibly cost savings as duplication of work and miscommunication is reduced. The ACT for Youth model, which overlays the turf/trust dichotomy and timeline, suggests what are, for me, two key components in collaboration: 1. moving into and through the collaboration continuum is a learning experience requiring cultural change that can only happen over time;  2. these cultural changes are profound and involve a fundamental change in mindset — in how we see and interpret our world (for example, the movement from “turf to trust”).

Continue reading

Posted in Organizational Culture | 2 Comments

Why understanding the Digital Humanities is key for libraries.

I just read a recent blog post by MITH Director Neil Fraistat, “The Questions(s) of Digital Humanities,” in which he discusses the Digital Humanities not just as a set of practices enacted by humanists, but as a field or discipline in itself. As a very sympathetic observer of the digital humanities, as a librarian working to support scholarship in the digital realm, and as a former humanities scholar, I’m drawn to this discussion for (at least) three reasons.

Continue reading

Posted in Digital Humanities, Digital Libraries, Library services | 1 Comment

“Why Digital Humanities?” Notes from a panel discussion at NYU.

I just got back from a panel discussion at NYU entitled “Why Digital Humanities,” co-sponsored by NYU’s Center for Teaching Excellence and NYU’s Humanities Initiative. It featured Kathleen Fitzpatrick (professor of Media Studies, Pomona College, visiting scholar at NYU, and co-editor of Media Commons, a Digital Scholarly Network), Deena Engel (professor of Computer Science, NYU), Michael Stoller (Director, Collections and Research Services, NYU Libraries), and Diana Taylor (University Professor, NYU, and founding Director of the Hemispheric Institute of Performance and Politics).

Here are some brief notes I took during the discussion:

Continue reading

Posted in Digital Humanities, Digital Libraries, Publishing, Teaching/Learning | 1 Comment

A patron at my own library: the view from the other side.

I’ve just started a six-month sabbatical to begin work on several projects. As I turn my attention from the daily responsibilities of my job to the professional projects I planned for this leave, I have the opportunity to look at my library from a quite different perspective. I am no longer building and providing tools and services; I am a potential consumer of many of the services that my colleagues and I have worked so hard to create.

So how do things look from this side of the fence? Well, the view is mixed.

Continue reading

Posted in Digital Humanities, Digital Libraries, Library services | 1 Comment