Conference papers

Working online I

IT Competencies for Library and Information Service Professionals: Traps for New Players

Angela Bridgland

Director, library services

Iris Simpson

Project manager, IT competencies

Abstract

Brief outline on what competencies are in general. Why we are applying them to the area of IT and Library staff - emphasis is on experience/proved ability rather than on training. Process issues: Training assessors, developing skills and specific competencies, developing assessment tools, developing policies with reference to existion HR policies. Application: Timing of training and actual assessment, piloting the process - choosing the best group, environmental issues. The hurdles ranged from resources required, lack of existing IT competencies which applied to the library environment, staff reactions, internal assessors with existing workloads. Potential benefits - heavy IT reliant environment. Creates an equal playing field for all staff to ensure everyone is appropriately trained/skills. Targeted training based on known needs, ability to plan IT skills required in dynamic environment, improved mobility for individual career paths.

Introduction

In 1998 the University of Melbourne Library began looking at the use of IT competencies as a way of building staff skills and confidence in this burgeoning and pivotal area, and one which we are highly reliant upon to deliver services to our customers. At the present time we are concentrating on technical skills relating to existing IT application, but we also need to adapt to new technology as it is introduced in the future. At a general level, workplaces have also changed, with restructures, quality assurance to reduce wastage and a desire to be more competitive. Overall, such changes have increased responsibilities for workers at all levels.

This need to establish IT competency standards has also been reinforced by the University's priority to integrate advanced multimedia and related educational technologies into curriculum design and delivery, into all aspects of student learning, and the establishment of a world-competitive information technology base for research and research training. It is vital that the library be an integral part of this approach and that our staff feel capable, prepared and confident in their use of appropriate information technology. Universities failing to avail themselves of the educational benefits and research applications of the new multimedia and information communications technologies and systems will find themselves in increasing danger of being rendered irrelevant by those that do.

Competence and capability

Competency implies being knowledgeable about what is being assessed and making consistent judgments based on information available. Many industries in Australia now have competency standards which are endorsed by the Australian National Training Authority (ANTA). Each industry is required by ANTA to incorporate these generic competencies into their own industry standards. Each set of standards is also required to incorporate relevant standards from other industries, for example, occupational health and safety standards, rather than reinvent the wheel. Use of certain standards across industries also promotes consistency and enhances portability of competency sets.

We must be aware of the role of competency based training (CBT) and its possible limitations, and not allow the focus on competency to overshadow the need for adaptability and cognitive skills such as lateral thinking and problem solving. Although using the definition of competence promulgated by the ANTA, it was felt that we were also working towards creating not only a competent organisation, but one which was capable as well . The notion of 'capability' embraces the concepts of values, self-efficacy, mindful openness to change, self-management of learning potential, and a problem-solving approach as well as ability - which includes competence (skills, knowledge and attitudes) as well as capacity (potential ability which is present and available for use).

The process

In 1998 there were no competency standards for the library Industry relating specifically to IT, or external standards, which directly met the IT needs of our staff. This meant that we had to develop our own which has taken us considerable time, and the list of possibilities to be included seemed endless. Information gathering took place in the form of a staff survey, literature search, and several reference groups, which included staff from various classification levels, branch locations and functional groups. Reference was also made to the general competencies relating to administration staff outlined by ANTA. Now as we approach implementation, a number of certification programs testing technical competency in a variety of IT areas are widely available. None of these map completely to our requirements, nor do they cover industry specific technologies such as our Library Management System Innopac, or the National Bibliographic Database Kinetica.

The process of mapping which individual competencies applied to each particular work group (e.g., circulation, collection management, information services, technical services), and even particular individuals, was made more complex by our highly multi-skilled environment, and multiple branch locations. This meant we had to build as much flexibility into the process as possible, with job requirement driving what competencies applied to a particular person and their position. The reality of our working environment is such that staff at the same classification levels sometimes have different IT abilities, and in some cases, whilst a high level of skill in a particular application may not strictly be required for a given position, this skill is often utilised because it exists. An example of this might be where a staff member undertakes occasional training of their colleagues. There may be no strict need for this person to have skills in the use of PowerPoint, but if they do, why not utilise this skill in presenting the training program. These and other issues were tackled along the way including the need for particular staff to reach a higher benchmark. As Tovey has pointed out :

'In order to identify if a person is not performing to the required standard you need to have the standard clearly documented for the employee in particular, and for the manager and the organization.'

Towards the end of 1999 we determined a set of 16 core competencies relating to our most basic IT functions. We plan to introduce these first, and add more complex competencies once the basic ones have been completed, and the overall process is understood.

Fourteen library staff members from all areas of the library, were trained in two nationally recognised units relating to competency development and assessment by our University's Research Assessment Centre in the Faculty of Education. These staff were chosen on the basis of their confidence and skill level in using technology in general. As part of the accreditation for passing these units, the staff were required to develop assessment modules for at least one of the core IT competencies we had identified, and test them on a sample of library staff. This training, assessment development and testing took approximately six months to complete.

Training and training needs analysis

One message to come out clearly from the reference groups was that there was a real need among staff for effective and pertinent training delivered when they needed it for their work. Furthermore, training should be consistent throughout the library, i.e., all staff would learn the same things about an IT program and its use. There was some concern expressed by this group that in the past, training consistency had been variable. They also alerted us that not all problems are training problems, for example, the lack of concurrency in delivery of training and use of an IT application is arguably not a training problem but a planning problem.

In establishing a set of IT standards, individual staff will be able to identify skills gaps relating to the particular IT Competencies we have devised. It will also enable us to determine the current skill levels we have in the organisation. We are confident that the majority of people will be competent in most of the areas. We are utilising the CompAssess database to record assessment results, and from this data the system will provide us with reports on training needs of individuals, work groups, or classification level depending on what we require. CompAssess is an on-line competency assessment, recording and monitoring system, designed to allow a workplace assessor to assess competency standards. It also provides reports for employees and managers on current skills levels, skills gaps and training needs.

We will be deploying our existing Performance Development Scheme to enable staff and their supervisors to plan for each assessment and any training needs. Training will be provided by a range of mechanisms including online computer based training (OCBT), accessible to all staff via our Intranet using LearningFast by Infossentials. This software meets our need for a modular or non linear approach to training, so that staff can find out 'how to' about a particular element within a particular IT competency. Complete training courses are also available for staff to access as usual through our University IT Services (ITS) where staff feel they have a large skills gap. We are also looking at commercial training providers, depending on the information analysis provided by CompAssess after the first round of assessment. Based on the pilot exercise, and the fact that staff often feel more confident being shown how to do things by their colleagues, we expect that many staff will fulfill most of their training needs with a combination of OCBT and on-the-job training. Supervisors and staff must also plan and allow sufficient time for training and practice, as:

'regardless of the method of delivery (instructional video, computer based training, web-based training, demonstration, hands-on, one-to-one), it is essential to allot time for repeated practice and review. Not surprisingly, demonstrations and lectures without the benefit of hands-on practice are of little use. It is only through the reinforcement of newly acquired skills that learners feel comfortable and secure.'[4]

Our reference groups stressed the need for training that only occurred at the point of need. The options available address this as well as the need for a variety of training options to take into account different learning preferences, as reinforced by Krissoff and Konrad:

'wherever possible, attempt to take into account the various learning styles and perceptual strengths (auditory, visual, and kinesthetic) of the staff or patron groups you are working with.'

Assessment

Assessment is a vexed question because the idea of assessment raises issues both philosophical and competitive[5]. It also requires a cultural shift for our library as we have not tested or formally assessed staff skills before. This shift has naturally generated anxiety for some staff. Tovey says of assessment:

'Assessment is a difficult process. It must be fair and equitable. It must test what it claims to test. It must be reliable so that people can depend on the results of the testing for all who are tested. Finally, it must be integrated with the design and development of the training and it must use appropriate techniques. Statements can then be made as to an individual's competence.'[6]

Our reference groups, while not opposed to the idea of assessment, made it quite clear that it had to be objective, consistent, fair and that people should be given the opportunity to train before being assessed (and after assessment if this should be necessary). These issues are congruent with the 13 principles of assessment[7] which are, authority, confidentiality, cost effectiveness, equal employment opportunity, fairness, feedback, flexibility, openness, practicality, relevance, reliability, sufficiency and validity .

It was their view that this order of events would build people's confidence in the process and make the idea of assessment less threatening as staff would have had a chance to self-assess beforehand and build their skills. Competency as we know it is assessed against criterion referenced assessment, that is, 'if learners reach the criteria they are said to be competent, if they do not reach the criteria, they may be asked to do some parts of the assessment again as they are not yet competent.'[8]

A number of assessment methodologies have been employed depending on the particular competency, and in some cases several options are available for staff to choose within each. The most important point is that assessment be congruent with the skill being measured and the training that has occurred. David Rumsey in Assessment Practical Guide[9] lists a number of methodologies which can be adopted to assess staff skills: observation, skills tests, simulation, evaluation of prior learning, and questioning which can be oral, written (in various forms), or computer managed. CBT encourages that evidence of competency be gained by using a range of assessment techniques for each element of competency.

As in all change processes, it is important to communicate the why, what, how and when at every opportunity. We have utilised our Intranet site and our weekly Information Division Gazette to inform staff about the stages of planning, development and implementation. The Director, Library Services also carried out personal presentations to staff in all divisions to deal directly with any questions or concerns. Input from Union representatives was also received and most helpful in addressing staff concerns. We have set a timeline of two years for staff to reach competency in all 16 core competencies, as we recognise this is a new process and some employees may need more training than others. Part of the communication strategy is to be open and transparent about the process and what is required. Our policy and procedures help us achieve this by being detailed yet practical, rather than formal. The standards have been clearly defined and staff will know these well in advance so they have adequate time for skill acquisition and practice. Staff will choose when they are ready for assessment, and supervisors will be aware of their role in the whole process.

Over time, staff will be able to recognise the underpinning principles of each new IT application and transfer them to new and enhanced technologies, thus increasing their capacity to learn new tools more quickly and enabling them to teach others more effectively. Their acquisition of new skills, knowledge and capabilities will increase their confidence, marketability and of course, benefit the customers.

Findings So Far

A core of five generic IT competencies relevant to all jobs across the library was identified. It was decided to tackle these first. A pilot exercise was completed in August 2000 with senior managers being assessed in these five IT competencies. A top down approach was considered appropriate because the situation needed to be clearly understood by supervisors in the first instance. Each supervisor needs to be deemed competent before they can assess their staff. The outcome of the pilot was very positive and encouraging, as all of the managers demonstrated competency during assessment, and found the assessment process easy to follow and the requirements fair and relevant to their jobs. Simplification of the paperwork and background information was the only area to need refinement, as well as the possibility for group assessment situations rather than one-on-one to save time where possible.

The success of the pilot was largely due to the transparency of the process, with the managers knowing in advance precisely what they were required to demonstrate. This enabled them to fill in any knowledge or training gaps prior to assessment, and then proceed confidently. Sufficient time between knowing what is required and completing assessment is essential so that any training needs can be identified and fulfilled.

Resource Implications and Evaluation

Successful staff training programs must be constructed on a foundation of time, patience, commitment, money and expertise. We are fortunate that in our Library there is a well developed culture, which recognises the value of training and devotes substantial resources, time and money to it. At the same time we must get a return for this investment, and ensure it is adding value to our organisation. While competency based assessments can be expensive to administer, the benefits will offset the costs, and the alternatives appear to be equally as costly. [10].The IT competency process will allow us to identify this return and our knowledge capital[11]. Specifically it will provide a more systematic approach to targeted IT training based on job requirement. Highly skilled staff will also mean provision of customer service in a more effective and efficient manner which is an imperative for all organisations who must do more with the same or less. While it has been costly in some respects to develop our IT competencies in-house, this knowledge base remains with us to develop further competencies in this ever changing area, particularly those which are industry specific and for which there are no off-the-shelf assessment products.

We already require a justification of the need for training against the goals of our operational and strategic plans, but often the knowledge and skills once learned, atrophy due to poor opportunities to practice how best to make them a 'normal' part of work. Using a CBT approach requires that the competency BE part of the person's work, not merely an add-on.

Where to from here?

A well defined process is now in place which will allow supervisors to assess staff in 2001. We are approaching a new Performance Development cycle, so planning will take place as part of this process to establish timelines for staff to complete training and assessment. the library is involved in a restructure, due to the merger of the library, ITS and Multimedia Education Unit (MMEU) into a newly formed division called the Information Division. This may have some impact on training and roll out. This restructure reiterates the merging of roles and the importance of IT to all areas including the library. Our OCBT will be launched officially in late 2000 and early 2001 as a major training tool. Above all, we must remain flexible, for example we may need to refine existing assessment units as the technology changes and build new ones, or decide to use commercial assessment tools available for general IT applications in the future, and only focus on developing internally those which are industry specific.

In summary, the main traps we encountered whilst implementing this process were the resource-intensive process of having to develop competencies in-house, identifying what competencies were important to us in the short term, setting a realistic time frame, communicating openly and frequently with staff, defining policies and procedures, and ensuring that sufficient training options were available which matched staff needs. Despite these traps and the time it has taken, we are confident that in the near future we will reap the rewards with staff being confident and able to tackle the range of IT issues they are faced with on a day-to-day basis. Having a clear idea of our organisational benchmarks in this area will also help us to plan more efficiently for staff training, and organisational development [12] overall.