Presented at the 2014 LIBER Conference

1. Mobilizing
Invisible
Library
Assets
for
Innova5ve
Research
Support
in
the
2020
Informa5on
Landscape
Sheila
Corrall
Professor
and
Chair
Library
&
Informa5on
Science

2. Research
Environment
Challenges
• Networked
data-­‐driven
science,
digital
humani5es,
interdisciplinary
research,
and
“grand
challenges”
• Policy
developments
and
funding
body
mandates
–
open
access,
data
sharing,
and
research
impact
• Evidence
of
unmet
needs
for
research
support
(infrastructure,
systems,
tools,
and
expert
help)
• Calls
for
libraries
to
change
both
what
they
offer
and
how
they
engage
with
the
research
process
– Moving
from
“service-­‐as-­‐support”
to
partnership
and
“deep
collabora5on”
across
the
knowledge
crea5on
cycle

3. Theore5cal
Proposi5ons
Proposi5on
1
Research
libraries
gain
strategic
advantage
by
effec5ve
use
and
efficient
accumula5on
of
intangible
resources
that
represent
dis5nc5ve
competencies,
i.e.,
Invisible
Assets.
Proposi5on
2
Libraries
can
strengthen
their
resources
by
undertaking
ac5vi5es
that
require
more
than
their
current
capabili5es
and
stretch
their
invisible
assets,
i.e.,
Overextension
Strategy.

4. Theore5cal
Framework
• Resource-­‐based
view
(RBV)
of
organiza5ons
– tangible
and
intangible
assets
are
strategic
resources
whose
value
in
terms
of
durability,
rarity,
inimitability,
and
non-­‐subs5tutability
represent
compe55ve
advantage
– includes
financial,
physical,
human,
technological,
reputa5onal,
and
organiza5onal
resources
(Barney,
1991;
Grant,
1991;
Meso
&
Smith,
2000)
• Intellectual
capital
(IC)
perspec5ve
– human,
structural,
and
customer/rela;onal
capital
are
long-­‐term
investments
enabling
value
crea5on
for
stakeholders,
alongside
other
forms
of
capital,
such
as
physical
and
monetary
assets
(Marr,
2005;
Stewart,
1997)

5. Defini5ons
“Intellectual
capital
is
intellectual
material
–
knowledge,
informa;on,
intellectual
property,
experience
–
that
can
be
put
to
use
to
create
wealth”
“sum
of
everything
everybody
in
a
company
knows
that
gives
it
a
compe55ve
edge”
(Stewart,
1997,
pp.
ix-­‐x)
“IC
can
be
both
the
end
result
of
a
knowledge
transforma5on
process
and
the
knowledge
itself
that
is
transformed
into
intellectual
property
or
assets”
“An
asset
can
be
thought
of
as
a
prior
cost
that
has
a
future
benefit”
(Snyder
&
Pierce,
2002,
pp.
469,
475)

6. Terminology
• Different
terms
can
be
used
for
the
same
things,
e.g.,
– intangible
assets
(IAs),
intangibles,
intellectual
assets,
intellectual
capital,
invisible
assets,
hidden
assets,
knowledge
assets,
knowledge-­‐based
resources,
knowledge
capital…
• Some
scholars
give
the
terms
more
precise
meanings
and
arrange
them
as
a
hierarchy
of
related
concepts
• IC/IAs
have
three
core
characteris5cs
i)
they
are
sources
of
probable
future
economic
profits
ii)
they
lack
physical
substance
iii)
to
some
extent,
they
can
be
retained
and
traded
by
a
firm
(OECD,
2006,
p.
9)

7. Research
Ques5ons
General
ques5ons
RQ1.
What
human,
organiza5onal
and
rela5onship
factors
are
associated
with
development
of
higher-­‐end
research
services
in
research
libraries?
RQ2.
To
what
extent
are
libraries
blending
and/or
recycling
intangible
resources
to
create
added
value
in
the
delivery
of
support
for
research?
RQ3.
What
do
current
trends
in
library
engagement
with
research
suggest
about
future
strategies
for
service
innova5on
and
growth?

8. Data
Sources
and
Methods
• Case
study
design
enabled
in-­‐depth
inves5ga5on
of
topic
of
interest
in
a
real-­‐world
ins5tu5onal
context
• Ins5tu5ons
selected
to
represent
different
sizes
and
types
within
group
of
leading
research
universi5es
• Primary
data
sources
included
ins5tu5onal
documenta5on
and
semi-­‐structured
interviews
• Review
of
related
literature
used
to
form
ques5ons
and
to
provide
secondary
data
for
comparison
• OECD
(2008)
classifica5on
of
intangible
assets
used
as
pre-­‐exis5ng
framework
to
analyze
data

9. Analy5cal
Framework:
OECD
(2008)
Classifica5on
of
Intellectual
Assets
Category
Brief
descrip5on
Examples/keywords
Human
capital
Knowledge,
skills,
and
know-­‐how
that
staff
“take
with
them
when
they
leave
at
night”
Innova5on
capacity,
crea5vity,
know-­‐how,
previous
experience,
teamwork
capacity,
employee
flexibility,
tolerance
for
ambiguity,
mo5va5on,
sa5sfac5on,
learning
capacity,
loyalty,
formal
training,
educa5on.
Rela5onal
capital
External
rela5ons
with
customers,
suppliers,
and
R&D
partners
Stakeholder
rela5ons:
image,
customer
loyalty,
customer
sa5sfac5on,
links
with
suppliers,
commercial
power,
nego5a5ng
capacity
with
financial
en55es.
Structural
capital
Knowledge
that
stays
with
the
firm
“amer
the
staff
leaves
at
night”
Organiza5onal
rou5nes,
procedures,
systems,
cultures,
databases:
organiza5onal
flexibility,
documenta5on
service,
knowledge
center,
ICTs,
organiza5onal
learning
capaci5es.

10. Sample
Characteris5cs
(Pilot
Study)
Ins5tu5on
A
Ins5tu5on
B
Age
200+
100+
Type
Public
Private
Faculty
5,000
1,500
Students
35,000
12,500
Libraries
15
5
Library
staff
225
75
Note:
Figures
rounded
to
protect
ins5tu5onal
iden55es

11. Findings
on
Human
Assets
@
Case
Sites
• Exper5se
in
collec5on
development/archives
administra5on
transferred
to
repository
management
via
redeployment
• Informa5on
organiza5on/retrieval
know-­‐how
and
teaching/
training
abili5es
reused
in
the
scholarly
communica5on
area
• Skills
in
reference
interviewing
applied
to
data-­‐related
issues
• Competency
needs
for
specialist
support
not
only
technical,
but
also
include
generic
managerial
and
(inter)personal
skills
(e.g.,
marke5ng,
nego5a5on,
collabora5on,
cri5cal
thinking)
• Knowledge
of
research
and
scholarship
acquired
by
recrui5ng
(non-­‐LIS)
PhDs
for
special
projects
and
permanent
posi5ons
• Librarians
need
to
think
differently
and
gain
new
perspec5ves
–
and
get
used
to
“thinking
like
knowledge
producers”

12. Findings
on
Rela5onal
Assets
@
Case
Sites
• Professional
networks
used
to
benchmark
service
ini5a5ves,
gather/exchange
informa5on
and
iden5fy
good
prac5ces
• Trust
and
credibility
built
from
from
previous
interac5ons
exploited
to
develop
effec5ve
rela5onships
with
researchers
• Cross-­‐unit
collabora5ons
formed
by
university
libraries
with
exis5ng
and
new
partners
to
develop
research
data
services
– compu5ng
services,
research
office,
and
compliance
office
• Liaison
librarians
expected
to
have
important
on-­‐the-­‐ground
roles
“engaging
the
campus
in
conversa5on”
– in
rela5on
to
exis5ng
and
emergent
researcher
support,
e.g.,
repository
services,
data
management,
new
metrics

13. Findings
on
Structural
Assets
@
Case
Sites
• Ins5tu5onal-­‐level
commiqees/groups
endorsed
library
role
in
research
process
and
provided
sounding
board
for
proposals
• No
ins5tu5onal
mandates,
but
policy
statements/resolu5ons
on
OA/RDM
used
to
promote
good
prac5ce
to
faculty
– decentralized
ins5tu5onal
structure/culture
problema5c
• Mixed
hybrid
structure
of
subject
liaison
librarians
and
(new)
func5onal
specialists
used
to
provide
subject-­‐related
support
informed
and
guided
by
specialist
exper5se
in
key
areas
– research
data
services,
scholarly
communica5ons
• Tools
developed
in
the
wider
community
deployed
locally,
e.g.,
bepress/EPrints,
DMPTool,
PKP
Open
Journals
System

14. Structural
Assets
Community toolkits
Functional specialties
Subject liaison positions
Institutional committees/groups
Relational
Assets
Service reputation
Professional network
Academic engagement
Cross-unit collaborations
Libraries
can
gain
strategic
advantage
from
complex
bundles
of
intangible
resources
combined
into
service
assets
Human
Assets
Technical
know-how
On-the-job learning
Blended professionals
Management competence
Collection & Service
Assets
Data management planning
Open access publishing
Digital repositories
Altmetrics
Mobilizing
Invisible
Assets

15. Invisible
Assets
as
Strategic
Resources
• Invisible
assets
are
hard
to
accumulate,
but
are
capable
of
simultaneous
mul5ple
uses,
and
are
“dual
resources”
– Both
inputs
and
outputs
of
business/service
ac5vi5es
• Libraries
achieve
dynamic
strategic
fit
between
ever-­‐changing
external
and
internal
factors
through
the
effec5ve
use
and
efficient
accumula5on
of
their
invisible
assets
• Successful
strategies
are
dependent
on
invisible
assets,
which
are
also
largely
determined
by
the
content
of
the
strategies
– Invisible
assets
affect
and
are
in
turn
affected
by
strategies
(posi5vely
and
nega5vely)
– Libraries
may
have
to
enter
a
new
area
of
opera5on
before
they
are
completely
ready
to
achieve
their
strategic
design
and
thereby
generate
new
assets
for
future
use

16. Mobilizing
Invisible
Assets
“Overextend
yourself,
but
don’t
get
reckless.”
(Itami,
1997,
p.
132)
• In
a
dynamic,
technology-­‐driven
environment,
libraries
cannot
afford
to
wait
un5l
they
are
completely
ready
to
act
• Libraries
have
successfully
used
learning-­‐by-­‐doing
strategies
when
developing
pedagogical
know-­‐how
needed
to
lead
informa5on
literacy
educa5on
across
campus
• Capabili5es
gained
from
successfully
suppor5ng
learning
and
teaching
can
be
repurposed
for
research
collabora5on
– Crea5ng
new
structures,
forming
new
rela5onships,
and
developing
the
research
know-­‐how
needed
to
succeed

17. Thank
You!
Any
Ques?ons?
Sheila
Corrall
scorrall@piq.edu