Recommendations on Accountability

RS Assessment/Implementation Committee

Every unit should meet to set unit goals as a group. The units can then meet to set up section goals and from these goals the department can select its own goals. This is being done by some units, but it would be best to have all units uniformly go through this exercise.

Result: Vote: accepted unanimously. With suggestion that this be done near beginning of new fiscal year, July 2001.

Each unit should then try to select performance standards both to measure how well each unit is achieving its goals and also to improve performance over time. The units should actively utilize the 1999 RS Performance Standards document issued by the RS Performance Standards Work Group in evaluating their performance and setting goals, augmenting it if necessary with standards not established in the document.

Result: Vote: 4-yes, 7-Needs to be modified, 1-No. To unit heads-please tell us how you would like to see this modified. One suggestion was that this should be used as a tool only. A final result will appear at a later date.

Resource Services might consider creating a performance standard document on the model of the one created by The Reference and Information Services Committee and posted publicly on The Library Staff Toolbox. This would make clear to the larger library community Resource Services’ guidelines for accountability to the community.

Result: Vote: 8-yes, 2-no. Accepted as stands.

Implement reverse evaluations to give staff members the chance to evaluate their supervisors’ performance. Staff could anonymously evaluate both the positive and negative aspects of their supervisors’ performance. These reverse evaluations could be compiled into a document by the department chair or secretary and then given to the supervisor in question. The content of the evaluations should not be disseminated outside the unit. At first, these evaluations might be tried on an experimental basis and only for giving supervisors feedback on their own performance. To insure that it is done on a professional level, perhaps all staff who have not done so yet should be required to attend the workshop on how to make performance evaluations work.

Result: Vote: yes-0, Needs to be modified-10, no-4. A final result will appear at a later date.

Implement annual clientele evaluations from a library department outside Resource Services. Each unit would pick a department that its members interact with regularly, either on an ongoing basis or for a particular year in question. The units should then send out a standardized form to the members of the chosen department that would allow individuals to anonymously evaluate the unit’s performance. The feedback thus received could be used to measure the unit’s overall performance and achievement of its goals.

Result: Vote: yes-5, needs to be modified-8, no-0. Modifications made at the joint RSMG and Assessment/Implementation meeting. Modified recommendation:

Implement annual clientele evaluations from a library department outside Resource Services. Each unit would pick a department that its members interact with regularly, either on an ongoing basis or for a particular year in question. The units should then send out a standardized form to the members of the chosen department that would allow individuals to anonymously evaluate the unit's performance. Each unit should come up with its own form and pick its own unit and criteria. The feedback thus received could be used to measure the unit's overall performance and achievement in its goals.

Find out if the University of Florida does independent evaluations of a unit’s performance. If so, Resource Services might consider seeking such an outside evaluation.

Result: Vote: yes-8, 4-no. Assign someone in administration to find out for RSD.

Return to Assessment Implementation Group

Prepared by: Tim Hartigan, April 24, 2001
Last updated: July 3, 2001


		Library Catalog \| Databases \| Site Map \| Search
Library > Cataloging and Metadata Department