Author Archives: Yoko Kudo

About Yoko Kudo

Orbach Science Library G47

Roster 2016-2017

Executive Board

Chair: Kat Koziar
Vice-Chair/Chair-Elect: David Rios
Secretary: Kent LaCombe
Delegate: David Rios
Alternate Delegate: Judy Lee
Past Chair: Carla Arbagey

Representatives to LAUC Systemwide Committees
Diversity: Kent LaCombe
Research and Professional Development: Tiffany Moxham
Professional Governance: Michael Yonezawa

Committee on Committees, Rules, Jurisdiction, and Elections
Chair: Ken Furuta (Co-Chair with Sharon)
Rhonda Neugebauer
Jessica Geiser
Alternate: Sharon Scott (Co-Chair with Ken)

Committee on Diversity
Chair: Kent LaCombe
JJ Jacobson
Judy Lee
Zayda Delgado

Committee on Personnel
Chair: Eric Milenkiewicz
Robin Katz
Michael Yonezawa
Jessica Geiser

Committee on Research & Professional Development
Chair: Tiffany Moxham
Kat Koziar
Yoko Kudo
Cherry Williams
Dani Cook
Swati Bhattacharyya

Committee on Professional Governance
Chair: Michael Yonezawa
Tiffany Moxham
Cherry Williams
Sharon Scott
Ken Furuta

Committee on Programs
Chair: Rhonda Neugebauer
Judy Lee
Ying Shen
Janet Reyes
Noah Geraci

Committee on Mentoring
Chair: Krista Ivy
Rhonda Neugebauer
Patricia Smith-Hunt

Academic Senate:  Representative to
Committee on Courses: Tiffany Moxham
Committee on Library & Scholarly Communication: vacant

CAPA-L:
Chair: Christina Cicchetti
Michael Yonezawa
David Rios
Krista Ivy [1st alternate]
Judy Lee [2nd alternate]

Professional Development Funding 2015/2016

The end of the fiscal year is quickly approaching.  Please submit requests for travel and professional development activities to be paid out of 2015/2016 fiscal year funds by May 25.  As a reminder, in this fiscal year each LAUC-R represented and non-represented librarian has been allotted $1500 for professional activities. The LAUC R&PD Committee will equally redistribute any unused funds as supplemental funding.

LAUC-R members are encouraged to resubmit any unfunded amounts remaining on travel and professional development expenses incurred (2015/2016 fiscal year) beyond the allotted amount of $1500 for consideration of supplemental funding.  Please send your resubmittals to me no later than June 3.

More information about funding: Professional Development Funds

Report on LAUC-R Brainstorming Session

Submitted by Carla Arbagey, LAUC-R Chair, 2015/2016
Draft, 3/4/2016

Summary

The February 9th, 2016 meeting of LAUC-R consisted of a brainstorming session to address the issue of improving morale in the library, especially among librarians.  A majority of LAUC-R members were in attendance, with a good mix of librarians, department heads, and administrators contributing to the session.
Attendees were split into two groups: active brainstorming and silent brainstorming. Active brainstorming involved the group calling out ideas in rapid succession, while the silent brainstormers wrote ideas on sticky notes, which were later arranged into categories.  After the session, those who were not able to attend were invited to send ideas via e-mail.

Each group was asked to brainstorm ideas on the following topics:

  • What makes you happy at work?
  • Which professional development opportunities help improve morale?
  • What kinds of programs, services, equipment, technology, furniture, educational opportunities, activities, or anything else you can think of, will improve morale?
  • What are we doing that we should keep doing to bolster our morale?

Once each group was finished brainstorming, they were asked to categorize their ideas, which are included in an appendix at the end of this report.  To finish up the session, each group presented their ideas.

Themes

After examining the ideas, I found that they fall into six major themes:

  1. Respect and how we treat each other
    Librarians indicated that working with highly professional, creative, and engaged colleagues makes them happy.  They appreciate that we respect one another’s busy schedules, and call for shorter, more productive meetings.  There is a clear desire to build a culture of caring and gratitude by saying thank-you for work done, appreciating contributions, and respecting the ideas of others.
  1. Library as place
    Many librarians suggested ways to improve or enhance our physical space as a way to improve morale.  Windows, plants, natural light, and ergonomic furniture were all cited as positive things we currently have.  Top on the list of ideas to improve morale included a café or coffee cart of some kind, clean restrooms, and staff areas that are better-equipped and modernized.
  1. Interaction and communication
    Issues and ideas about our communication were the most frequently mentioned ideas during both brainstorming sessions.  It is clear that librarians do not just want communication, but interaction, to improve morale.  In addition to receiving clear, frequent, timely, and in-depth communication from library leadership, librarians would like to participate in discussions about the library’s future, foster fluid communication and listening skills, and build an environment of trust.
  1. Training opportunities
    Librarians are eager to learn about new technologies, methodologies, and about the work of others.  We enjoy opportunities to enhance our skills and share our expert opinion/insight.  Continued (and enhanced) funding for professional development activities has been a great morale booster.
  1. Technology
    Librarians want technology that is portable, cutting-edge, and helpful to our jobs.  We need technology that will help is work from home or on-the-go.  We also want the ability to experiment with new technology through prototyping and testing.
  1. Programs
    Librarians cited programs dealing with diversity, cultural events, and socializing as being good ways to improve morale.  Staff socials such as brown-bag lunches, “open house” events in departments, field trips, and film screenings (with popcorn provided!) were all mentioned.  Further, a peer recognition or rewards program was suggested several times as a way to improve morale.  Past programs such as the Edible Book Contest, Library Staff Association (LSA) activities, Banned Books Week, and National Library Week were mentioned as being worthy of continuation.

Actions

Achievable, Near-term Actions
The following are suggested actions we can do within the next 12 months, along with the proposed LAUC-R group that can accomplish them.  Other LAUC-R groups or individuals are encouraged to help see these actions through, or to suggest other actions.

  • Plan an event to celebrate National Library Week and/or National Library Worker’s Day (LAUC-R Executive Board)
  • Host a film series for LAUC-R (or all library staff), possibly using films from the new Kanopy Streaming service (Programs and/or Diversity Committee)
  • Set up a regular brown-bag lunch session for librarians to share ideas and accomplishments (LAUC-R Chair)
  • Develop a system or program for librarians to share their professional development activities (Professional Development Committee)
  • Identify training opportunities such as webinars, workshops, and librarian-to-librarian learning and publicize/host them (Professional Development Committee, Mentoring Committee, all LAUC-R members)
  • Collaborate with the new Internal Events Committee to co-sponsor events such as the Edible Book Contest or a coffee/ice cream social (Programs Committee)
  • Collaborate with the new Professional Development Committee to create a staff recognition program (TBD, or by volunteer)
  • Sign up for the libchat@liblist.ucr.edu mailing list at http://liblist.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libchat (All LAUC-R members)
  • Regularly check the UC Learning Center, com, and UCR Extension Center for training and development opportunities (All LAUC-R Members)

Challenging, Ongoing Actions
These are broader goals that have less tangible solutions, or which require an ongoing and sustained effort.  Future conversations among the LAUC-R membership should help determine how we can realize these goals.

  • Build a culture of interaction between librarians and library administration
  • Develop our communication and listening skills
  • Utilize current technology and equipment request procedures to secure beneficial/new technology and furniture for your personal workspace
  • Develop a stress management program
  • Continue to assert LAUC/LAUC-R’s role as an advisory body to the university and library administration, and advocate for professional librarians

Appendix: Ideas Generated During Brainstorming

Active Brainstorming Group ideas

What we sometimes do/keep doing/do more:

  • Ability and technology to work from home or off-campus
  • Inter- and cross-campus connections to share expertise
  • New staff to add to our resources and expertise
  • Like that we have professional development funds: keep it and add more, check out comparative institutions’ funding, such as Cal Tech
  • Plants
  • Better library classrooms to teach in and use
  • Opportunity for staff to get together informally
  • More sign-ups to LibChat e-mail list
  • Working with students
  • Finish projects
  • Departmental togetherness and activities, such as lunch
  • Meaningful work
  • Meaningful rewards and recognition
  • Ability to test/experiment/prototype
  • Timely official communications
  • Library branded/promo items
  • Shorter meetings
  • Portable technology
  • Windows/sunlight
  • Flexible work schedules
  • Field trips
  • Shorter meetings
  • Start meetings on time
  • More access to technology that helps us
  • More maker activities in the library
  • Celebrate National Library Week
  • Celebrate Banned Books Week
  • Edible Book Contest

What we would like to have:

  • Good public transport to and from work
  • Professional development reporting to & from all
  • Sufficient employees to do the jobs
  • Electronic resource management system
  • Causes – projects/support for
  • Adopt campus groups/support (such as Guardian Scholars)
  • Use staff hours to volunteer for other library-related causes
  • Would like it is the library can pre-purchase conference registration, hotel/air instead of reimbursing
  • Staff/staff or peer recognition program (recognize staff while they are still here)
  • More chocolate, ice cream, coffee
  • Egg chairs for all
  • Better library classrooms to teach in/use
  • Divisional and departmental budgets for discretionary opportunities and initiatives
  • Staff areas equipped as well as public areas
  • Nap room, shower room
  • Free access to the SRC
  • Remodel Rivera staff room
  • Childcare
  • Film series with popcorn (get a popcorn machine?)
  • Plotter outside the staff room
  • Fun activities for students
  • Clean bathrooms
  • Coffee cart in the lobby
  • Walking meetings
  • Library café (with food)
  • Frosted glass windows
  • Reward system

What makes us happy:

  • Great colleagues
  • Environment of trust
  • Library Insider newsletter
  • Managers who have an open-door policy
  • Meaningful rewards and recognition
  • High standards
  • Culture of gratitude
  • Colleagues with ideas

Silent Brainstorming Group

Theme 1: Our colleagues

  • Having a national/international impact
  • Being a world-class librarian
  • Making a positive difference in student/faculty lives
  • Keep doing: hiring good people in the organization
  • Communicating with all staff at all levels of the organization
  • Administration and staff, librarians (not necessarily supervisors) should get to know each other better
  • High standards
  • Talented colleagues
  • Creative colleagues
  • Makes me happy: colleagues who contribute positively and do their jobs well
  • Seeing colleagues excel
  • Autonomy within the context of the job
  • Opportunities to interact with colleagues at other UCs and elsewhere

Theme 2: Respect and recognition

  • Team building opportunities
  • Respect for all ideas
  • Studies show people feel better at work when they have autonomy/control
  • Respect each other’s time (keep doing)
  • Respecting all co-workers
  • Encouragement to surface ideas for professional opportunities
  • Professional approach to service
  • Talk to others about their similar/different experiences
  • Creativity is encouraged and appreciated
  • Appreciation for contributions
  • Makes me happy: feeling valued by managers, colleagues, and patrons
  • Ability to experiment
  • Say Thank You
  • Across-the-board opportunities for serving
  • Treating one another professionally
  • Engaged, peaceful co-workers
  • Inclusivity
  • New staff
  • Cooperation among departments
  • Colleagues make me happy at work

Theme 3: Communication

  • Already doing: asking each other for advice/input
  • Occasional brown bags to discuss societal/cultural events
  • More and better communication
  • Doing clear communication about the future
  • Information-sharing and discussions of professional opportunities
  • Even more in-depth communication
  • Clear and fair communications about expectations
  • Workshop on open and fluid communication/conversation
  • Listen more; listen to one another
  • Having a clear idea of direction of the university/library

Theme 4: What makes us happy:

  • Experiment
  • Permission to strive for excellence
  • Freedom to think outside the box
  • Keep doing: positive changes and enhancements
  • Short-term cross training
  • Learning new things
  • Natural light
  • Other staff members
  • Ergonomic evaluations
  • Colored pens
  • Being surrounded by beauty (workspace and collections)
  • Safe work environment
  • Knowing I was in a unique position to help someone
  • Flexibility
  • Good ideas
  • Work-life balance
  • Flexible schedule
  • New initiatives and challenges
  • Getting to go outside sometimes
  • Bring your pet to work day
  • Producing finished end products that are tangible and usable
  • Coming up with new solutions
  • Coffee cart
  • Positive feedback from users, stakeholders, colleagues, and supervisors
  • When I feel like I have time to follow up/see a task through
  • Technology/new technology
  • New website

Theme 5: Professional development and opportunities

  • Professional opportunities
  • Understanding the big picture
  • Professional growth
  • All-staff meetings/town hall
  • Opportunities to enhance skills
  • Knowledge sharing
  • New technology
  • Learning opportunities
  • Conferences, workshops, programs
  • Diversity programs
  • Attending meetings in other departments
  • Getting to work on cutting-edge projects
  • Interesting speakers
  • International student exchange
  • Getting good critical feedback on performance
  • Opportunities for training
  • Personal growth
  • Educational and cultural opportunities
  • Training opportunities
  • Inclusion in professional activities
  • Stress management programs offered regularly
  • Programs on librarian research
  • Workshops to enhance skill sets
  • Being asked for my expert opinion, insight, or experience
  • Getting to take a break for fun and contemplation
  • Learning new content/information, getting to “go deep”
  • Advancement opportunities
  • Mentoring
  • Training on technical equipment and software

 E-mail Brainstorming Ideas

  • Humane and caring management
  • Would like to have: Goals and priorities of the UL and AULs
  • Makes me happy: receiving support and validation from colleagues
  • Re-instate LSA
  • Keep the Library Insider newsletter going
  • Reasonable, achievable expectations for advancement

Membership Meeting: Nov. 10, 2015

2:00‐3:15 pm
Location: Rivera 403

Members Present:  Carla Arbagey (Chair), Kat Koziar (Secretary), Melissa Cardenas‐Dow,
Christina Cicchetti, Ann Frenkel, JJ Jacobson, Angela Lee, Judy Lee,
Steven Mandeville-Gamble, Julie Mason, Eric Milenkiewicz, Tiffany Moxham,
Rhonda Neugebauer, David Rios, Patricia Smith‐Hunt, Michael Yonezawa,
Virginia Schilling (Guest).

Meeting called to order by Carla Arbagey at 2:05 p.m.
1. Approval of September 8, 2015 minutes
a. Minutes approved

2. Welcome to new librarians and librarian series attendees
a. Carla welcomed new librarians and those new to the series:
Jessica Geiser, JJ Jacobson, Burges Jules, Angela Lee, and Eric Milenkiewicz.
b. As a result of new librarians in LAUC‐R, we will have another delegate in LAUC.

3. Systemwide report
a. Carla Reporting.
i. Assembly is at UC Merced in late March; Dan Russell, who works at Google, is a possible
speaker for the Assembly.  Donald Barclay, who is on the Direction and Oversight
Committee (DOC), is another possible speaker.
ii. UCLAS 2.0 is still being worked on.  The SAGs have officially been dismissed; however,
any projects which were authorized through them and have not yet completed are still
ongoing.  New structure includes the Council of University Librarians (CoUL); DOC; and
Shared Content Leadership Group (SCLG).
iii. New library at UCSB opening soon (January 4, 2016)
iv. APM Taskforce 360‐4 recommendations sent to UCOP.  UCOP will respond & send out
new APM in winter for review.  “Research & Creative Activity” is included in APM language.
v. CDL Director search is still underway.
vi. Three new system‐wide LAUC committees are formed:  Archives, LAUC Journal, and
Web Content. (see https://lauc.ucop.edu/committees for all LAUC committees).
Clarification question was asked regarding the archives committee; the LAUC archives
are for systemwide materials (not local materials).  The physical archives are at UCB.
They use box.com for documents.  In the past, since several (depreciated) systems were
used to store electronic documents, some materials are hard to find.

4. Committee reports
a. Bylaws:  No Report; chair not present.
b. Personnel Committee:  No Report.
c. Professional Governance Committee: Michael Yonezawa reporting.  Completed first of two
charges; decided no guests on committee.
d. Programs Committee: Rhonda Neugebauer reporting.  Still in brainstorming stage.
e. Research & Professional Development Committee:
i. Julie Mason reporting.
1. Both represented and non‐represented librarians get $1,000 for professional development
this fiscal year.
2. Local research funds are available in the amount of $1,500 for represented, and $500
for unrepresented.  Proposals are due by the end of March.
3. The first meeting of the systemwide committee was 11/8.
4. The next call for Presentation Grants is 1/20/2016, with proposals due 2/17/2016.
Will be forwarded to systemwide 3/2/2016.  Applicant must be accepted for the presentation
before the deadline of the proposals.  Full details are on the website at
https://lauc.ucop.edu/committees/research‐and‐professional‐development‐committee
5. All forms are on the LAUC‐R website:  http://laucr.ucr.edu/funding/
ii. Steven Mandeville‐Gamble stated he and Lee Banda are looking into increasing
Professional Development base funding to $1,500/year.  Steve said he would like it at that level
annually.
f. Diversity Committee: Melissa Cardenas‐Dow reporting.  Still in the brainstorming stage.
Collaborating with the program committee.  The National Diversity in Libraries 2016 Conferenc
will be at UCLA; LAUC‐R should submit a proposal. Website at http://ndlc.info/
g. Mentoring Committee:  No Report; chair not present.

5. Senate Rep reports
a. Committee on Courses:  Tiffany Moxham reporting.
i. The system used for course approval (currently called CRAMS) is changing.  They are trying
to streamline and simplify the process.
ii. Regarding eCourses, Tiffany reported there was discussion and concern regarding online
proctoring and authentication of students.  The new eCourse requests will require a statement
of the system used to deliver the course.  Concern on the content of eCourses and creating
an effective online experience.  Proctoring adds an additional expense onto the student;
there is no online proctoring on campus.  Steve stated that might change in the long‐term,
that G73 was being looked at as a possible place, but they require dedicated workstations for
proctoring. An issue of UC systemwide eCourses is while UCR may deliver some of the courses,
we receive no funds or enrollment as a result.  Students in these systemwide eCourses
do not have a NetID and are not able to use our resources.  It was reported that
the Masters in Engineering program uses lecture capture for their courses.
b. Committee on Library and Scholarly Communication: No report.

6. Vote to Approve committees
a. Committees were approved.

7. Round‐Robin of all members present
a. Carla Arbagey: presented a poster at CLA on Reinventing the Library Newsletter
b. Ann Frenkel: awarded a publishing contract and is one of three (and primary English) editors
of an anthology of underground printing in Poland.
c. Melissa Cardenas‐Dow: is working on LA 500, which is part of a nationwide program.  Second
screening of the 1st  episode will be at Riverside Public Library.
d. Rhonda Neugebauer: working on open access implementation.
e. JJ Jacobson: ABC‐CLIO asked to write virtual worlds immersive narrative. Also, created a
facebook page for Eaton.
f. Eric Milenkiewicz: participated in National History Day Learning Lab
g. Julie Mason: working on makerboxes for Rivera and Orbach.  Working group meets on
“Maker Mondays,” in OSL 122, 10‐11:30am.
h. Judy Lee: Worked on community cultural family village festival.
i. Steven Mandeville‐Gamble:  Writing in book, Managing Change in 21 st Century Libraries, with
Rebecca Lubas.
j. Tiffany Moxham: outreach research project resulting in poster (STFM) and presentation (MLA)
k. Christina Cicchetti: K‐12 Inland Empire Librarian Roundtable, working with group to provide
info to help students be college ready.
l. Virginia Schilling:  created Pinterest for California Digital Newspaper Collection Project.
m. Patricia Smith‐Hunt: Working on smaller digitization projects, and gearing upto be a vendor
to work with outside organizations.  Also, CAPA‐L will have additional information upcoming.

8. As may arise
a. Steve reported that 32‐33 cluster hire job announcements went out.

Meeting adjourned 3:15 p.m.

Membership Meeting: Sep. 8, 2015

2:00‐3:30 pm
Location: Rivera 403

Members Present:  Carla Arbagey (Chair), Kat Koziar (Secretary), Diane Bisom, Marie Bronoel,
Chistina Cicchetti, Ann Frenkel, Denise Kane, Steven Mandeville-Gamble, Julie Mason,
Stephanie Milner, Tiffany Moxham, Rhonda Neugebauer, David Rios, Anthony Sanchez,
Alison Scott, Ying Shen, Patricia Smith‐Hunt, Michael Yonezawa

Meeting called to order by Rhonda Neugebauer at 2:02 p.m.
1. Gavel Exchange
a.  As outgoing chair, Rhonda Neugebauer expressed appreciation and thank yous
to all who helped her during the past year; recapped the year as one of advocacy and
engagement emphasizing achievements of increased voting within LAUC‐R,
change of designee in review process, initiation of tracking recruitments in personnel, and start of LAUC‐R archive (as an idea which will be implemented this year by her).
b.  Rhonda handed over LAUC‐R chair‐ship to Carla Arbagey by passing over the gavel.
c. Carla stated her platform for the year of “improving morale” and expressed desire to create a
space where all may share opinions, and ideas will be respected and listened to with an open
mind.

2. Announcements
a. David Rios shared his duties as Director of Special Research Projects which include working
with UL, AULS and staff as appropriate to conduct research.  Duties involve labor relation
support; assistance with campus cluster hires; liaison with Conacyt, Conaculta, UC‐Mexus to support UC‐Mexico Initiative; Inland Empire Memories project; HSI status; and, other duties as assigned.  His new office will be in Rivera 431.

3. Approval of June 9 minutes
a. June 9 minutes were approved.

4. Ongoing Business
a. APM 360‐4 Changes
i. Carla provided background on the APM changes and creation of APM taskforce.
Deadline for feedback for current proposed changes is today (9/8); however, deadline
might be extended.  Asked for any feedback from group.  Michael Yonezawa stated if
the level of feedback provided is essentially nitpicking the language, there probably
won’t be a consensus from a large group of people.
ii. Carla stated current proposed changes only impact non‐represented librarians. Tiffany
Moxham requested clarification regarding how many people this change impacts.  David
Rios responded five currently, but seven when the two reference manager positions are
filled.
b. Changes to The Call for librarian reviews
i. Carla stated nothing received yet.  Patricia Smith‐Hunt stated we should receive
something September 30. Steven Mandeville‐Gamble confirmed Patricia’s statement,
adding VPAP Office is still folding in recent changes; their original target date was
9/3/2015.

5. New Business
a. Committee Chairs and Charges
i. Carla: Good response rate of those interested in serving on committees; however, still
need Parliamentarians.  Committee members should check their email for this year’s
additional charges from the Chair.
ii. Action Item: Committee chairs to send membership list to Carla by next membership
meeting.

b. Senate Committee invited guests
i. Carla gave UL privilege to select the Senate Committee invited guests.

c. Meeting Schedule for the Year
i. Bimonthly with Discussions/Theme Meetings
1. Carla suggested bimonthly meeting where during the off‐month we can have
brown‐bag discussions.  Rhonda stated regret at not having many discussions.
Kat Koziar stated she liked the idea, that it will provide set time which we
already set aside where we can have librarian discussions or specific workshops.
There was general consensus for this idea by nodding of heads which was
confirmed verbally by the Chair.
ii. Date/time
1. General consensus on keeping the same day/time.  Ann Frenkel pointed out that
the time would make it more of a snack‐bag than a brown bag during the off‐
month discussions.
2. Meetings will be bimonthly, on the second Tuesday of the month from 2:00‐
3:30p.m. with discussions during the off‐month.

6. Report from LAUC Transition Meeting
a. Carla Reported:
i. The new President of LAUC, Diane Mizrachi (UCLA), stated her platform is to “Celebrate
LAUC member scholarship & achievement.”
ii. New LAUC website lauc.ucop.edu.  Check it out.  Website cost $40k to develop, using
discretionary funds from more than one campus.
1. To support the new website, Web Content Group is being formed focusing on
two areas: 1)  provide news from campuses to lauc.ucop.edu; 2) Social Media
iii. Suggestion to create a LAUC Journal on eScholarship to increase visibility of
librarianship.  Steve stated Diane Mizrachi presented the idea to Council of University
Librarians (CoUL) who expressed strong support and explored different options for
implementation and how to remove barriers such as a journal cannot be formed on
eScholarship, but must be an outside independent entity.
iv. They are looking into creating an Archivist for LAUC.

7. As may arise
a. UC Libraries Advisory Structure (UCLAS) 2.0
i. New structure is still being revised; there are ongoing discussions between CoUL and the
Directional Oversight Committee (DOC).  Ann stated she is on the DOC group; there is
nothing new to announce, but when the announcement is made she is willing to walk us
through the new structure.

b. CACLS Name Change.
i. Patricia requested clarification of the Chancellor’s Advisory Committee on the Librarian
Series (CACLS) name change.
1. Steve stated all other UC campuses use CAP or CAPA, and that the name CACLS
is misleading, since the group advises the UL and not the Chancellor.  The name change
from CACLS to CAP or CAPA is recommended to bring the name in alignment with other UC
campuses.  Since the faculty use the term CAP (Committee on Academic Personnel), we’ve been asked to append an L at the end of our name: Committee on Appointment, Promotion and Advancement‐Librarians (CAPA‐L).

c. Review, Promotion and Advancement Process.
i. Steve asked if it is helpful during the review process to allow managers/admins to have
input at the beginning so candidates may understand what managers are looking for.  He
shared that the majority of push‐back he received from VPAP office during the process has
been regarding profiles which the VPAP didn’t think deserved merit increase; that 11% of laddering faculty get no merit during their process, and the VPAP thinks librarians would be similarly 11%.  The resulting statement from Steve was that some profiles didn’t contain enough evidence supporting merit to convince the VPAP.
ii. Patricia stated it is helpful to get other/extra input at the beginning of the process.
iii. Steve suggested creating sample profiles:  what does merit work look like at the other UCs
at the three different levels?  The expectation is there is an increasingly sophisticated level of
performance as librarians increase in levels and career.  UCLA bases merit not on the amount
of work, but the caliber of work.  Suggests having a conversation of what merit‐worthy work
looks like.
iv. Carla stated it is a good idea as long as the conversation is open and transparent.
v. Patricia asked what others think of including the manager/admin piece.
vi. Rhonda stated that for years people complained about not having an admin session.
vii. Diane stated her past experience from other campuses supports having the
manager/admin input; that having input from managers at the beginning is helpful.
viii. Alison stated there seems to be three perspectives for workshops 1) those going under
review, 2) the review initiators 3) for both 1 & 2 so they understand the process.
ix. Michael stated his experience from serving in the peer‐review process on other campuses
is every campus is different.  They each have different processes and levels of expectations.
Discussing what quality work looks like is important, as well as providing examples which are
diverse and open to encompass all varieties of librarianship here.
x. Alison emphasized the importance in learning how to construct a persuasive file as seen
by non‐librarian academics/administrators.
xi. Diane included we need to understand what is impactful in what we do.
xii. Steve suggested we don’t ask the question “Why” often enough.  Why are we doing what we
are doing?  We get caught up in the what and the how, and forget the why.  Why explains what and how.
xiii. Alison suggested if you don’t have a “so what” answer embedded in your argument, your
answer won’t be as persuasive.
xiv. Carla emphasized workshops are needed for all three levels, and would be helpful for the
process.
xv. Marie stated if perception is key, then we need to know the weight of different areas if
the perception by the reviewers is one is more important than the other (e.g. publishing is more important than committee work).
xvi. Diane stated that all areas are equally important with the exception of area 1, in which
librarians should be excellent.  And the goal is to build a well‐rounded career which  touches
an all areas.
xvii. Tiffany stated that other institutions/organizations have very well defined merit processes;
however, we don’t.  So, we need to learn how to write our statements effectively by including
the impact our work has.
xviii. Carla asked who would lead these workshops and improvement of the process.
xix. Steve stated the new Director of Personnel and Human Resources (DPHR) would lead,
and that he is deeply involved with implementing the process correctly.
xx. Michael voiced a concern that a non-librarian may see things as black and white, and not
understand the nuances and variability of librarianship.
xxi. Carla questioned if the new DPHR would be here in time.
xxii. Steve stated he was making an offer tomorrow.  That training the review initiator is the
role of Senior Leadership in the library as per the contract/APM/MOU.
xxiii. Christina stated a need for reviews to be written consistently.
xxiv. Steve stated they are working on figuring out how the review files can be written better
and convincingly.  In the past, a lot of additional work was put into making review files stronger cases, and that AULs worked to strengthen the candidate up for review.  The bar is being raised across the whole campus for all candidates; the whole organization is going through hard
leadership.  The library senior leadership is trying to create the ability for success in a rapidly
changing environment.  Hard questions and conversations are ahead to rethink what the bar
looks like.
xxv. Carla reinforced we need to know what success looks like.
xxvi. Patricia thanked Steve for his willingness to work with the librarians through this.

Meeting adjourned 3:09 p.m.
Minutes Approved November 9, 2015 LAUC‐R Member Meeting.