Library Design for the 21st Century: Collaborative Strategies to Ensure Success 9783110617535, 9783110614657

Citation preview

IFLA Publications

Edited by Janine Schmidt International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions Fédération Internationale des Associations de Bibliothécaires et des Bibliothèques Internationaler Verband der bibliothekarischen Vereine und Institutionen Международная Федерация Библиотечных Ассоциаций и Учреждений Federación Internacional de Asociaciones de Bibliotecarios y Bibliotecas

Volume 179

Library Design for the 21st Century

Collaborative Strategies to Ensure Success Edited on behalf of IFLA by Diane Koen and Traci Engel Lesneski

DE GRUYTER SAUR

ISBN 978-3-11-061465-7 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-061753-5 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-061482-4 ISSN 0344-6891 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018961665 Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available on the internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Cover Image: Madison Public Library­– Central Library; Architect & Interior Designer: MSR Design, Minneapolis; Photography by Lara Swimmer Typesetting: Dr Rainer Ostermann, München Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com

Contents About IFLA

Contents

IX

Diane Koen and Traci Engel Lesneski Introduction 1

Part 1: Collaborating with Stakeholders

Many different constituent groups, including users, staff, the community, faculty, politicians and funding agencies, are involved in the planning and design of library buildings. This section describes effective means of engaging with, and leveraging ideas from, all stakeholders involved. 1

Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?

Elif Tinaztepe and Marie Østergård 2 Collaborative Design: A Persona Exercise Approach

7

25

3

Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches 35

4

John Souleles and Carol Shepstone Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function

48

Part 2: Collaborating for Cultural Change

Exemplar libraries find ways to connect with their entire communities and provide places that strengthen social bonds. This section shares ways the library building, and the design process itself, can be catalysts for cultural change. Traci Engel Lesneski 5 Madison Central Library: The Art-Infused Library

79

Marie Østergård 6 Dokk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis: a Mash-up Library, a Democratic Space, a City Lounge or a Space for Diversity? 91

VI  7

 Contents

Vicki McDonald Building Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track 104

Santi Romero and Imma Sabater 8 Cooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab: Collaborative Strategies in the Province of Barcelona Municipal Library Network

Part 3: Cooperative Collections

117

Despite the dramatic growth of e-resources, the need for innovative, accessible storage solutions continues to be a vitally important issue, particularly in research intensive academic and national libraries. This section shares innovative solutions to the tug-of-war between space for people and space for collections. Charles G. Forrest 9 The Library Service Centre: A Collaborative Partnership for Legacy Collections and Programme Innovation 133 Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer 10 The Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland: A Successful Multi-Cantonal Cooperation 143 Dorothea Sommer 11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 155

Part 4: Crafting the Project Story

No building project can succeed without a story that resonates with its community members, funding agencies, governing authorities, and staff. This section offers methods to define a unified vision and communicate the project story effectively. Jeffrey M. Hoover 12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories

173

Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith 13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies Contents

187



Contents 

Tuula Haavisto 14 A Dream Come True of Citizens – the New Helsinki Central Library Vivian Lewis 15 New Models for Library Advancement

231

203

214

Gobnait O’Riordan 16 Re-imagining the University Library – a Transformative Opportunity Contributors

 VII

221

About IFLA www.ifla.org IFLA (The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) is the leading international body representing the interests of library and information services and their users. It is the global voice of the library and information profession. IFLA provides information specialists throughout the world with a forum for exchanging ideas and promoting international cooperation, research, and development in all fields of library activity and information service. IFLA is one of the means through which libraries, information centres, and information professionals worldwide can formulate their goals, exert their influence as a group, protect their interests, and find solutions to global problems. IFLA’s aims, objectives, and professional programme can only be fulfilled with the co-operation and active involvement of its members and affiliates. Currently, approximately 1400 associations, institutions and individuals, from widely divergent cultural backgrounds are working together to further the goals of the Federation and to promote librarianship on a global level. Through its formal membership, IFLA directly or indirectly represents some 500,000 library and information professionals worldwide. IFLA pursues its aims through a variety of channels, including the publication of a major journal, as well as guidelines, reports and monographs on a wide range of topics. IFLA organises workshops and seminars around the world to enhance professional practice and increase awareness of the growing importance of libraries supporting their communities and society in the digital age. All this is done in collaboration with a number of other non-governmental organisations, funding bodies and international agencies such as UNESCO and WIPO. The Federation’s website is a prime source of information about IFLA, its policies and activities: www.ifla.org Library and information professionals gather annually at the IFLA World Library and Information Congress, held in August each year in cities around the world. IFLA was founded in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1927 at an international conference of national library directors. IFLA was registered in the Netherlands in 1971. The Koninklijke Bibliotheek (Royal Library), the national library of the Netherlands, in The Hague, generously hosts IFLA’s headquarters. Regional offices are located in Buenos Aires, Argentina; Pretoria, South Africa; and Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-202

Diane Koen and Traci Engel Lesneski

Introduction

While type of library, scale of project and available budget may vary, library design in the twenty-first century has one common theme: collaboration is at the heart of innovation. In a time when the word, ‘collaboration’ is so overused as to be at risk of becoming meaningless, the stories by the library and design professionals within this publication illustrate the power of the role partnerships, outreach and cooperation play in a library project’s success. From design concept to operations, successful collaboration is key. Incorporating diverse perspectives while shaping a project can fuel project support; illuminate key opportunities that may have otherwise been missed; forge partnerships that allow expansion of offerings; and elucidate methods to improve the user experience. The goal of this book is to provide fresh insight into how working cooperatively can positively shape a library building or renovation project. Selected papers from five programmes organised by the IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment Section (LBES) Standing Committee in 2016 and 2017 form the foundation of this book. A two-day pre-conference entitled “Collaborative Strategies for Successful Library Design and Innovative Use”, hosted by the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, Illinois, was held prior to the 82nd IFLA World Library and Information Congress (WLIC) in Columbus, Ohio. Twenty-seven speakers from eight countries shared insights and tips for leveraging the almost limitless range of constituent groups involved in the planning and design of a library building project. Speakers addressed such topics as collaborating for cultural change (Lesneski, McDonald and Romero/Sabater); the potential challenges and opportunities of collaboration; and tools that assist collaboration, such as a carefully considered Master Plan (Blackburn/Brubaker). Also addressed were innovative strategies involving library users (Hanken/Cribb, McKenna/ Plosz/Jenkins) and tools such as “persona journeys” (Tinaztepe/Østergård). The Library Buildings and Equipment Section Open Session at the 82nd WLIC in Columbus, Ohio asked the question “What comes after the “Third Place? Visionary libraries – spaces and users”. Libraries today are inspiring learning venues for students, collaboration incubators, meeting places in communities and social spaces for cities. The major trends in designing and building libraries during the last decade can be succinctly described using Andrew McDonald’s Top Ten Qualities for Good Library Space (McDonald 2007). But what features defining a highly functional, awe-inspiring and vibrant library will figure prominently in the future? The chapter by Marie Østergård on Dokk1, the award winning Danish library, provides insight into approaching this challenging question. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-001

2 

 Diane Koen and Traci Engel Lesneski

In the spring of 2017, a regional seminar was held in the inspiring State Library of Bavaria in Munich, Germany to address the ongoing challenge of collection management and the changing storage landscape. Despite the dramatic growth of e-resources, the need for innovative, accessible storage solutions continues to be a vitally important issue, particularly in research intensive academic and national libraries. The seminar “Storage! The final frontier” addressed the collaboration challenges and solutions available. Three approaches outlined by Forrest (USA), Sommer (Germany) and Tschirren/Niedlander (Switzerland) delve into this important area of librarianship and design. A joint open session hosted by the IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment and the Management and Marketing Sections at the 82nd WLIC in Wroclaw, Poland, “Branding | Bridging | Building: Telling and Selling the Space Story,” sought to investigate how a library project is marketed to build buy-in from a range of actors: community members, faculty, funding agencies, donors, governing authorities, librarians, architects, interior designers and planners. A new story must be told and getting to the end game demands carefully-crafted approaches and wide-ranging skills. Telling the right story involves getting all participants together, defining a unified vision, communicating effectively and managing processes successfully. Chapters contributed by librarians and design professionals from Canada (Lewis), Finland (Haavisto), and the USA (Hoover) address storytelling in depth. A further chapter (O’Riordan) emerged from the highly successful IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment Section mid-term meeting and seminar, “Key issues for Library Space: International Perspectives”, hosted by Cathal McCauley, University Librarian, at Maynooth University, Ireland in 2016. The IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment Section developed the programmes for its mid-term and satellite meetings, regional conferences and Open Sessions to discuss library building planning and design through multiple lenses, ranging from best practices in collaboration to marketing a project. While collaboration was clearly at the heart of the 2016 satellite in Columbus, the LBES Standing Committee members did not consciously set out to investigate the role of collaboration in its sessions. And yet, collaboration was the thread that wove its way through every paper, prompting the editors of this book to gather together the best insights from the various sessions. This book covers many of the world’s well-known success stories in current library design through the lens of collaboration and is divided into four sections aligned with the various aspects of a building project: engaging stakeholders, creating change, addressing the changing needs of the twenty-first century library, and gaining support for a project. We hope that you find for your own building projects ideas and solutions that spur innovation and lead to success through effective collaborative strategies.



Introduction 

 3

References McDonald, Andrew. 2007. “The top ten qualities of good library space.” IFLA Library Building Guidelines: Developments and Reflections, edited by Karen Latimer, Hellen Niegaard, 13–29. Munchen: K.G. Saur.

Acknowledgement A very special thanks to Joseph Hafner, Associate Dean, Collection Services at McGill University Library and John Blair, Marketing Graphics Coordinator at MSR Design for their wonderful support with advanced citation and photograph management. Their contributions have greatly enhanced this publication.

Part 1: Collaborating with Stakeholders Many different constituent groups, including users, staff, the community, faculty, politicians and funding agencies, are involved in the planning and design of library buildings. This section describes effective means of engaging with, and leveraging ideas from, all stakeholders involved.

Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

1 C  ollaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science? Abstract: As libraries continue to evolve, there is the opportunity to reimagine these places to meet the needs of contemporary and potential users. The library master plan provides a road map to answer the question: what is the library of the future? Through an integrated process that combines art (quantitative evidence) and science (qualitative aspects), architects and designers can work with library communities to re-envision spaces and programmes based on progressive pedagogy and opportunities for new interactions. Keywords: Library planning; Master planning; Change management; Budgeting; Library management; Strategic planning

Introduction What is the library of the future? What does it look and feel like? How does it interact with its surroundings and users? Where do these conversations happen and who are the decision makers? As leaders in library design, we help clients approach and answer these questions every day, reinventing libraries for contemporary use. The most creative solutions are born from conditions that challenge designers to think outside the box and problem solve collaboratively with institutional partners and the communities that support them. One of the best opportunities for creative thinking is the chance to reimagine a library through the creation of a master plan. A library master plan provides a road map that guides an institution from where it is to its dream destination. It includes mile markers, pit stops and even detours. Not only is the master plan an opportunity to re-envision library places and programmes, but it can also act as a catalyst for change in how a community learns and interacts. As library communities engage in dialogue about where they are and want to go, the solutions are frequently larger than simply space, touching on operations, organisational structure and cultural shifts.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-002

8 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

The Art and Science of a Library Master Plan In any library master plan, one of the most sizable pieces to understand is the importance of including both breadth and depth in the planning process. The final destination is not arrived at through a single lens of cost analysis, usage data, experiential goals or advancements in technology. Rather, the possibilities of tomorrow’s libraries are progressed by engaging stakeholders in both science (quantitative evidence) and art (qualitative aspects) to make a successful plan that is: –– Visionary, heartfelt and delightful, –– Justified with supporting data, and –– Ultimately, implementable in terms of operations and funding. It is equally important to note that the process is not linear, with first science and then art to follow. Rather, for a successful master plan, science and art work in tandem, playing off one another with each holding the other accountable.

Science: Listen to the Data Libraries are complex organisms that must meet exacting and complex functional requirements for organisation of space components, accommodating flows of people and materials, security controls, lighting, acoustical and technology performance as well as environmental conditions. A careful framework for these performance requirements must be included in the master plan, as sound understanding of space requirements based on empirical data and tested solutions will result in a well-planned library with adequate space for all activities. Strategic decisions informed by usage statistics and comparative data are important to gain support and approvals from funding sources and administrative leadership. Institutions will often have space standards that the library is required to honour. However, through review of comparative data and analysis of the needs of a specific library’s constituents, an understanding of if or why the library might need to deviate from such standards can be gained. For instance, do all staff members operate and perform similar functions and require the same square footage? Are there unique patron patterns of use that will affect seating metrics? As part of the evaluation of science, it is important to identify shared goals and priorities for the project. Rules of thumb to guide scientific analysis include: –– Identifying what brings the most value to an individual institution –– Including existing and aspirational peers to reach beyond the everyday and explore new possibilities



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 9

–– Articulating challenges and opportunities specific to one’s library and community

Shifting Metrics Benchmarking has been an integral piece of master planning for decades. However, it is important to note the actual quantitative information collected and used to inform the science of today’s successful library master plan is vastly different from that of even 10 years ago, and will be unique to individual libraries. Historically, libraries were measured by volumes per student or staff per square foot. However, as libraries have evolved, more and more institutions are benchmarking patron spaces. What will create the right experience for library users? There are three universally relevant metrics that libraries of the future typically look at: collection shifts, usage shifts and space allocation shifts. When benchmarking institutional peers, it is important to recognise that they, too, may be engaged in a process of reinvention. Their current built environment may not match their aspirations. It can be difficult to compare apples to apples, as other libraries may quantify space differently or could be starting from a completely different place, with entirely distinctive goals and values. Comparative analysis is most effective when it begins with a clear definition of desired information and parameters to be considered during data collection and evaluation. It is important to continue identifying how an institution excels beyond today’s norms, as well as the key themes where clients need data to move their libraries beyond their current state.

Collection Shifts While print collections are not going away, they are being shifted to other locations either off-site or stored more efficiently to make way for people, growing user populations, new types of learning, community and cultural spaces, as well as new programmes and services. So how do libraries use metrics to uncover new possibilities for physical collections and determine what works best for that institution? Being more objective about what libraries keep on open shelving by tracking circulation, for instance, will inform decision makers with hard and fast numbers. However, depending on the library’s mission, circulation rates may tell only part of the story. A range of filters should be considered in collections tracking, including:

10 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

–– –– –– –– ––

Intensity of use via circulation data New forms of both physical and virtual browsability Searchability Conservation requirements Staff resources and capabilities around material retrieval, cataloguing or digitisation –– Institutional culture and priorities regarding access to historical materials or artefacts Many central public libraries and their branches have instituted collection evaluation systems and a rotating collection model, in which collections are shifted from library to library, based on requests from the community. This systematic evaluation of collection use allows libraries to analyse how much space and flexibility they need for physical collections in each branch location. On the other hand, academic library facilities that dedicated more than 50% of a library’s space to physical collections in the mid-twentieth century are now planning for dramatic reductions in the amount of central library space used for book stacks. Often collection storage occupies 25% or less of the total building footprint (Figure 1.1).

Figure 1.1: Twenty-first century academic library space allocation (graphic by Shepley Bulfinch).



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 11

Usage Shifts As libraries become increasingly user focused, benchmarking library seating as a percentage of patron population has emerged as an assessment of space needs rather than metrics tied to collections or staff. Standards documents and guidelines vary considerably (IS0 2012; Latimer and Niergaard 2008; Poll and Boerkhorst 2007), with figures ranging from 8–25% depending on the type of library, with a focus on 15–20% as an average for academic libraries. This is a stretch goal for many institutions and a variety of factors will influence the actual target. For example, at large public universities, the percentage of students seated in the library is likely to be lower than for smaller schools. Beyond size, other considerations include provisions for other study spaces on campus along with the needs of residential versus commuter communities as well as institution type and location. Both public and academic libraries are turning their focus to providing a variety of seating types for their patrons and understanding what good quality study environments entail. Master planning metrics can provide an accurate measure of seat counts, as well as targets for total space allocated for seating.

Space Allocation Shifts Programme distribution comparisons do not tell the whole story, but can be useful benchmarks. Libraries are shifting priorities, focusing more on the user experience. This is reflected in the proportion of space allocated to various uses. Forty years ago, a typical academic library would have allocated 50% of space to collections, 25% of space to staff and 25% of space to patron services. Today, library space use is better characterised as a rich mosaic of different but complementary space types and services. As academic campuses plan for the future of their libraries, 50–75% or more of available space will be allocated to patron use. Often less than 25% will be allocated to collections, while 25% or less will accommodate library staff, along with staff for a range of partnerships that expand services offered to patrons such as career centres, innovation hubs, technology and academic support programmes (Figure 1.2).

12 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

Figure 1.2: 50% of available space is allocated to patrons (graphic by Shepley Bulfinch).

In public libraries, the distribution of spaces and functions is often identified as collection/seating, public/social and staff/services. Combining collections and seating allows for the distribution of spaces to change within the footprint allocated to that function. As collections relocate to other libraries, or as the physical collection reduces in footprint, the seating can expand. Libraries can plan for this shift by providing flexible spaces that have the correct lighting and infrastructure in place to accommodate seating areas of stacks equally well. In addition to shifts in the mix of spaces and how space is allocated, the amount of space needed for each patron is increasing to accommodate technology, working with multiple formats and the needs of diverse user groups. Overall building efficiency has decreased. Historically, the assignable area of a collection-focused library would be 70–75 % of the total area; in today’s more patron-focused libraries, the assignable area is typically 62–65% of the total. This shift reflects current building and accessibility regulations, as well as increases in user-centric spaces and decreases in densely packed collection storage areas. The results of these new metrics have been vibrant and versatile contemporary libraries, in which the interconnecting spaces between dedicated functions are vital contributors to the building’s rich palette of activities and experiences.



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 13

Art: Consider the Intangible While most facility teams are familiar with the components, collections, seating and staff areas that have long been library mainstays, it is important to expand institutional understanding and ambition around other factors impacting the purpose and role of tomorrow’s library. So many components make up twenty-first century libraries that designers and stakeholder partners must think differently about the physical place, the activities it must provide and how it is inhabited by its users. Master planning needs to go beyond the library of 40 years ago to look at all influences on today’s library as a living, built environment, the art of the master plan. Reaching past the recorded and reported science of libraries, there is an ambitious balance in the impact spaces can have on institutions, users and communities at large. Each establishment sets its own priorities with regard to art, interaction with the landscape and access to nature, types of learning and more. It is through the goals that individual institutional values are identified. There is an art to planning user experiences and recognising the activity as an important component of a collaboratively created master plan. Art includes qualitative pieces, feelings, aesthetics and the interaction and stories one can craft to help people envision the experience. Through art, excitement is built around process and potential, allowing stakeholders to engage, inspire and make real libraries of the future from master plan to built environment.

Engage Engaging the community is a key part of successful master planning, with providing as much face-to-face interaction as possible throughout the process producing the best outcomes. An involved team provides opportunities for input and idea building, where often what is not said is just as revealing as what is. Involving users, potential donors, the design team and other central stakeholders in exercises such as interactive modelling, Image Olympics and storyboarding not only promotes dialogue but also uncovers potentially unforeseen challenges (Figure 1.3). Interactive events fully engage participants and provide meaningful feedback. Effective icebreakers often generate more honest input than an around-thetable discussion by sidestepping groupthink, shyness and peer pressure.

14 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

Figure 1.3: Image Olympics stakeholder engagement exercise (photo by Shepley Bulfinch).

Image Olympics, for instance, is an interactive exercise designed to help stakeholders articulate their preferences for the look, feel and experience of reimagined library spaces. Participants are invited to rank anonymously images and post comments, followed by group dialogue about the results. Storyboarding  combines visualisation and narrative to develop facility use scenarios from the perspectives of different stakeholders. Through describing a “day in the life of,” stakeholders are freed from imagining specific physical places. “How big, how many, and what kind?” are replaced with “Why am I there, what do I want to do, and how do I want to feel?” Rewinding the dialogue to these essential questions can unlock new ideas and hone understanding of different stakeholder communities’ goals and priorities (Figure 1.4). Interactive gaming and prototyping also help stakeholders test ideas through manipulation of  a physical model or full-size prototypes. This allows users to experience how they will interact in their proposed space. For example, simple mock-ups, such as to-scale models constructed of Lego blocks, can be modified on the spot by users as they explore spatial ideas.



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 15

Figure 1.4: Hands-on activities can push ideas further (graphic by Shepley Bulfinch).

Inspire Tools that help team members visualise a space and experience can inspire stakeholders to push ideas further. Sharing images, animations, events and prototypes gets communities excited about the potential of a project without specificity that may cause consternation about unresolved issues. For instance, before-photos

16 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

and after-visualisations provide compelling imagery of what the future can be. Softer, more impressionistic images that define experience, rather than details of space, invite people to tell their own stories, imagining what the future could be and testing scenarios to make sure the library will be versatile enough to adapt and remain relevant for many years.

Build Support and Make it Real It can be a long road to the start of construction. Continued engagement to socialise the plan with stakeholders throughout the master planning process keeps them inspired and involved as the plan comes to fruition. Launch of a master plan and development of funding strategies should start around the same time and run in parallel, with both processes probing questions such as “Who are potential supporters and what will excite them?” It is important to have project champions that can build support: cultural, organisational and monetary. The plan should present a loose fit to the big ideas to ensure it remains relevant, even as details need to evolve. Think of this as a mitten, not a glove.

Project Studies To further illustrate the balance of art and science, let us look at case studies for a series of library master plans. While each has distinctive outcomes, the planning processes share many commonalities. Each plan embraces art and science in proportions appropriate to its respective communities and project goals: –– McGill University Library and Archives Master Plan includes the art of extensive community engagement and science of extensive metric and demographic analysis. –– The focus of University of Notre Dame’s Hesburgh Library Master Plan is space transformation, through the art of reimagining tired space to create new inspiration and through the science of planning technically complex operational and implementation strategies. –– The Austin Central Library balances the creation of a vision that captures what is unique about its community’s culture and place, within the framework of public process and funding.



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 17

An Urban Gateway: McGill University Library and Archives Master Plan The Library and Archives Master Plan for McGill University addresses the evolving needs of the twenty-first century student and researcher through a comprehensive plan for library renovations and new construction (Figures 1.5 and 1.6).

Opportunity The system-wide master plan looks at all libraries on McGill’s campus to understand current use to determine how to strategically reimagine each built environment’s position for future evolution and innovation. The ability to efficiently accommodate print collections without monopolising valuable campus space, as well as meet the demands of contemporary scholarship, are important aspects of this project.

Figure 1.5: McGill University Library and Archives Master Plan (graphic by Shepley Bulfinch and EKM Architects).

18 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

Figure 1.6: Budget and timing inform phasing (graphic by Shepley Bulfinch).

Strategy Rich stakeholder engagement is integral to the McGill University Library and Archives Master Plan, embracing McGill’s community-centred culture and presenting the project’s vision for public comment. The project connects art and science by facilitating a robust stakeholder engagement process and in-depth



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 19

benchmarking that utilises regional and international peer data points as well as extensive analysis of usage patterns within the McGill libraries. Similarly, discussions about practical, real-world implications, such as zoning due to the campus’ urban location, as well as inspirational sessions to help users envision what the library could look like as a connecting portal to the city and showcase for McGill’s unique and rare special collections, drives master planning goals through institutional values. Lastly, the need to keep libraries operational throughout building and construction drives implementation approach and strategy.

Result The master plan provides McGill Library and Archives with a strategy for transforming its facilities to meet the evolving needs of twenty-first century users, while connecting the campus and its surrounding community. As the project awaits funding, there remains an active and ongoing dialogue about the most effective strategy for storing low-use collections, either to invest heavily in first capital costs for a robotic retrieval system versus lower initial cost through construction of a more staff intensive high bay collection storage facility.

A Haven for the Digital Age: Hesburgh Libraries Master Plan and Renovation, University of Notre Dame The Hesburgh Libraries Master Plan and Renovation challenged the design team to fulfil Notre Dame’s vision of designing a forward-thinking academic research library from existing floor plates and a distinctive visual legacy across campus.

Opportunity The master plan identifies opportunities to elevate aesthetics and impart change in use and function of the library space and beyond by creating a variety of different seating and service neighbourhoods from two large floor plates and a tower (Figure 1.7). New destinations, such as technology row, the collaboration hub, the research commons and a grand reading room reimagine how a large, anonymous

20 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

Figure 1.7: University of Notre Dame’s Hesburgh Library Master Plan creates neighbourhoods to impact change (graphic by Shepley Bulfinch).



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 21

footprint can be enlivened to become a campus focal point. By addressing the library’s relationship with its surroundings, the master plan makes the space and its activities more visible, extending its influence and connection to surrounding areas of campus.

Strategy This project consists of a multi-phased approach to keep the library operational and active throughout the process and allow work to be completed as funding sources are identified. While the phasing timeline is dependent on donors, it aligned with the overarching concept of showcasing the library as a high-impact space on campus and highlighting future aspirations. The science to Hesburgh Library is more about the physical building’s potential, moving from a place few were using to one of the most connected spaces on campus. The design team worked with the University to coordinate campus workspace standards with library staff space planning norms and introduced a range of collaboration and processing spaces to supplement allowances for individual staff workstations and offices. Relocating collections off-site and redistributing collections in the upper tower floors, to create themed collection areas paired with quiet individual study spaces, provides the opportunity for the first two floor levels of the library to be predominantly patron-focused and provide new active and collaborative environments. From an art perspective, the library’s distinctive international style legacy is used as a starting point, creating new environments that enhance the building’s mid-century modern aesthetics. From there, focus on connections, from interior to exterior space, influences the relocation of staff offices from the building’s perimeter to internal offices with glass fronts for borrowed light. External-facing patron space invites increased activity and interaction from other parts of campus without exterior changes. Within interior spaces, new openings between floors with connecting stairs create smaller scale neighbourhoods of patron services and study environments. These new openings bring daylight to the interior through new skylights. Further scenario planning with a diverse steering committee breaks down the library’s large footprint into scalable spaces conducive to visitors via experience mapping.

22 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

Result Hesburgh Libraries Master Plan and Renovation transform a mid-twentieth century library building. Providing a more permeable first floor with a new north entrance connects the space to how the campus has expanded. It repurposes a massive, once severely underutilised, building into obvious, purposeful connection spaces for flexible learning, highlighting new technologies, creating academic social gathering space for students and faculty as well as adding permeability and context to its surrounding landscape. The project is currently in Phase Four, with two additional phases to follow.

Austin’s Living Room: Austin Central Library, Austin, Texas Located on the western edge of Austin, the New Central Library reflects the eclecticism, authenticity and diversity of Austinites and their way of life.

Opportunity The new library serves as a resource for the Austin community, making it a destination at the heart of Austin. The space encourages discovery through art, technology and the display of themed collections that provides flexible and adaptable spaces to allow for transformation over time. To create a city landmark, a beacon, as well as an extension of the city, a library entrance adjacent to the Shoal Creek Hike and Bike Trail speaks to the city’s outdoor culture. Views from all levels, either across Lady Bird Lake, Shoal Creek or back to the city, showcase a thoughtfulness to the diversity of the locale and its library patrons.

Strategy The continuously flexible planning and design process throughout the 10-year project has allowed for seamless shifts and transitions in approach as technological, cultural and environmental innovations evolves (Figure 1.8). Building flexibility into the programme reiterates a focus on sustainability in the form of making sure the library is environmentally friendly, conserves and creates energy, highlights daylighting strategies, is socially welcoming to all members of the community and fiscally responsible.



1 Collaborating for a Successful Master Plan – Art or Science?  

 23

For Austin Central Library, the programming and planning process blurs science and art through evaluation of existing library facilities within the system, observation and mapping of community spaces as well as highly inclusive public meetings and interactions. Community wants and needs drive the formulation of ideas into quantitative space allocation, while the new-build project status allows for more abstract site adjacencies to address programming and planning priorities within the framework of the project’s initial goals.

Figure 1.8: Planning focused on providing a mix of space types (graphic by Shepley Bulfinch).

Result Relative to its former facility, the new Austin Central Library increases public space by 85%, with tripled square footage for youth services, so as to meet an extraordinary number of unique programme needs to fulfil its role as a community living room (Figure 1.9). These include outdoor porches and gardens, a bike corral, a demonstration kitchen that highlights regional cuisine, obvious influences of local music and art and shared learning rooms. This makes for a truly diverse environment representative of the library’s distinctive locale and stakeholders that will remain relevant and flexible for future generations and new users.

24 

 Janette Blackburn and Kelly Brubaker

Figure 1.9: Austin Central Library reading porch (photo by Nic Lehoux).

References Ékm Architecture and Shepley Bulfinch. 2015. McGill Library & Archives Master Plan. Montreal: Ékm Architecture and Shepley Bulfinch. https://www.mcgill.ca/library/files/library/ mcgill_library_master_plan-english.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. International Organization for Standardization. 2012. ISO 11219. Information and Documentation: Qualitative Conditions and Basic Statistics for Library Buildings: Space, Function and Design. Geneva: ISO. Latimer, K., and H. Niergard. 2007. IFLA Library Building Guidelines: Developments and Reflections. München: K.G. Saur. Poll, R., and P. Boekhoerst. 2007. Measuring Quality: Performance Measurement in Libraries. 2nd revised edition. München: K.G. Saur. Shepley Bulfinch. 2013. Hesburgh Library Master Plan: University of Notre Dame. South Bend, Indiana: University of Notre Dame. https://renovation.library.nd.edu/docs/ HesburghLibraryMasterPlan.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018.

Elif Tinaztepe and Marie Østergård

2 C  ollaborative Design: A Persona Exercise Approach Abstract: Collaboration, in its broadest sense, is an exchange. Good listening skills, an open mind and the ability to get comfortable with uncomfortable situations lie at the core of good collaboration. Elif Tinaztepe (Associate Partner, Schmidt Hammer Lassen Architects) and Marie Østergård (Library Director, Aarhus Public Libraries) were invited to discuss their approach to collaborative design at the IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment Satellite Conference in Chicago in August 2016, one year after the launch of the award winning Dokk1 Library in Aarhus, Denmark (Figure 2.1). Both were intensely involved in the collaborative design process between the library, architects, users and a wide range of stakeholders over the previous 10 years (Figure 2.2). Their engaging and fruitful workshop was designed to help the seminar participants gain insight into one of the collaboration tools successfully employed by Tinaztepe and Østergård to understand users’ needs and assess the likelihood of success for a potential built space. Their approach is detailed in this chapter. Keywords: Library planning; Library buildings – Design and construction; Collaboration; Library architecture

The Framework We used multiple approaches and design formats throughout the years planning the Dokk1 project but determined that the persona exercise, which allows participants to learn and apply crucial aspects of good collaboration in a short time frame, was the best fit for the two-hour conference workshop. The persona exercise is an immersive, hands-on workshop where participants step out of their own roles and explore different library scenarios from a user’s perspective. They create their own personas and map the personas’ journeys, reflecting on their interactions and experiences in the library every step of the way. The persona exercise is a tool we enjoy using in most projects. It is approachable, applicable and easy to tailor to the specific organisation or the complexity of the problem at hand. It can be used in diverse situations and project stages, e.g. from the programming stages of a new library, when the team is trying to figure out what needs to be accommodated in the building, to the final phases of development, when the signage and wayfinding strategy is implemented in the actual https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-003

26 

 Elif Tinaztepe and Marie Østergård

Figure 2.1: Dokk1 on opening day (photo by Adam Mørk).

Figure 2.2: Dokk1 interior (photo by Adam Mørk).



2 Collaborative Design: A Persona Exercise Approach 

 27

building. It can also be used in day-to-day library development to start the design of a new library service or programme. The exercise kicked off with a framing narrative where we shared our own experiences on how strategic and comprehensive user involvement in a multi-layered collaboration process contributes to creating a new type of library and library usage that draws the public in unprecedented numbers. For the persona exercise we utilised images to spark the imagination and blueprints to create a real-life context for conference attendees to explore. The session closed by reflecting on the multifaceted strength of collaboration viewed from different angles while discussing its challenges and opportunities, both in terms of the architectural development of a project as well as the development of library services, usage and functionality. We elaborated on the benefits and challenges of the iterative design process and crucial role a strong design vision plays in bringing diverse voices together in harmony.

Creating a Persona In the first exercise, we focused on getting participants to create a persona. A persona is a fictional but realistic character, preferably based on data and statistics, against which ideas or concepts can be tested. Using personas helps to incorporate and focus on user needs. Instead of using real people to test ideas or concepts against, personas can be used as a tool in the development process. For this exercise the persona needed to be framed around a library user, but it can be relevant to create personas that are non-users. To benefit from using personas, it is important that a relatable background, narrative and context are created for them. The persona needs to feel like a real person and not an idealised figure. People are complex and colourful, with different backgrounds, stories, hobbies and concerns; the more detail one can bring into the persona, the more one can begin to inhabit the character, with all its complexities. To this end, participants were asked to create personas with names and ages, as well as narratives on personal background, interests, education, dreams and aspirations (Figure 2.3). Participants created their persona in groups, both in words and in drawings. In previous workshops we have experienced how people tend to relate more rapidly to a persona when it has a picture and not just stories. It is therefore preferable to either find pictures to attach to the persona or simply draw them, as was done in this case.

28 

 Elif Tinaztepe and Marie Østergård

Figure 2.3: Participants creating a persona (photo by Klaus Werner).

When the participants had created their personas, we asked them to describe the personas’ realistic library usage based on their characters. Are they typical users? Do they come alone? Why do they go to the library? What annoys them? What would they want more of? Delving deeper into the persona’s characteristics is helpful but also helps the participants create a common language around people and libraries. To create a realistic starting point, it is essential that stories are not only positive but also have friction and frustrations, as is the case in real life. When working with personas, one of the challenges for participants is to shed their own baggage and not apply personal views and opinions, or dream scenarios, on the personas (Figure 2.4). This is more difficult than it sounds.



2 Collaborative Design: A Persona Exercise Approach 

 29

Figure 2.4: Sharing the story of a persona with participants (photo by Klaus Werner).

Creating a Context The next step was to introduce the participants to a fictional context, a fictional library created for their personas to explore. We chose to do this in architectural plan drawings, which depicted the different spaces and functionalities that exist in the fictional library. The plan drawings were supported with photos that showed how the rooms looked and the activities that took place, bringing the black and white drawings to life and enabling the participants to imagine real, lifelike spaces. Aware that many participants would not have had access to architectural plan drawings prior to this workshop, we used simple illustrated plans of Dokk1 as a case study to explain how to approach and read a plan (Figure 2.5). This is a very real challenge in a library building process where major decisions are made based on the understanding of architectural drawings. We discussed what to look for in a drawing, how to decode the illustrations and understand what they represent, as well as how to interpret the relationships and proximities between different functions, which is the key to understanding how a space works.

30 

 Elif Tinaztepe and Marie Østergård

Figure 2.5: Architectural plan drawings with workshop images (graphic by Schmidt Hammer Lassen).



2 Collaborative Design: A Persona Exercise Approach 

 31

We then introduced the participants to the actual drawings they would be working on in order to create their user journeys. We were facilitating a large group of participants so had prepared two different sets of drawings. They had intentionally designed these spaces with different opportunities and challenges to make the stories and findings richer and raise an important point. The way a space is organised is another determining factor in the overall user experience, in addition to the user’s own story. We asked the participants to take a little time to study the fictional contexts that their users would shortly be exploring, and to understand the relationships between the drawings and the photos. In other words, participants were asked to start inhabiting the context created. This exercise can be carried out with architectural physical models instead of two-dimensional drawings. If communicating with drawings, it is important to remember that it takes time to read plans. Keeping the drawings clear and simple, while using supporting visuals such as photos or sketches to expand the imagination, helps the participants visualise the context. This also rings true when co-designing buildings with users in real life. Using inspirational images, architectural models, 3D renderings and even referring to certain aspects of spaces previously experienced together can be tremendously helpful in communicating and establishing a common understanding of scale, size, atmosphere and function.

Make a User Journey Now it was time to take the personas on the journey through the library plans. We asked participants to explore the library space with their personas and at the same time notice and discuss what happened as their personas worked their way through the library (Figure 2.6). What was bothering him or her? What was he or she looking for? Which proximities in the library space evoked joy and which were a nuisance? Was he or she in and out quickly or was it an explorative journey? How did they use the staff in the library? We encouraged the participants to pose these and many more questions to get a full picture of how their particular personas would interact with the library and which services and spaces would feel inviting or the opposite. Participants were asked to discuss, reflect and not shy away from potential conflicts between user groups or proximities in order to get a better insight into both the personas’ expressed needs as well as what they might in fact need or look for without being fully conscious about doing so (Figure 2.7).

32 

 Elif Tinaztepe and Marie Østergård

Figure 2.6: Plotting a user’s journey (photo by Klaus Werner).

Figure 2.7: Sharing a user journey with participants (photo by Klaus Werner).



2 Collaborative Design: A Persona Exercise Approach 

 33

Walking through the library in this fashion quickly reveals points for reflection and provides an opportunity to discuss the clashes that occur and whether to deal with them or not. It always becomes obvious through these journeys that there is never a library space without compromise or potential conflict points. However, the exercise gives an opportunity to turn such a scenario into conscious choices about strategy and target groups.

Facilitation Obviously, the need for facilitation of these kinds of exercises varies tremendously. For participants with low familiarity with workshops it can take a long time before a common framework and starting point is created. In this particular case, the participants were enthusiastic, competent and experienced professionals. Even so, it is always interesting to observe what happens when the step is taken from the persona narrative onto the user journey. Most often during the journey participants will tend to try to adjust the persona to fit one’s own opinions or avoid dealing with dilemmas that occur on the journey. Suddenly you may hear tales of a 15-year-old boy who comes to the public library every week with his group of friends and agrees the library must be silent, or a mother who has two children, aged two and five, sitting silently next to each other and reading books while she browses the collection. In these cases, facilitation is always about pushing participants to be true to their personas. The particular workshop in question was dealing with a fictional setting in which no participants had feelings invested. When undertaking user journeys in real-life libraries that participants may have been part of designing or creating, opinions and ownership-feelings tend to overrule the logics of the persona; much stronger facilitation is therefore required for these kinds of exercises to be of value.

Wrapping Up The workshop participants in Chicago presented narratives with rich storylines that demonstrated empathy and creativity (Figure 2.8). The personas were diverse, relatable and sincere. The participants approached the personas and their journeys with a sense of humour, which triggered interesting discussions about the nature of public space, human behaviour as well as cultural norms and perceptions that differ from person to person, geography to geography and

34 

 Elif Tinaztepe and Marie Østergård

Figure 2.8: Participants at work (photo by Klaus Werner).

library to library. In the short time frame available, each group was able to project their persona into the architectural plans and break down their journey through the library into diverse interactions laden with challenges and opportunities, thus arriving at a critically reflective reading of the plan itself. One of the most important realisations for the participants, observed by us as facilitators, was the difficulty of staying in character throughout the exercise. Librarians emerged from time to time to talk about preferences as service providers, overshadowing the personas. However, as the exercise progressed, the participants started inhabiting the personalities of the users they created in a more conscious way. The participants generally felt that the persona exercise was a practical tool they would be eager to utilise in their daily work, in their own projects and organisations.

Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb

3 Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches Abstract: Singapore Management University (SMU) Libraries’ learning spaces are managed on the basis of an active collaboration between students and library staff. The SMU Libraries’ experience affirms Logan’s (2012, 318) statement that “intelligent collaborations between librarians and students is a partnership that enhances both the library and the students”. Beyond this, an outcome of the partnership between SMU students and library staff has created an evidence-based learning space design and management framework which have brought about learning outcomes for both students and library staff. These collaborations have strengthened competencies ranging from critical thinking, problem-solving and research skills to stakeholder management, scenario planning and engagement. This is a case study of the student-librarian collaborations that focus on sustainability and management of the learning spaces following library renovations. Findings of student projects undertaken by SMU students are discussed along with various other strategies adopted by librarians to demonstrate the ways in which data and evidence are used to continually assess and improve learning spaces. Keywords: Collaboration; Student engagement; SMU-X; Evidence-based librarianship; Academic libraries

Introduction “Planning new library space is essentially about people, or rather it is about creating the space in which people can interact with collections, information technology and the services they need… Above all, the user should be at the centre of the whole process” (McDonald 2006). At SMU Libraries, the students have been involved as key participants in the entire library renovation process, from master planning in 2012 to the formal evaluation following renovations in 2014 and 2015. The Singapore Management University student-staff learning space collaborations include librarian-initiated activities which focused on assessment and enhancement of learning spaces, as well as planning and awareness-raising around resource use and availability in collaboration with the Singapore Management University Student Association (SMUSA). These collaborations focused on a range of class projects in three participating SMU courses: Managing Process https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-004

36 

 Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb

Improvement, Design Thinking and Innovation and Computer as an Analysis Tool. Each project utilised assessment and research methods to solve ‘real world’ space management issues.

Changing Role of Library Spaces in Academic Institutions The shift in the role of academic libraries and their interrelationship with learning has been evolving rapidly, leading to the creation of spaces such as information commons, learning commons, academic commons and shared spaces with other student service departments, 24/7 learning spaces and so on. Students will most likely spend more time in campus learning spaces than anyone else and they have a valuable perspective on what works and what does not. Finding meaningful ways to involve students in planning and evaluating space design is an effective way to ensure that the space catalyses learning. As well as simply supporting their learning we should aim for a vision that the space is inspiring and motivating for students. Seeking to delight students should be one of our core aims (UCISA Toolkit 2016). There has been increased focus on the planning and utilisation of library spaces in academic libraries over the last 20 years, as evidenced by the proliferation of reports, research papers, articles and other outputs. This shift in focus is due to a range of factors, including: –– Reduction of print collections –– Increased prevalence of digital collections –– Changing pedagogies –– Student-centred approach to learning –– Increased recognition of learning outside formal classroom settings –– Expectations of university administrators regarding accountability for use of valuable spaces in libraries –– Changing focus of libraries from collections to their users, especially students and their use of libraries –– Need to demonstrate value to university administrators and other fund givers on how the library contributes to the institution’s success in areas such as shared resources and spaces –– Changing role of libraries’ involvement in teaching and learning, curriculum as well as community activities, e.g. student clubs, associations, alumni and external relationships



3 Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches 

 37

–– Increasingly critical importance of stakeholder engagement and communication for libraries and the institution –– Recognition by universities to invest in both formal and informal learning spaces to support the student experience In response to the changing library landscape, academic libraries have been renovating old, dated and traditional spaces to create new learning spaces that are more conducive to learning, welcoming and accessible for a diverse population of students with different learning needs. Holmgren and Spencer (2014, 9), presenting the results of discussions of a Chief Information Officers’ workshop sponsored by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR), conclude that by 2024 many library buildings will have been transformed into an academic commons whose primary role is to host academic support services while also providing space for what remains of the library’s physical collection. It is encouraging to observe that this report reaffirms what many academic libraries have been striving to achieve. Rather than being designed to accommodate library collections, such spaces are designed to enhance student learning and facilitate collaboration among students, faculty and the professional staff who support them.

Changing Role of Librarians in Academic Libraries Changing educational and learning spaces landscapes, as well as changing workforce expectations, have created a shift towards increased accountability, demonstrating value to the stakeholders and new levels of engagement with the stakeholders. Being accountable and demonstrating value requires not only the use of quantitative and qualitative research, analysis of surveys, focus groups, ethnographic studies and other kinds of user studies to gather information for decision-making, planning and reporting purposes, but also the ability to communicate in an effective way with stakeholders for higher levels of engagement. The library profession has responded to the changing nature and expectations of librarianship from a focus on what librarians do (collections, reference and library instruction) to what users do (research, teaching and learning) (Jaguszewski and Williams 2013).

38 

 Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb

Collaborations Between Librarians and Students Libraries and librarians have traditionally enjoyed a reputation of being customer-focused and service-oriented amongst their stakeholders. The customer focus and service orientation approach often translate into collaboration with faculty and students to plan, design and evaluate use of library learning spaces, library resources and even collaborative design of new services, marketing and engagement. Examples of collaboration with architecture departments to help design library spaces are relatively common, especially when funding to hire external consultants is scarce. Architects and their departments are keen to use the library for students to learn and experiment (Logan 2012). Abram and Cromity (2013, 41) assert that “the sustainable core of library strategies is focused on collaboration” in their paper, “Collaboration: The Strategic Core of 21 Century Library Strategies”. Advantages of collaboration with users, information systems units, vendors and publishers, curriculum and e-learning developers, faculty, researchers and teachers are numerous and create learning opportunities for all involved, sometimes beyond expectations. Some libraries have been partnering with other units, such as student services, career services, writing centres, wellness centres, research areas, student associations and clubs, to plan, develop and provide collaborative services and activities. This type of collaboration has many benefits for all parties involved. One of the beneficial outcomes can be helping library staff to learn more about the stakeholders and understand their experiences in areas outside of libraries.

About SMU and SMU Libraries Singapore Management University, established in 2000, consists of six schools and supports approximately 8,000 undergraduate and 1,000 postgraduate students. SMU’s pedagogical focus is on project-based and experiential-learning experiences, as reflected in the SMU-X Initiative which emphasises working with industry partners to provide opportunities for students to delve into real world problems and constraints. The SMU-X curriculum is based on the philosophy that students should be co-creators, planners and managers, not in a traditional passive role. The philosophy encompasses the principles of solving real world issues and problems, active mentoring, closer faculty-external relationship and interdisciplinary approaches. SMU Libraries has always been the most popular place on campus, with over 1.2 million visits recorded in 2015. Students spend a great deal of their time in the



3 Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches 

 39

library and feel strongly about library spaces and services, as demonstrated in the biannual LibQual+ survey (https://www.libqual.org/home) and a multitude of feedback channels including social media and the libraries’ suggestion board. When plans were made to renovate the library in 2012, both undergraduate and postgraduate students, as well as faculty from different areas, contributed to the library space conceptualisation stage, working with the architects and designers during the master planning. They participated in the evaluation and selection of the furniture, worked with the library to communicate with the community about the progress of the renovation and helped gather feedback regarding policies, continuous review and evolution of spaces to ensure these were suitable to students’ needs at different periods of the academic year. Following the 2014 renovations, which increased seating capacity, created flexible teaching, enhanced learning spaces and resulted in a 24/7 learning commons, the students participated in the assessment and evaluation of the new learning spaces. The outcome of the assessment activities confirmed that the renovations were successful in meeting design objectives and also provided an opportunity for librarians to reinforce evaluation and assessment competencies as related to the Libraries’ 2013 Culture of Assessment Initiative (Cribb and Hanken 2015). SMU Libraries’ Culture of Assessment Initiative (part of the SMU Library talent management strategy) emphasises providing librarians with learning opportunities to strengthen and practice the skills and competencies needed to “ascertain the Voice of the Customer”: –– continually assess and improve services and learning spaces that are aligned with the libraries’ strategic goals of engagement –– communicate with students the University’s pedagogical initiative to motivate students to master new skills and apply that knowledge in solving realworld problems

The Case Studies Inviting people with different perspectives to contribute to collective decision-making can be time-consuming in the development phase but ultimately is less time-consuming than leaving them out (Bickford and Wright 2006). SMU librarians are very much aware of this approach, especially in relation to planning for changes that will impact resource use or availability. This premise has been incorporated into the libraries’ evidence-based learning space design and management framework. The results of student surveys and student focus groups

40 

 Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb

have been incorporated into communicating changes to policies impacting stakeholders. The use of data and evidence from the students helps with buy-in, strengthens relationships and often leads to further opportunities for collaborative work. The annual SMUSA student survey about students’ perceptions involving all university services has included questions about various aspects of library services for some years. Responses to these questions are collated and presented at various forums at SMU, including library staff, Library Advisory Committee, senior management and students’ gatherings. The 2014 survey results showed that library space was the most preferred learning space for students, equal to their homes, even though SMU offers a variety of learning spaces outside the Library. This confirms the argument of Matthews and Soistmann (2016, 124) that people are not coming to libraries only to get work done; they also want an audience and to be part of the performance, confirming that “being surrounded by other productive people is a powerful motivator”.

Class Projects Student-librarian class project collaborations are aimed at strengthening competencies necessary to sustain a culture of continuous assessment and improvement amongst library staff whilst fulfilling the requirements of the SMU-X curriculum. To this end, each project examines a real-life research problem with the library as client. Students and librarians work together to understand the Voice of the Customer through quantitative and qualitative research methods for purposes of decision-making, planning and reporting. Three participating SMU courses will be discussed as examples below: Managing Process Improvement; Design Thinking and Innovation; and, Computer as an Analysis Tool. Within each class project, students were made aware of learning objectives, expected outcomes and project assessment methods. For participating librarians, the outcomes have been used to improve levels of service quality and process performance as well as incorporated into annual performance assessment processes.



3 Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches 

 41

Managing Process Improvement: the SeatHogging Project Students and librarians working on the Managing Process Improvement seat-hogging class project (Lau et al. 2015) utilised project management tools and learned and applied Lean Six Sigma methods to find solutions to the persistent problem of students using their personal belongings to reserve seating, depriving other students of seats during peak study periods in the library (seat-hogging). A mixed methods approach was utilised with survey, process mapping and various analysis techniques to understand the students’ point of view (Figure 3.1). Similar tools were used to analyse the effectiveness of various methods the library had been using to combat the problem.

Figure 3.1: Survey results highlighting why students seat-hog (graphic by Singapore Management University).

The seat-hogging project resulted in the following outcomes: –– a designated Hog Free Zone –– a seat-hogging awareness campaign that promoted the designated space –– students and librarians earned a Lean Six Sigma Green Belt certificate

42 

 Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb

–– the project contributed to a growing repository of data for ongoing communication with students and other stakeholders regarding issues related to student seating capacity

Design Thinking and Innovation: Seat-Hogging 2.0 The Design Thinking and Innovation class project utilised the work of the seat-hogging project, the 2015 LibQual+ ervice Quality report and user comments, and applied design thinking methodologies to find additional innovative solutions to the seat-hogging problem. Problem measures were identified through the use of WiFi signals to measure student presence at different times; best practices from other libraries and industry were considered; a suggested prototype proposed use of WiFi data to illustrate, via the Libraries’ Website and LCD screens at the main entrance, the number of students present by location and time. Ongoing collaborations with faculty often intersect with, and bring to fruition, student project recommendations and extend the use of data across the University. The Design Thinking and Innovation course is one such example. Library staff had been working with the University’s LiveLabs Research Centre (http://livelabs.smu.edu.sg) to explore ways to use WiFi data collected by the Centre to help with decision-making related to opening hours and service staffing levels. LiveLabs and the Design Thinking and Innovation programme students and faculty developed the Heat Map (Figure 3.2), thanks to students’ suggestions to display the data. The Heat Map is now a feature of the libraries’ home page and is on display at various locations inside and outside the library. The application of LiveLabs’ project for use of WiFi data has been extended to include other data, such as traffic flows inside the library and across campus as well as dwell times in the library, to indicate the length of time users spend on different floors.



3 Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches 

Figure 3.2: Heat Map from the SMU Libraries Website (graphic by Singapore Management University).

 43

44 

 Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb

Computer as an Analysis Tool: the Library Tour App A Computer as an Analysis Tool collaboration was both a combined class project and a library Lean Six Sigma project (Low 2016). The shared learning objectives and outcomes included understanding user behaviour and needs of both students and librarians, as well as practicing and applying project management tools to develop and deliver a technology system that would solve a real problem. The project goals were twofold: to find a new way to engage and interact with library users during the matriculation exercise, LibQuest, an annual problem-based learning scavenger hunt which targets 1,500–2,000 incoming students at the start of each academic year; and to reduce the number of librarian hours needed to conduct the exercise. The outcome of the project was a mobile application, the Library Tour App (Figure 3.3), which reinforced the importance of first understanding the voice of the customer and then designing a process or service from the users’ perspective.

Figure 3.3: Value stream depicting the process utilising the app (graphic by Singapore Management University).

A second Computer as an Analysis Tool course project assisted the librarians in analysing library visitor statistics to review the library’s opening hours. The students created an Excel programme (Figure 3.4) that takes information from the LiveLabs’ WiFi heatmap statistics to determine and predict the best time to close the library depending on various criteria.



3 Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches 

 45

Figure 3.4: Application to predict library opening and closing hours (graphic by Singapore Management University).

In another example, a PhD student utilised the Seat-Hog Free Zone, implemented through the Managing Process Improvement project, to develop an occupancy (i.e. occupied either by humans or by objects) detector system using sensors and timers at each of the individual study carrels. Initially, the project informed the extent to which the Hog Free Zone works. As illustrated in Figure 3.5 below, red

Figure 3.5: Illustration of the results of the occupancy detection (graphic by Singapore Management University).

46 

 Tamera Hanken and Gulcin Cribb

indicates occupancy, green indicates empty, while amber indicates that the seat is empty, but the table/carrel is occupied with the student’s belongings (Nguyen et al. 2015). The student’s project was demonstrated at the 2015 International Workshop on Internet of Things towards Applications.

Discussion and Conclusion The UK Higher Education Learning Space Toolkit (2016, 8) emphasises that “we need to design for a diversity of pedagogic approaches bearing in mind a strong prevailing tendency towards a socio-constructivist approach that emphasises participatory and collaborative activities wherever appropriate”. The student-librarian collaborations with the classroom projects have proven to be excellent examples of the socio-constructivist approach, emphasising the impact of communication, collaboration and negotiation on thinking and learning. Students and librarians, through the completion of the projects, have been actively involved in their own learning which is a process of peer interaction, mediated and structured, in this case by the faculty, the library as client and the student body as customer. Each of the three course project examples provided opportunities for students and librarians to apply problem-solving and research methods skills as well as engage stakeholders in scenario planning and awareness-raising around issues related to learning space management and beyond. The faculty overseeing these projects have been using these examples to illustrate activities of their schools and research centres both for internal and external awareness raising purposes and to showcase innovation at SMU to stakeholders. The intention of this case study has been to provide a broad context for a case study of a strategic approach taken by SMU Libraries to align with the University’s pedagogy, leveraging collaboration, voice of the customer and culture of assessment as part of SMU Libraries’ evolving strategic directions. The journey continues; one of the outcomes of the journey has been development of a special website by the libraries’ analytics manager to inform students and faculty about potential projects, the process and data sources available at SMU Libraries.

References Abram, S., and J. Cromity. 2013. “Collaboration: The Strategic Core of 21 Century Library Strategies.” New Review of Information Networking 18, no. 1: 40–50.



3 Student Engagement and Collaboration: Creative Evidence-Based Approaches 

 47

Bickford, D. J., and D. J. Wright. 2006. “Community: The Hidden Context for Learning Spaces.” In Learning Spaces, edited by D. G. Oblinger, 4.1–4.22. Boulder: EDUCAUSE. https://www. educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7102.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Cribb, G., T. Hanken, and S. Gottipati. 2015. “Evaluating Library Spaces while Developing a Culture of Assessment.” In Proceedings of the Northumbria International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries and Information Services, 11th, Edinburgh, UK, July 20–22. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1057&context=library_research. Accessed August 20, 2018. Holmgren, R., and G. Spencer. 2014. The Changing Landscape of Library and Information Services: What Presidents, Provosts, and Finance Officers Need to Know. Washington D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources. https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/ pub162/. Accessed August 5, 2018. Jaguszewski, J. M., and K. Williams. 2013. New Roles New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries. Washington D.C.: Association of Research Libraries. http://www.arl. org/storage/documents/publications/nrnt-liaison-roles-revised.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Lau, A., W. Yang, E. Yi Lin Tan, J. Xin Lee, J. Thiow Ern Lim, S. Wei Lee, A. Dimian, Y. Wirawati Ishak, and V. Ong. 2015. “Improve Space and Manpower Utilization.” Singapore: Singapore Management University. http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/library_research/55. Accessed August 5, 2018. Logan, F. 2012. “Student Workers: Essential Partners in the Twenty-First Century Academic Library.” Public Services Quarterly 8, no. 4: 316–325. Low, J. 2016. “Coll-App-Orating with Students: iBeacons and AR and Gamification, Oh My!” Presentation at the Internet Librarian International, London, UK, October 18–19. McDonald, A. 2006. “The Ten Commandments Revisited: The Qualities of Good Library Space.” LIBER Quarterly 16, no. 2. http://doi.org/10.18352/lq.7840. Matthews, B., and L. A. Soistmann. 2016. Encoding Space: Shaping Learning Environments that Unlock Human Potential. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries. Nguyen, H. H., N. Gulati, Y. Lee, and R. Krishna Balan. 2015. “Real-Time Detection of Seat Occupancy & Hogging.” In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Internet of Things towards Applications. Seoul: South Korea. https://doi.org/10.1145/2820975.2820981. Singapore Management University. 2016. “SMU-X curriculum.” https://x.smu.edu.sg/ curriculum. Accessed February 7, 2018. UCISA. 2016. UK Higher Education Learning Space Toolkit: A SCHOMS, AUDE and UCISA Collaboration. Oxford: Universities and Colleges Information Systems Association. http://www. ucisa.ac.uk/learningspace. Accessed February 8, 2018.

John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

4 C  ollaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function Abstract: This chapter explores the nature of collaborative relationships and their impact on the outcomes and successes of planning, designing and building an academic library. Using a joint-use facility as a case study, the authors consider the value of both formal and informal decision-making structures on the success of the building design process and explore the critical importance of building strong relationships through intentionally collaborative approaches to working together. This chapter also explores the complexities of organisational culture, language and communication to better understand their influence on collaboration. Offering both the perspective of the project’s lead architect and head of the library, the chapter presents unique insights for those considering engaging in a new shared use, or multi-partner building project, or for those simply looking to better understand the challenges faced in creating successful collaborative partnerships. Keywords: Library planning;  Library buildings  –  Design and construction; Library architecture; Collaboration; Community engagement 

Introduction Mount Royal University (MRU) is a mid-sized undergraduate university of approximately 11,000 full load equivalent students located in Calgary, Alberta Canada. It is a public university known for excellence in scholarly informed teaching and undergraduate research opportunities for students. It boasts small class sizes, an integrated general education programme and a close-knit and supportive learning community that offers rich experiences for student and faculty interaction. After many years as a highly successful two-year college, Mount Royal College transitioned into a uniquely student-engaged four-year degree granting university. Though MRU’s official university status was confirmed in 2009, the transition from college to university was implemented over a period of approximately 10 years, during which time the community engaged in intensive discussions and consensus building. It involved across-the-board curricular planning and degree development, challenging discussions about the future of non-degree programing, and provincial and national quality review processes. Community discussions regarding culture, enduring organisational values and a changing mission https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-005



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 49

were also central to this period of transition. Organisational change processes including the implementation of academic rank, the codification of scholarship and research expectations for faculty, along with a myriad of other organisational changes, were all part of this complex college to university transition process. The shift from college to university also necessitated a new emphasis and investment in a new academic library (Figure 4.1). Supporting the upper years of degree programmes, as well as new degree offerings and advanced research expectations, meant that a significant re-investment and re-imagination of MRU’s reviewer from the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC)1 (Mount Royal College 2004), the library became a key area of institutional investment. This meant more funding for collections, staffing and services, as well as a new library building being identified as a major capital campaign priority. Such a new facility would address the practical limitations of the existing 1970s facility that was both too small for a growing institution and no longer pedagogically

Figure 4.1: Exterior Riddell Library and Learning Centre (photo by John Souleles). 1 Association of Universities Canada has since been renamed Universities Canada (UC). While not a formal accreditation body, its review and endorsements are essential for university status and credibility in Canada.

50 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

aligned with the academic needs of a university of the future. At the same time this project and building quickly became a symbolic reference point for the successful fruition of MRU’s long transition from college to university, as well as a physical manifestation of the MRU’s status as a university known for learning and teaching innovation and the academic rigour demonstrated through research and scholarship.

Design Development The design process for the new building began in 2006 with functional programing and planning consultations providing the foundation of architectural design. This work also informed the development of significant capital funding requests to the government and community supporters. Early on it was determined that along with the library, a number of key departments and support areas from across campus would be included in the new building. This one-stop approach to student academic success and supports became a hallmark concept for the building. Based on university priorities, the then Provost and VP Academic, along with the Library, included in the building: Student Learning Services (peer tutoring, writing help etc.), Accessibility Services (academic accommodation), the Academic Development Centre (supporting innovative faculty teaching), the newly created Research Institute for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (research centre), the emerging General Education unit (a cross-programme approach to delivering liberal studies outcomes for all students), the newly formed Department of Education and Schooling (elementary teacher training) and the associated Office of the Dean of Teaching and Learning.2 The Library and these units, or those that eventually confirmed involvement, became collectively referred to as building partners, a term specifically chosen to signal an intentional approach to collaboration and service integration within the facility, as well as avoid perceptions of simple tenancy. This echoes Lippincott’s (2004, 2009) notion of a continuum of partnership multi-stakeholder library facilities that suggests co-location on one end, cooperation in the centre and collaboration at the other end of the continuum. Following approximately eight years of active planning, interrupted by periods of ‘pencils down planning’ when the focus shifted to efforts to secure

2  It should be noted that since the time of planning, departments, faculties and units have changed names or been reorganised and therefore do not currently reflect the organisational structure of Mount Royal University at the time of publication of this chapter.



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 51

government funding, Mount Royal University Library and Learning Centre finally received funding approval from the provincial government. Confirmation of a naming donor quickly followed, making the Riddell Library and Learning Centre (RLLC) a reality and leading to groundbreaking celebrations in August 2014. Fully reanimating the planning and design process after eight years meant that a review of planning assumptions was required before it was possible to move forward with confidence into the final detailed design. Careful attention had been paid over the protracted planning period to keeping abreast of new developments in library design with visits to new facilities, as well as participation in design and change-focused workshops and preparation. In-house workshops with the Library team and with proposed building partners were also key in maintaining the momentum in planning and tending to building partner relationships. Keeping the planning process alive also helped ensure alignment with MRU’s evolving priorities, programmes and approaches to teaching, learning and research. Even with these efforts, it was clear that once funding was confirmed, the building concept had to be substantively reworked and reimagined to keep programming within the approved unescalated budget and proposed building shell. The extended period of intermittent planning was also witness to considerable change in higher education generally and within the MRU specifically. From the advancement of technology, changing expectations and needs of students to the evolving roles of academic libraries, there was much to consider when deciding how to best realise a design that captured not only current but also future needs of students, faculty and the community. Individual building partner leads also came and went over this period, as did university senior leadership. Students joined the university and graduated. New faculty were hired and senior colleagues retired. Managing external and internal expectations became a norm for those leading this project, but the continued work, even during the slowest pencils down planning periods, meant building partners and Facilities Management Department colleagues had considerable experience working together and considering shared and complementary goals for this new facility. These relationships created strong foundations of trust and helped foster healthy collaboration and cooperation among those involved in the project and ultimately contributed to the smooth launch of a successful facility. Quickly on the heels of securing funding came re-engagement in the detailed design process and review of the current programming in earnest. DIALOG, the architectural firm for the project, hired a new architect with library design experience to be a dedicated lead. Formal working groups and steering committees were reconstituted and detailed planning was underway. Working within the parameters of the early conceptual design that defined the shell and overall size

52 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

of the facility, it became evident that the original building partners, as identified by the Provost and Vice-President Academic at the time, could no longer fit within the approved building footprint. A new configuration of the Riddell Library and Learning Centre occupants had to be confirmed. The revised building partner team consisted of the Library, Student Learning Services, the Academic Development Centre, the Institute for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning and the renamed Department of Education (Figure 4.2). This removed the vastly expanded and growing unit of General Education, the Office of the Dean of Teaching and Learning as well as a restructured Accessibility Services unit. Building Partners

Figure 4.2: Building Partners (graphic by John Souleles).

Determination of the new configuration of building partners was primarily based on a self-selection process in which units quickly identified that their current or projected space needs could not be met in the facility, or that other campus adjacencies or locations were more desirable. While primarily programmatic alignment considerations would have resulted in a different group of building partners, it is a testament to the student-focused nature of the University that the commitment to the need for a new library space was paramount in these decisions. What could have easily been an acrimonious and fraught process was remarkably quick and amicable. While the revised group of building partners meant a more manageable number of units and core collaborators, as well as a more realistic demand on a limited building footprint, it did not necessarily result in a more programmatically aligned or complementary grouping of partners in terms of services or mandates. Unique functions and cultures, coupled with significant differences in size of teams and organisational structures, resulted in a diverse group of building



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 53

partners reporting through different divisions and offering a variety of services and programmes to unique audiences. The Library was situated at the connected centre of these sometimes complementary yet quite distinct units (Figure 4.3). Its mandate to deliver course-embedded instruction, student academic support, as well as support for faculty teaching and research while being open and accessible to all members of the University and engaging in community outreach, meant that it intersected in some way to each of the building partners. The building partners, however, did not each share the same degree of intersection or complementarity. Varied mandates and foci meant that building partners served unique constituent groups, were outward-focused or service-orientated and had distinct cultural characteristics. It also meant their enthusiasm and interest in being co-located in this new facility, a fact determined by a decision of the Provost and VP Academic, was varied. There was substantive progress to be made before all parties could fully embrace a shared vision and goals for this transformational building.

Figure 4.3: Fireplace Lounge (photo by John Souleles).

54 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

Building Relationships The questions facing building partners were large and complex but fundamental to the success of a new Riddell Library and Learning Centre. How might all parties work together in new ways in the building? How might all parties best design this new facility in order to transform teaching, learning and scholarship on the campus? How could all parties ensure that the design would enable them, collectively and individually, to perform their work differently? How could all parties ensure that each maintained its unique profile and autonomy? What would collaboration look like and how could all parties ensure no one partner was disadvantaged? What would student learning and academic success look like in this new facility? How might all parties understand a shared vision that was inclusive for all and supportive of the University’s vision? The process of planning and design for this new building was noteworthy not only for the length of process, but also because of the very fluid and, at times, meandering and divergent nature of the process. Whether it was due to the time and creativity parties were afforded, or simply a factor of the project itself, the process was successful in leading all involved to a shared and desired destination. The library and learning centre needed to address both current and future needs of students. It needed to integrate and innovate teaching, learning and research, and address the potential of new learning technologies and information tools. It needed to support faculty research and scholarship and meet the specific needs of a diverse set of evolving degree programmes. It needed to engage the entire campus community and provide a way for the external community to connect with the University. Finally, of course, it needed to meet the future needs of a growing undergraduate university and the needs of a diverse group of building partners. Developing the vision for a multi-partner, mixed-use library facility was both straightforward and complex. It was straightforward in the identification and articulation of a common vision for the facility, but infinitely more complex in understanding the manifestation of that vision, particularly among and across building partners. As the planning and design literature stresses, building project success relies heavily on creating and adhering to a clear vision (Dornseif 2001; Lippincott 2004, 2009). The intention is to achieve a functional and aesthetic building that meets the needs of stakeholders and users. A strong vision should also, however, function as a touchstone that enables an organic and nuanced process to continually interrogate the vision and ensure its continued applicability, versatility and resilience. The vision then becomes part of an iterative process to build understanding and confidence in the project process as well as the measure of a successful project outcome.



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 55

A clear vision is also as integral to relationship building and the fostering of trust and creation of social capital as it is to the design of the building itself. It is an important tool for ensuring strong communication throughout the project and can be a mechanism for resolving conflicts and encouraging innovation. It is an important tool for sustaining focus over the life of a project, from inception through planning and into the launch of new working relationships and organisational structures. Finally, a strong vision helps manage external change and challenges that may influence a project, particularly one that has a long planning horizon. The challenge of creating and communicating a shared vision for this project began with securing agreement among all building partners that a collaborative approach to planning, as well as an integrated working arrangement in the new building, were goals beneficial for our students and faculty but also each partner (Figure 4.4). This intentionality needed to extend into the work of staff Communiciation Culture – Formal

Figure 4.4: Formal communication structure (graphic by John Souleles).

teams within and across partner areas, so it was important to ensure staff expertise contributed to the integrated building design. It also fostered the necessary engagement, trust and agency to allow staff to begin to address potential changes to their work that would come with this transformational new library and learning centre. Creating an environment in which staff could begin to reimagine their own work both within their units and across building partner units was essential to build capacity for change and consider more transformative ways of working together. The shared vision also helped create the frameworks for collaboration, articulating both the complementary roles and values of building partners and at the same time identifying specific points where integration of work might be most viable and comfortable.

56 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

The vision also needed to engage and captivate the imagination of the respective stakeholders. For faculty this meant maintaining engagement throughout a protracted planning phase and balancing current needs while inspiring and leading innovation. For students, the vision became an important communication and advocacy tool for each new cohort. With a senior administrative team undergoing considerable turnover, the vision was a positive way to maintain momentum for the project and reiterate the centrality of the project as a university priority. Finally, the vision needed to inspire potential donors while communicating responsibility to government funders. A clear shared vision helped build a strong narrative for the project team and its work. The collective story created through the iterative work was embraced by all planning leads and provided a foundation for engaging with the internal teams. It was valuable for identifying and sharing successes across the organisation and key to communicating achievements to external communities and stakeholders. It helped build excitement and manage expectations and was inclusive enough to reflect and speak to the unique mandates and cultures of all building partners, while at the same time was future-focused and aspirational. The five units identified as stakeholders in this project became building partners through the process of articulating and creating a shared vision and through the hard work of collaboration and relationship building over the long arc of the project. Programmatic alignment, practicality and political will, while important, were not sufficient incentives to result in an integrated outcome. This only occurred through active collaboration, the cultivation of shared interests and the articulation of a shared vision for a new library and learning centre. As McNicol (2008) describes the co-location continuum, it was important for this project to evolve “from lodger, flat-mate, to marriage partner” to building partner, from a marriage of convenience of sorts to building partners with shared interest in working together in new ways. These building partners had to work together as independent and complementary units without the fear of losing autonomy or identity.

Collaboration Frameworks Like the core building concepts of structured and unstructured learning spaces, the planning process for the Riddell Library and Learning Centre leveraged a series of formal and ad-hoc teams and working groups. This was both a practical way to undertake and complete a significant amount of planning work while ensuring the necessary expertise and creativity was focused on contributing



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 57

to an innovative and functional design. The diverse work teams also helped to construct networks as well as build and deepen social capital, alongside the creation of social relationships and structures that enabled trust and collaboration (Coleman 1988) among building partners. A campus-wide steering committee provided the organisationally sanctioned formal planning body. This high-level committee included senior representation from building partners, Facilities Management, the project manager (an external contractor brought in to lead the project for Facilities Management), the lead architect, the Provost and Vice-President Academic, and was chaired by the Vice-President Administration. The steering committee (Figure 4.5) also brought together internal decision-making structures regarding building design and operations connecting in external architectural and expert construction teams (structural, mechanical, landscape, construction). Communication + Planning

Figure 4.5: Ad hoc Working Group Structure (graphic by John Souleles).

A Joint Working Group (JWG) comprised of building partner leads, the project manager, the lead architect and other key specialists including ITS and media experts evolved over the course of the project, finally emerging as the main planning and communication body. Created in the early stages of the project and chaired initially by the University Librarian, the JWG shifted mandate as the project moved into construction phase. Prior to the launch of construction, the JWG functioned as the core body liaising with the architect on planning and design processes. This group provided input and advice on the building functional programme, considered design features and elements and created the guiding principles for design work as well as principles for collaboration and service integration. These core principles both informed the design work for the building but also the later work of service and programme development and policy work

58 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

undertaken in active preparation for occupancy. Once the project moved into final planning stages, a specialised Project Manager was hired by Facilities Management to execute the project and oversee the construction process. The JWG now expanded and evolved into the core planning team for the facility, shifting focus from design decisions to construction consultation and planning. A Building Partner Group (BPG) composed of unit directors/deans/leads was formed later in the project. This group, though overlapping in some membership with the Joint Working Group mentioned above, served a very different function in the planning process, focusing on service development and delivery, as well as policy and process matters related to post-occupancy operations and services. The group met regularly to address process planning issues as they arose, identify and discuss operational matters, and consider ongoing collaboration and complementary services. The BPG also proved valuable for resolving challenging issues or conflicts that were then referred to the JWG and/or the steering committee. While both the JWG and the steering committee were increasingly focused on construction, budget and technical building operations, they were not wellequipped to address or resolve issues building partners saw as critical. An excellent example of one such issue was the matter of signage in the facility. While the type of signs and the physical placement of signs most certainly needed to be discussed at the JWG construction-focused table and required the expertise of campus Health and Safety, Security and the architect, as well as the campus signage team, the actual content of building signs was most appropriately addressed at the BPG table. Determination of content, standardisation of terminology, the introduction of Blackfoot language (an Algonquian language) translations, the order of elements, the user’s needs, digital or print signage options and much more became important discussions to building partners. Perceptions of prominence, value, hierarchy, audience, building function, space responsibility or ownership and many other critical nuanced issues surfaced through these discussions. Managing the various issues within a small group of collaborative and politically minded experts, able to consult internal teams in appropriate ways and to debate the complexities of options, became critical for resolving the practical matters of wayfinding in the facility. Signage discussions also helped reveal and address some of the underlying tensions and concerns inherent in a joint-use facility with multiple building partners. The challenges of signage became an excellent example, and real manifestation, of some of the challenges building partners were likely to face moving forward together. Attempting to address these issues at the JWG table would have been time-consuming and would not have yielded the positive results the BPG was able to achieve, both for the signage itself but also ongoing partnership relations. Dealing with signage turned out to be a robust real-world example of how to



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 59

approach difficult conversations among building partners. As Innes and Booher (1999) suggest, good answers are best reached through good process. The process required open discussion, compromise, internal consultation, communication of decisions and reasoning for the decisions, identification of shared interests, a respect for expertise and, as always, repeated confirmation of recommendations. While this was one of the most complex and comprehensive examples of a collaborative coming together for the building partners, it was by no means the only such example encountered in the project. Through the process, a series of ad hoc working groups was created to support building planning, service innovation and foster inter-unit collaboration (Figure 4.6). The working groups engaged most Library staff, and many building partner members, as well as external faculty champions in planning and helped ensure a richer outcome for the project. Working Groups were formed to deal with building signage, an integrated service desk, the overall service model, room booking needs, media suites, visualisation spaces, makerspace development and the Library’s move into the new building. Communication Culture – Reality

Figure 4.6: Informal communication structure (graphic by John Souleles).

The working group structure was essential for the success of the Library’s efforts to reimagine services, develop new programing and most importantly engage staff in the planning. It should also be noted that this approach to team

60 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

engagement was relevant across all building partners. Some had only one or two leads involved directly in working group planning; some had minimal or no representation; and others preferred to consult with individuals as needed outside of any of the formal structures. Approach varied greatly based on existing organisational culture, clientele or audience, mandate, work arrangements and availability, perceptions of trust and need, as well as the size of the team. For the Library, which was the largest and most diverse team with approximately 16 faculty librarians and 45 staff members, it was critical to have as much team involvement as possible, both to ensure there was the right expertise around the table but also to ensure staff were actively engaged in the significant change process. While a formal structure around decision-making and consultation required the creation of a structure of committees and working groups, it should be noted that the mandates, responsibilities and authority, and therefore membership, of these bodies not only evolved over time but also intentionally overlapped and complemented each other. The project benefited from an empowered expert joint working group, as well as a robustly collaborative building partner group, that was able to resolve complex issues and advance or advocate for shared interests or through project pressure points. The steering committee appropriately focused on matters of budget, Board of Governors’ oversight on capital projects, government compliance and reporting, and overall quality assurance including project timelines and milestones. The steering committee also functioned to deal with difficult issues that might arise within the JWG or building partner group. The commitment of the teams meant that there was a willingness to attend to issues expediently and at the most appropriate table. Because of this, and an extremely well-managed project in terms of budget and timeliness, only a few issues were elevated to the steering committee.

Communication A strong commitment to positive and open communication meant it was imperative that all involved had the information needed to perform their roles and functions, and that the right decision-makers were present at the right tables. As a core principle, this was carefully tended to by building partner leads as well as other key members of the project team, specifically the lead architect and Library leads. This approach to communication was key for the cultivation of trust: “Trust building must be a cyclical process within which positive outcomes form the basis for trust development. With each consecutive positive outcome trust builds



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 61

upon itself incrementally, over time, in a virtuous circle” (Huxham and Vangen 2004, 154). Through continued attention, and a strong foundation of trust and personal relationships, all involved were able to adjust their processes as they progressed through the project. Internal to the Library, relevant parties involved took a multi-pronged approach with special whole of Library update meetings, standing agenda items in unit meetings, blog communications, written reports, WG chair meetings and decision document management to augment the official project documentation held in Facilities Management. While not always successful in achieving ideal communication, or agreeing on the best table for problem resolution, all parties involved were mindful and able to discuss when scope creep or issue blur was occurring. One such example was when the Library decided to dedicate one of its group rooms to become a family room available to students or other visitors with infants or small children. The suggestion came to the table late in the project so some desirable elements such as a sink could not be accommodated in the design, but minor modifications (a door lock and privacy film on the glass wall) could easily be accommodated to make this room more private for breast-feeding, active children, or other family requirements. For the Library, it was a simple decision around room use and a minor modification around design elements including furniture choices. For Facilities Management, there was concern that it could and would impact wider university policies and expectations around room use across the campus. At the insistence of the project manager, the issue was forwarded to the steering committee’s attention and quickly returned to the Library as a room use matter. Along with a structured governance model and formally articulated consultation and decision-making groups, the project’s success relied heavily on informal communication networks and personal relationships to bridge gaps, tap into expertise and flexibly respond to design and planning needs. The informal system allowed individual relationships to be forged for the common good of the project. The relationships were critical in creating strong bonds of trust and robust social as well as political capital. The experiences echoed Huxham and Vangen’s research which identifies common themes of concern to be managed in collaborations to be: “common aims; communication; commitment and determination; compromise; appropriate working processes; accountability; democracy and equity; resources; trust; and power” (Huxam and Vangen 2004, 31). In addition, the informal connections fostered creativity and enabled strategic problem solving both outside and within the formal working group and steering committee tables. Although formal structures for consultation and decision making remained intact, the reality of working collaboratively and efficiently meant that the nature of interconnections and communication became more complex and

62 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

interdependent. Figure 4.6 attempts to capture the reality of relationship and communication that formed the underpinning of the success of this collaborative project.

Figure 4.7: Group rooms and entrance (photo by John Souleles).

Bollman and Krings (2016, 187), quoting O’Reilly and Chatman, note: Relational climate – focuses on the quality of the social relations within the group and the extent to which members care about other members versus defend their self-interests. Relational climate emerges from group members’ discussions about the extent to which more formal aspects of work (e.g., incentive structures, participation systems) or symbolic acts of management are characterized by consideration for others (O’Reilly and Chatman 1996).

The relational climate created through this unrecognised informal network allowed for the free flow of information, sharing of expertise and the ability to resolve issues and find positive shared outcomes far more frequently than the formal structure enabled. It was also the case that the informal network was embraced and successfully navigated by some team members more than others. For those who, by virtue of the nature of their role, relied on networks of personal connection to carry out their daily work, or who frequently operated in an environment of partnering and influencing rather than position-related or top-down decision-making, the informal networks and relationships were a familiar concept. For the Library, the Aca-



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 63

demic Development Centre and Student Learning Services operating in the space was the norm. Building on the concept of third space professionals proposed by Witchurch (2010, 2012), Veles, Carter and Boon note: Third space professionals are being located or intentionally locate their work at the crossroads of multiple organisational domains with functional and cultural interchange, they are more exposed to seeing the linkages between staff professional activities and noticing opportunities where people can collaborate. They are therefore more likely to act as either catalysts or architects and leaders of collaborative initiatives (Veles, Carter and Boon 2018).

For other partners less familiar with operating in these ways, such as Facilities Management, ITS, Security and other purely administrative units, the informal networks at times created discomfort and concern. Even for the Department of Education, a purely academic unit, the informal networks were viewed as unnecessary, complicated to navigate and not worth the time investment.

Building Partners and Partnerships – Collaborating for Success To explore more deeply the processes, challenges and benefits of an integrated and highly collaborative approach to building and service design, we set our lens on four representative and distinct Riddell Library and Learning Centre collaborative environments: the main programme and functional design partners, the building partners group; the facilities led planning and construction focused joint working group; staff engagement and staff led groups; and finally, stakeholder consultation processes.

Building Partners – Integration and Integrated Planning One of the most critical planning teams for this project was the building partner group; those areas offering services and delivering programming in the building. As noted earlier, it included the Library, Student Learning Services, the Academic Development Centre, the Department of Education, and the Institute for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. An iterative approach to planning included unit-specific programming meetings with the architectural team and each building partner team, as well as joint inter-unit planning meetings to refine the design as a building partner group. The processes were supported by an open dialogue which allowed all areas and all representatives to provide input into

64 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

the design. It was a highly respectful process that was successful in large part because of the strong interpersonal relationships solidified during the early planning stages of the project. The process was also supported through the creation of clear parameters for framing specific discussion expectations and goals. An example that illustrates the approach was the process created for furniture and technology discussions. In order to honour the ongoing collaborative and open approach to planning, and create an integrated approach to services going forward, it was extremely important to ensure all building partner leads and key team members had the opportunity to participate in the discussions around furniture and technology selection. This would not only have a positive impact on the final aesthetic and functional design of the building, but also a positive impact on building a shared understanding of the work of building partners, not to mention a better understanding of organisational work cultures and structures. It was imperative for successful integration of services and the creation of new collaborations going forward. In practical terms, it meant that while meeting invitations and schedules allowed for all key building partners to participate in each unit’s architect-led discussion of furniture and technology needs, there were also clear expectations that the all final decisions were to be made by the unit leads only. Members from other units were able to observe the discussion, ask questions and participate with suggestions, but also to step back when final choices were being confirmed by the unit lead (Figures 4.7 and 4.8).

Figure 4.8: Ideas visualisation lounge (photo by John Souleles).



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 65

The integrated design of the Riddell Library and Learning Centre benefited greatly from this approach to decision-making. While not equally as critical for all building partners, the process was extremely well-received by others. Discussions were respectful and the decisions and outcomes were richer for the increased degree of participation. In addition, the process helped deepen trust among building partners, and reduce any tensions regarding control and purview, fostering what Huxham and Vangen (2004) refer to as the trust building loop allowing risk taking and trust building, and, if needed, relationship repair. The approach of observation and participation accompanied by clearly articulated decision-making authority was successfully applied to many aspects of this project. Success relied upon strong existing relationships and the willingness of the architectural team, and others, to engage fully in this time-consuming as well as highly consultative and, at times, repetitive process. The approach was supported by a similarly transparent process for recording and sharing meeting notes and decisions. Though initially perceived by some as unnecessary, cumbersome and potentially ripe for conflict, this in fact did not prove to be the case. The initial investment in process and consultation resulted in richer, more durable and more robust choices, decisions and outcomes (Kezar 2014).

Building Partners – Working through Conflicts and Communication It would be inaccurate to suggest, however, that there were no trust issues or conflicts during the lengthy and complex project. At the genesis of the project for example, there was a spate of claim staking in what was perceived as prime building real estate. This threatened valuable library student study space and attempted to privilege administrative visibility over student needs. At other points in the project, language and cultural differences resulted in miscommunication. Some of the situations were minor in terms of impact while others had significant and potentially lasting operational effects. One particularly illustrative example came midway through the project when the phrase public spaces, which was used by the Library to distinguish office and back-of-house functions from open, public, library spaces, began to be (mis)understood as co-owned or unassigned common areas under the purview of all building partners. The issue of terminology was identified quickly and public spaces were more accurately referred to as library spaces from that point on. The confusion was caused both by terminology and the integrated approach to building design which included library space or seating on all floors, with book stacks and back-of-house offices and functions of the Library located on the upper floors. Other building partners were also located

66 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

throughout the facility; however, they did not share the same understanding of the distinction of public versus office as the Library. Those units most certainly had defined work spaces that included offices as well as meeting or teaching/ research spaces, but they were defined areas within the Riddell Library and Learning Centre quite distinct from, though at times adjacent to, library spaces. Access to the building partner work areas required movement through the library spaces, again creating some interesting perceptions of space responsibility and oversight. The issue was exacerbated at times as some units were very concerned about being physically overshadowed, or almost consumed by the Library in the new integrated facility that had a high library profile. Another excellent example of the need to clarify language and terminology was experienced when the Library planned its instructional classroom spaces. For the Library, the term classroom was a deliberate choice to emphasise the embedded instructional role that faculty librarians held and to differentiate between labs and lab instructor roles. When Library classroom needs were communicated to university ITS colleagues by the Project Manager, the decision was made to reduce the number of requested floor plugs as a classroom in ITS terms did not include computers. This miscommunication was identified only days before the concrete flooring was poured. A change order was issued to return the plug and network connection count to the original request and later costly modifications were averted. Changing university leadership and evolving priorities had direct impact on building planning and design, as well as collaboration. The addition and removal of units assigned to the building was of particular importance to working relationships throughout the project. Although made early in the process these decisions resulted at times in a climate of distrust or even conflict. To maintain and build positive relationships the issues had to be sensitively, expeditiously and patiently managed. Open communication, opportunities to build personal and procedural trust and the delineation of clear lines of responsibility and authority allowed for the creation of safe arenas for collaboration: spaces where ideas could be tested, failure could be supported and territoriality and self-interest or self-protection could be safely set aside for the good of the project. In its earliest iteration, the project had downplayed the role of the Library, and had in its place privileged other building partners for what were perceived to be more direct links to the university’s teaching and learning mandate. This view was so pervasive that, in fact, the term library did not appear in the initial building name. Reframing the narrative was essential from the perspective of the Library but it was also very much aligned with the institution’s original aspirations to become a university. A shift in the naming to include library in the title of the facility was a first order of business for the University Librarian. From that



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 67

point it became an issue of demonstrating that the Library played a prominent and active role in the academic life of the university and of students; a demonstration that the Library was as much about teaching, learning and scholarship as any other building partner. This was achieved through clear and consistent messaging and ongoing demonstration that the Library added value, and was a skilled and eager partner clearly focused on student academic success as well as the unique teaching and learning vision of the university. Once the Library reaffirmed its reputation as the heart of the academic mission of the University, and the primary lead in the development of the Riddell Library and Learning Centre, it became extremely important to attend to managing relationships with and among building partners. Some units feared that they would be consumed or subsumed by the Library both as a building and as an academic unit. They feared losing autonomy, identity and prominence on campus. As Bolman and Deal (2003) suggest, groups and individuals working within an organisation will always be positioning themselves to maintain access to scarce resources if the resources offer access to influence, decision-making and finance or relate to profile. Mitigation of positioning, assuaging concerns and ensuring inclusivity were ongoing challenges that required careful use of language and attention to communication and collaborative principles. Incremental positive experiences and attention to building and cultivating trustworthy relationships were helpful, but challenges continued as the building partners embarked on discussions of how to work together in the new space. Concerns over mandate creep, staff responsibility overlaps and the benefit of integration or continued separation of services were ongoing topics of discussion. Issues were also at times exacerbated by cultural and organisational differences among the units. Attending to the politics, power and perceptions at play in these projects is as critical as establishing a shared vision and successful shared outcome. It demands a similar proactive approach to establishing a shared understanding as well as testing, refining and confirming understandings as the project evolves. Allowing the narrative to stray too far from the building vision or principles of collaboration can result in damaged relationships, shallow collaborations and operational decisions that are limiting, confusing and counter to the integrated goals and potential of the building.

68 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

Joint Working Group – Campus Collaborations and Culture The second collaborative environment to highlight is that of the Joint Working Group (JWG), the central planning team consisting of building partners, the project manager, lead architect and key experts from areas such as campus Information Technology Services. Led primarily by the project manager, the group served as the primary communication forum for building design and construction updates. The JWG was a diverse group made up of individuals from units with vastly different mandates, clientele and roles as well as communication styles, cultures and approaches to collaboration and decision-making. Though the diversity of the group presented challenges at times, pre-existing social capital among the members helped to create a network of connections to enable collaboration within the group. While the Building Partner Group (BPG) was a more integrated body with shared intentions and more vested interests in collaborative outcomes, the JWG functioned more as a series of independent experts with points of connection anchored to particular planning requirements of the building project. A more tangible mandate with a limited horizon of activity, namely the completion of the building, gave the JWG a more pragmatic approach to its work and interactions. While a common understanding and vision for the building remained important for the work of the JWG, particularly in regard to decision-making, the degree to which the vision was deeply shared was much less important than for the members of the BPG. Unlike the long-term relationships built through years of BPG planning and programming meetings and discussions, the JWG focussed on topic-specific formal meetings, off-line one-to-one conversations between JWG members as well as more task-oriented and time-bound project decisions. While one-to-one meetings tended to be much more fruitful than open discussions for this group, particularly when gathering specific feedback or making clearly defined decisions, the JWG did provide an important forum for confirming offline unit recommendations and ensuring that individual meeting outcomes were shared back with the larger group. The JWG also ensured that high-level building decisions stemming from construction matters were communicated to all those involved. The JWG also served as the main conduit back to the university-wide steering committee for the project. The impact of cultural differences was perhaps the most pronounced for this group. The mixed nature of the team, particularly the inclusion of academic units and non-academic operational units, notably Facilities Management and ITS, at times created significant communication challenges including confusion over



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 69

semantics (as noted previously) as well as fundamentally different approaches to communication. What was deemed important or necessary to share and determined to be outside of the decision-making purview of the JWG members was often unclear or in dispute. The desire for Facilities Management, for example, to control communication between the building partners and the lead architect was at times challenging and often added a level of needless bureaucracy. Rather than expediting decision-making the perceived obviation of information sharing often added delays and frustration for all members. There was little interest in setting clear terms of reference for the group and at times the JWG appeared to be an overly one-directional and selective or filtered communication mechanism. There were also many instances where academic decision-making processes, based in discussion and debate, came into direct conflict with decision-making practices of other units which were more vested in role-based or top-down decision-making than consensus or collaborative approaches. At times the differences appeared to substantively curtail the flow of information at the formal JWG table, replacing open group discussion, with its potential for disagreement and debate, with more manageable, or perhaps comfortable, one-to-one conversations with individual leads. The shared goal of the JWG group was the construction of a successful library and learning centre facility, ideally on time and on budget. This was an enabling element of the vision shared by the BPG, but the JWG did not share the same vision for transforming teaching and learning as well as scholarship and creating a new academic heart of the university. In fact, the goals of key members of the JWG could at times be viewed as in direct conflict with the vision for the Riddell Library and Learning Centre. For example, a core mandate of Facilities Management was often budgetary restraint, while the central mandate of the Library was innovative support for student academic success. While these are certainly not mutually exclusive goals, it is important to understand the perspectives that are shaping the nature of discussion. Highlighting and remaining true to the project vision in these circumstances is as essential to recognising that there may be very different and equally important paths to reaching this vision. Identifying shared interests and points of alignment is key in resolving some of these seemingly opposing approaches. It is equally important to note that conflict often does play a critical role in the success of complex projects, particularly when diverse teams are working in collaboration. Conflict should not be viewed as a negative to be avoided in these circumstances, but rather as a natural outcome of deep collaborations. It can be viewed as a constructive controversy that allows for the exploration of alternative ideas and solutions (Paulus 2003). A place where differences in expertise and mandate can help enrich the outcome rather than distract from its goals.

70 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

As Bolman and Deal (2003) also point out, conflict often occurs at the boundaries and interfaces of group differences. This was most certainly evident in the operations of the JWG where conflict and communication challenges seemed to be occurring with more frequency than at other tables. The challenges tended to stem from extremely different approaches to communication and tolerance levels for discussion and debate, resulting in frustration among members, declining trust and at times decisions based on inaccurate or incomplete information and consultation. In order to mitigate the challenges, it became necessary to seek oneto-one meetings with key members of the JWG, particularly the project manager and lead architect to ensure timely information flow. Activating the informal networks through personal interactions helped advance the planning and construction work but also created opportunities for relationship building among the team members, particularly across divisional units. While such discussions were initially viewed with suspicion and even concern when it came to direct communication with the lead architect, a commitment to information sharing and open communication, even in off-line discussions, became a new trusted standard.

The Working Groups and Inter- and Intra-Unit Collaboration As noted earlier, the Riddell Library and Learning Centre project successfully employed an ad hoc working group (WG) model for managing the more complex and detailed aspects of the building and integrated services planning. The working groups were created to engage internal experts, faculty champions and other interested Library team members in the development and detailed planning of particular programmes, spaces, services or activities. Working groups were constructed to achieve maximum Library team engagement and ensure that key aspects of the building were carefully planned and ready for implementation. From research and use case scenario development to policy and procedure creation, staffing recommendations or software and hardware proposals, or project planning for the move, each working group had a clearly articulated set of goals to achieve within established timelines. Terms of reference were created for each working group and regular meetings and reporting ensured that WG progress was on track and integrated. Working groups also became core to preparing the Library team for change. Not only were members engaged in planning and decision-making enhancing agency in, and support for, change, these working groups became important intra-unit tools for communicating and managing change across the Library. They



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 71

helped reduce silos within the Library, improved librarian/staff communication and created a Library team more able to manage the peaks and valleys of the change process, both leading into the move as well as post-move. Most working groups also included members from other building partner units, which helped foster an integrated approach to service innovation and delivery, one of the goals of the new Riddell Library and Learning Centre. They also provided opportunities to build inter-unit collaborative social networks across building partner teams. Early in the project, it became evident that although building partner leads had spent considerable time working together, team members of the respective building partner units had had little opportunity for interaction. In fact, building partner teams, in many respects, had little awareness of each other’s work, staff and/or faculty, cultures, organisational structures, priorities or in some cases even core mandates. To begin to build a sense of community for the new building an all staff event for building partners was held, which included a series of presentations providing overviews of the work of each building partner, followed by mixed table discussions. In the group, share-back tables were asked to identify what they had learned about their new colleagues, what was surprising, where they might collaborate and other questions they might have about living and working together. Although it was challenging to get almost 200 people together it was an incredibly productive and worthwhile afternoon spent sharing information and getting to know one another. Many excellent questions were raised and the session led to plans for building partner communication tools and ongoing invitations to join each other’s social events. These proved to be important community building opportunities; they provided teams with a better understanding of neighbours and how to develop a shared service model for the facility which relied on a system of referrals, programming awareness and a commitment to service integration going forward.

Stakeholder Consultations – Collaborating with Users The final collaborative planning environment to discuss in the context of the project is that of external stakeholder consultation, specifically faculty engagement and consultations. As a key user group and important champion community, faculty members were important contributors to helping shape and imagine transformative learning spaces. While Library faculty and staff members remained the experts in library-related needs and functions, stakeholders, par-

72 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

ticularly students and faculty, were recognised as the experts in identifying and articulating their needs for successful learning, teaching and research. Faculty consultation was identified early on as an important element in the success of the Riddell Library and Learning Centre. Consultation included inviting key faculty members to serve as expert advisors on working groups, as well as engaging faculty members from across the university in ongoing discussions about the features of the new Riddell Library and Learning Centre. It was essential to ensure faculty champions were ready and eager to work in the new teaching and learning spaces as soon as the building was open. The spaces needed to be activated so other faculty members could begin to consider how they might innovate their teaching and enrich student learning. The faculty champions needed to be leaders in innovation, be willing to experiment with new technologies and modes of teaching, and be respected by their colleagues for their expertise and leadership. Finding the right champions from across a range of disciplines was key in the success of the new discovery and R&D teaching spaces, such as the planned immersion studio (360 projection immersion space), the visualisation classroom and visualisation ideas lounge (large scale viz wall with touch screen and interactive display) and the maker studio (creation and discovery fabrication zone). While not every faculty member would be willing to take on a champion role, it was possible, with considered invitations and the right level of engagement and support, to find those willing to act as mentors and thought leaders for their colleague. For many faculty members, they required concrete examples of how new tools, spaces, technologies and ways of teaching might be most effectively used and leveraged. Or, at the very least, as was discovered they needed to see the spaces and technologies for themselves before they could fully imagine what might be possible. Finding champions to help demonstrate what is possible is an effective way of ensuring the greatest degree of adoption. As in the case of other collaborative design environments, networks were leveraged to advance awareness and connect with champions. Countless presentations, focus groups, social gatherings, building updates, email updates and guest speakers, though useful, did not produce the anticipated level of faculty enthusiasm. It was not until the Library engaged in strategically timed discussions between librarian liaisons and their faculty colleagues within departments that increased levels of interest became visible, thereby supporting Kezar’s (2014) theory regarding the power of tapping into existing campus networks for successful change. It is important to keep in mind that while faculty may be enthusiastic about a new library facility some may view new tools and transformative learning spaces as more of a demand on their time, disruptive to their teaching approach, or even misaligned with their understanding of the University or Library. To help



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 73

address these very real concerns the Library ensured new expertise and support positions were created and filled prior to opening to assist faculty members to work with the visualisation and immersion technology as well as the makerspace tools and technologies. Reaching out to find ways to engage, educate and bring faculty into the network of supporters is critical for success and required a long view.

Conclusion Mount Royal University’s experience planning and designing the new Riddell Library and Learning Centre highlights some of the opportunities and challenges encountered when working on intensely collaborative projects. Planning and designing a successful joint use academic library facility, or other similar multi-stakeholder facilities, requires the commitment of all partners and the ongoing mindful cultivation of open communication and respectful collaborative processes that take into account cultural differences, evolving political contexts, and the value of a shared project narrative based on a clear and resilient vision. Through this work it has been demonstrated that personal relationships are key to building trust, and that trust, both procedural and personal, is essential for rich and successful collaborations. The lessons learned can be applied to other multi-stakeholder facilities or projects that require or would benefit from deep collaboration. While every institutional context is unique, the principles discussed in this chapter can be applied to other building projects, whether in new design, renovation or post-occupancy operations. Regardless of how collaborations might be structured or tended, it is important to keep in mind the value of open and continued communication and of bringing the right voices and views to the table. While a framework for formal communication and decision-making is essential, it must include the right stakeholders and empower them with both the authority and responsibility to contribute to key decisions. There also needs to be opportunity for informal communication among collaborators so conflicts can be managed and resolved, and relationships created and fostered. While building projects, particularly on academic campuses, often have a tightly controlled and compartmentalised approach to communication and decision-making, the success of this project proposes another way forward. Rather than limit the ability of building stakeholders and partners to directly inform the building form and function by tightly limiting direct contact with architects, designers, facilities management teams and others, the project recognised both the need for formal and informal communication and

74 

 John Souleles and Carol Shepstone

the value that sharing expertise and ideas more freely and widely would have on the project outcomes. Designing a library and learning facility is an inherently social process that will ultimately inform, influence and impact human interactions, learning and community. Although collaborative processes are complex, nuanced, challenging, and often time-consuming, the outcomes of deep collaboration are positive and more robust and long-lasting. The relationships nurtured over the course of the 10-year building design and planning process not only sustained the project through many institutional changes and many planning challenges, but also created an environment in which building partners were able to work together to create a successful learning and teaching building from inception through construction, and into opening and operation. The success of the collaborations was realised in both design and smooth operation. It is hoped they will have a transformative impact on the teaching and student learning, as well as a positive impact on the Library, other building partners, and overall University capacity for collaboration going forward. Additional research into the impact of this collaboration on the long-term service integration among building partners, on the academic success of students due to these collaborations and the overall capacity for collaboration would be extremely interesting subsequent projects.

References Bollman, G., and F. Krings. 2016. “Workgroup Climates and Employees’ Counterproductive Work Behaviours: A Social-Cognitive Perspective.” Journal of Management Studies 53, no. 2: 184–209. Bolman, L. G., and T. E. Deal. 2003. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, 3rd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Coleman, J. S. 1988. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American Journal of Sociology 94: 95–120. Dornseif, K. A. 2001. “Joint-Use Libraries: Balancing Autonomy and Cooperation.” Resource Sharing & Information Networks 15, no. 1–2: 103–114. Huxham, C., and S. E. Vangen. 2004. Managing to Collaborate: The Theory and Practice of Collaborative Advantage. London: Routledge. Innes, J. E., and D. E. Booher.1999. “Consensus Building and Complex Adaptive Systems: A Framework for Evaluating Collaborative Planning.” Journal of the American Planning Association 65, no. 4: 412–423. Kezar, A. 2014 .“Higher Education Change and Social Networks: A Review of Research.” Journal of Higher Education 85, no. 1: 91–124. Lippincott, J. K. 2004. “New Library Facilities: Opportunities for Collaboration.” Resource Sharing & Information Networks. 17, no. 1–2): 147–157.



4 Collaborating for Success: People, Places, Form and Function 

 75

Lippincott, J. K. 2009. “Information Commons: Surveying the Landscape.” In A Field Guide to the Information Commons, edited by C. Forrest, and M. Halbert. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press: 18–31. McNicol, S. 2008. Joint-Use Libraries: Libraries for the Future. Oxford: Chandos Publishing. Mount Royal College. 2004. The Heart of Learning: A New Library and Learning Centre for Mount Royal: A Proposal for the Government of Alberta. Calgary: Mount Royal College. https:// mtroyal.ca/cs/groups/public/documents/pdf/provp_library_proposal.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. O’ Reilly, C. A., and J. A. Chatman. 1996. “Culture as Social Control: Corporations, Cults, and Commitment.” Research in Organization Behavior 18: 157–200. Paulus, P. B., and B. A. Nijstad. 1971. Group Creativity: Innovation Through Collaboration. New York: Oxford University Press. Veles, N., M-A. Carter, and H. Boon. 2018. “Complex Collaboration Champions: University Third Space Professionals Working Together Across Borders.” In Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 1–11. DOI: 10.1080/13603108.2018.1428694. Whitchurch, C. 2010. “Convergence and Divergence in Professional Identities.” In Academic and Professional Identities in Higher Education: The Challenges of a Diversifying Workforce, edited by G. Gordon, and C. Whitchurch, 167–183. New York: Routledge. Whitchurch, C. 2012. Reconstructing Identities in Higher Education: The Rise of the ‘Third Space’ Professionals. Abingdon: Routledge.

Part 2: Collaborating for Cultural Change Exemplar libraries find ways to connect with their entire communities and provide places that strengthen social bonds. This section shares ways the library building, and the design process itself, can be catalysts for cultural change.

Traci Engel Lesneski

5 M  adison Central Library: The Art-Infused Library Abstract: The age of information abundance has dramatically changed the skills needed to succeed. Basic reading, writing and arithmetic remain foundational; however, beyond that foundation exists a need to develop multiple literacies and prowess in critical thinking, communication, collaboration and creativity. Often referred to as the Four Cs (National Education Association 2012), these skills are fundamental to problem-solving and innovation, which drive our economy and will lead us through the next wave of the ongoing technological revolution. People of all ages and backgrounds who do not have access to places or tools to learn and practice the Four Cs in their daily lives rely on the library’s resources for this access, which has led to an influx of spaces and programmes supporting hands-on learning, making, tinkering, and creating. The Madison Public Library in Wisconsin, USA, used its Central Library building project as an opportunity to re-invent the library and its place in the Madison community. The project tapped into the arts and culture ethos of the community and opened pathways to innovative partnerships, programmes and spaces that support citizens’ mastery of the Four Cs. Keywords: Four Cs; Makerspaces; Library buildings – Design and construction; Learning; Critical thinking; Libraries and education

The Library’s Role in Fostering the Four Cs A building design project requires a future-oriented perspective to unlock innovation in modes of staffing, programme offerings and services. It can spur conversations about how to best support the needs of a campus or civic community so its members can thrive. The age of information abundance has dramatically changed the skills needed to succeed. Basic reading, writing and arithmetic remain foundational; however, beyond that foundation exists a need to develop multiple literacies and prowess in critical thinking, communication, collaboration and creativity. Often referred to as the Four Cs (National Education Association 2012), these skills are fundamental to problem-solving and innovation, which drive our economy and will lead us through the next wave of the ongoing technological revolution. People of all ages and backgrounds who do not have access to places or tools to learn and practice the Four Cs in their daily lives rely on the library’s resources for this access. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-006

80 

 Traci Engel Lesneski

The twenty-first century library building is well suited to support growth in the Four Cs. As cultural hubs for their communities, libraries should inspire and encourage new ways of thinking. Twenty-first century libraries offer inspiration through materials, programming, visual arts and maker activities. Serendipitous encounters between people who might not meet otherwise can trigger thinking and connections. Public art can stimulate new ideas (Figure 5.1). Buildings that offer through art or hands-on learning opportunities engender repeat visits to take advantage of their myriad of offerings.

Figure 5.1: Public art abounds in the library: Heath Matysek-Snyder’s Stack I.25 (photo by Laura Swimmer).

Text, tech, tactility, talent and tools: libraries are filled with resources. Buildings that facilitate easy access to these resources empower users to direct their own experiences and foster growth in the Four Cs. This self-direction is best seen in makerspaces, where innovation thrives (Figure 5.2). These spaces invite people to interact with individuals who possess talents they may not otherwise encounter in their daily lives. Passionate staff and community members encourage dialogue and stimulate creativity through engagement in exciting tactile investigations. Libraries offer proximity to innovators by providing meeting spaces; workplaces for local start-ups, co-working individuals and professionals; and research areas for many. The buzz of a hackathon in a meeting room, or hype surrounding



5 Madison Central Library: The Art-Infused Library 

 81

Figure 5.2: The Bubbler Room accommodates myriad making activities (photo by Laura Swimmer).

an author’s talk, contributes to a library’s energy. Twenty-first century libraries house complementary partners that bring new people to the building and introduce fresh ways of defining libraries. Innovators can motivate one another through this proximity. Proximity can be inspiring, but sometimes people need solitude or a cup of coffee in the library café to crack a particular problem. A change of scenery can help ideas coalesce or activate the imagination. A well-designed library offers a variety of spaces, from vibrant, open collaborative areas to quiet nooks and private study areas. Having the flexibility to move between these spaces to suit individual tasks at hand, or mood, helps the creative process (Figure 5.3). A garden or gallery where people can lose themselves for a time offers the ability to rejuvenate. Unlike home, office or school, the library does not prescribe an expected activity. In the library, users can find freedom from the baggage that lingers in the places of our typical routine (for example, dishes in the sink or budget figures due next week). Escaping from typical surroundings can open the mind and provide fuel for innovation. Attaining a state of flow, critical for creativity, requires a stress-free environment and confidence in the ability to complete a task. A library provides the freedom to experiment with ideas or new technologies, assistance

82 

 Traci Engel Lesneski

when needed and anonymity. Furniture that allows self-organisation helps remove boundaries and support brainstorming and collaboration.

Figure 5.3: A library’s variety of spaces bolsters the creative process (photo by Laura Swimmer).

Art at the Heart The design team approached Madison Public Library’s Central Library re-imagination project from the context of twenty-first century skills-building. The renovation/addition project presented an opportunity to create a place that helps staff and library users practice the Four Cs as well as develop digital, visual and cultural literacies. Expanding the Madison community’s relationship with the arts helped the library achieve these goals. Repositioning the library as a hub for creativity and collaborative learning started during the building programming phase, with critical conversations about the role of art in a twenty-first century library. Recognising the strong arts base in the community, the design team saw an opportunity to create a library grounded in the existing community ethos around art. At a minimum, the building would accommodate the library’s significant pieces of existing art, include



5 Madison Central Library: The Art-Infused Library 

 83

new permanent commissioned pieces, embed art in the architecture itself and include a formal gallery to support rotating exhibits by regional artists. The design team encouraged Madison Public Library (MPL) leadership to expand beyond these offerings to include spaces for hands-on learning and making, as well as informal gathering spaces that foster staff creativity in programming. Three spaces in particular emerged: a room for audio-visual exploration, a room for analogue exploration and a flexible space in a distinctive location that could be used as a reading room or for programmes and events. Very little about the three spaces was defined beyond a need for flexibility as the design team searched for an advocate for these spaces within the library organisation. Without an advocate, the design team found itself defending the need for these spaces numerous times throughout the design process to various constituencies, including the library itself. Finally, during a meeting to go over requirements for the gallery with a library staff member who was the acting gallery coordinator, and a practicing artist, the spaces for making and serendipitous programming found their champion. The initiative proved to be the beginning of rich and multi-layered collaborations between MPL, the design team, the arts community and the public. The next step involved mapping all the ways the building would support exhibiting and making art (Figure 5.4). The building would include commissioned art to be displayed indoors and outside and a formal gallery for exhibitions by high-quality national artists. Wall space throughout the building would be available for two-dimensional works. The design team sought opportunities for certain functional elements of the building to be designed in artful ways, such as divider screens that closed off portions of the building for afterhours events. The design included space to support digital media exploration as well as audio and visual making. Analogue exploration would support drop-in making, hands-on workshops and artists-in-residence. Importantly, each floor of the building would include several of these functions to create a truly art-infused library.

84 

 Traci Engel Lesneski

Figure 5.4: The architects imbued art and making throughout the building (graphic by MSR Design).



5 Madison Central Library: The Art-Infused Library 

 85

Changing Community Perceptions The existing building posed complications for creating a hub for creativity and collaboration. It had a severe identity issue within the community. It was not seen as a place for creativity, or even a place where most community members were inclined to spend time. Built in 1965, the uninviting building lacked daylight and was steeped in an outdated model of library service (Figure 5.5).

Figure 5.5: Pre-renovation, the building was not a community destination (photo by John Schott).

After the building was emptied and prior to the demolition and construction phase, the library threw a party to generate excitement for the project and change the public’s perception of the existing structure. Dubbed Bookless, the one-day event featured local artists who were invited to create art with items remaining in the building after the library moved out and the serviceable furnishings and equipment were sold or absorbed into other city departments. Items remaining included defunct furniture, card-catalogue cards and miscellaneous shelving accessories. Over 100 local artists participated while over 5,000 community members attended the event. Attendees were encouraged to create their own art

86 

 Traci Engel Lesneski

on the building’s interior surfaces and engage with the artists. Another 2,500 attended the evening fundraiser, which raised $30,000 for the building’s capital campaign. Bookless confirmed that the concept of the art-infused library would tap into community interests. Bookless had numerous impacts. It generated partnerships and alliances with local artists and companies who would become key collaborators with MPL (Figure 5.6), as they activated the renovated building’s spaces with artsbased programmes and hands-on learning. Rather than duplicate offerings in the community, the library forged mutually beneficial partnerships that became a gateway to deeper community member engagement with the partner. The library was able to offer more diverse hands-on programmes and the partners benefited from increased awareness in the community about their offerings and capabilities.

Figure 5.6: Niki Johnson’s “Stacked,” reimagined from her Bookless installation (photo by Lara Swimmer).



5 Madison Central Library: The Art-Infused Library 

 87

The Bookless event also provided the design team with leads for local artists to consider in the quest to expand the library’s permanent art collection. As part of its services, the design team commissioned new art for the building to augment the five significant pieces on display in the building prior to renovation. The design team discovered three of its six commissioned artists through the pieces they created for Bookless. The building mapping of commissioned works became more specific as spaces were identified for each of the artists to create new iterations of their Bookless installations. In addition to these locations, other opportunities for permanent art were identified, including large-scale wall graphics for three levels of the building and furnishings for the children’s suite. A call for proposals was issued by the design team for the remaining installations. The design team selected local artists for the large-scale graphics and furnishings pieces and worked with them on their final installations. Public art provides delight and provokes critical thought as well as dialogue. It provides identity for an organisation or place and humanises a building. Public art by local artists contributes to the regional story and sense of community pride and place. Inspiring creativity in others by activating the imagination, public art plays a critical role in successful art-infused libraries and supporting the Four Cs. The most notable outcome of Bookless was the birth of the now world-renowned Bubbler programme, which would have a home base in the renovated central library’s analogue making room, now named the Bubbler Room. Working with Head Bubblerarian Trent Miller (the gallery coordinator-turned-advocate for making in the renovated building and mastermind of Bookless), the design team created a space that would gracefully support artists-in-residence, drop-in making, workshops and lectures.

Rooms as Tools in Creativity and Collaboration The Bubbler Room is a versatile tool for the library, equally well-suited for messy activities such as screen-printing and paper-making to clean activities such as creative writing and 3D printing. Central to its success is that it is designed to be non-precious, to foster creativity through assurance that the room cannot be ruined through exploration (Figure 5.7). The finish materials are highly durable and cleanable. The flooring is recycled rubber which accommodates pushing carts laden with materials for drop-in making. The rubber is also comfortable for standing, which is important in spaces created for a wide variety of hands-on creative activities. The furnishings are flexible, and a storage room immediately adjacent facilitates ease in clearing the floor of its furnishings.

88 

 Traci Engel Lesneski

Miller hired a local manufacturer to create tables that are height-adjustable, durable and on casters to facilitate the various activities and reconfigurations of the room. Key to the Bubbler Room’s success is the provision of convenient storage for source materials, a large sink for clean-up and ample access to power. Visual connections to adjacent spaces of the library and its urban surroundings help advertise the making activities and draw in participants while providing makers with access to daylight. Walls not holding magnetic whiteboards are covered with acoustic material to help contain noise created by makerly exuberance. Whiteboards and wall-mounted computer monitors help with presentation, display and brainstorming.

Figure 5.7: The Bubbler Room design: highly flexible and non-precious (photos by Madison Public Library).

The Bubbler Room is also used for the library’s highly successful artist-in-residence programme. Since re-opening in Autumn 2013, MPL’s Central Library has hosted nearly 30 artists-in-residence. Each of the artists is on site at the Central Library for one or two months, during which time they practice their art, hold workshops for the public, demonstrate their craft and host various events related



5 Madison Central Library: The Art-Infused Library 

 89

to their art. The art created by attendees of the workshops and events is regularly displayed throughout the library building. The building’s digital exploration room, called the Media  Lab, supports exploration in digital media production such as animation, photo editing, audio design, and graphic design. The room includes a green screen with camera and lights and a sound booth for recording music and spoken word. Many community members have created podcasts, aural histories and music videos, contributing content to society and honing their digital literacy skills. The popularity of the Media Lab necessitated hiring a staff person with digital skills, who was sourced through a local college focused on entertainment and media arts. In addition to this staff member, a roster of community volunteers offers particular relevant expertise, another example of innovative collaboration on the art-infused platform. A principal success of the renovated building is the non-programmed flexible space. With views of the city and an outdoor patio overlooking the green roof, the so-named Madison Room provides inspiration and respite during parts of the day. Immediately adjacent to the formal gallery space and large divisible meeting rooms, the space also serves as a pre-function area for opening exhibit receptions, public and private community event space for weddings and other social engagements, and pop-up arts-based activity area. The Madison Room accommodates music, fashion and a wide range of digital and analogue activities.

Conclusion Collaboration and creativity are embedded in Madison Public Library’s art-infused central library (Figure 5.8). Innovative programming offered throughout the building and partnerships with community organisations support the expanded literacies needed in the twenty-first century. Exuberant making activates the building. Beyond the formal areas for display and permanent installations within the library, everyday spaces showcase patron-made art. Once despised by its community, the building has become a hub for collaboration and community gathering, with art at its heart.

90 

 Traci Engel Lesneski

Figure 5.8: The art-infused library (photo by Madison Public Library and Laura Swimmer).

References Madison Public Library. 2018. “Bookless: Once in a Lifetime.” Washington, D.C.: Urban Libraries Council. https://www.urbanlibraries.org/bookless--once-in-a-lifetimeinnovation-178.php?page_id=40. Accessed March 8, 2018. Madison Public Library. 2018. “What is the Bubbler?” http://madisonbubbler.org. Accessed March 8, 2018. National Education Association. 2012. Preparing 21st Century Students for a Global Society: An Educator’s Guide to the “Four Cs”. Alexandria, VA: National Education Association. http:// www.nea.org/assets/docs/A-Guide-to-Four-Cs.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2018.

Marie Østergård

6 D  okk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis: a Mash-up Library, a Democratic Space, a City Lounge or a Space for Diversity? Abstract: Dokk1, the new Main Library in the city of Aarhus, Denmark has become a central hub for the people of Aarhus. By working intensely with numerous new and untraditional partnerships through all levels of the organisation, the character and spaces in Dokk1 have changed the identity of the library forever. These new approaches have turned the library into a city square, with all the transparency, diversity and mutual ownership that follow such a change.  Keywords: Library planning; Library buildings – Design and construction; Public libraries; Collaboration; Library use studies; Creative thinking

Introduction Dokk1, the Main Library in the city of Aarhus, has become a new place and vibrant space in the city.  With  approximately 3,800  visitors a day in a city of 300,000 people, Dokk1 has become a central hub for the people of Aarhus (Figure 6.1). Inaugurated in June 2015, Dokk1 is open seven days a week, 82 opening hours per week, with 25 hours of these unstaffed. The building is 28,000 square metres in size with 18,000 square metres dedicated to the library and citizens’ services, 10,000 square metres for rental spaces and automatic parking space for 1,000 cars.  By working intensely with  numerous  new and untraditional partnerships through all levels of the organisation, the character and spaces in Dokk1 have changed the identity of the library forever. These new approaches, which were taken in order to develop new workflows and services, have turned the library into a city square, with all the transparency, diversity and mutual ownership that follow such a change.  When we look at how users approach the spaces, programmes and services, a significant change can be noticed. Throughout the planning and building process, the focus has been on creating a library for people and not books, a space that is organised on the principles of human needs and where shelves make space instead of taking up space. Dokk1 provides a space for new programme formats to thrive along with a substantial increase in the number of spaces for meeting, making, learning, collaboration, contemplation and play. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-007

92 

 Marie Østergård

Figure 6.1: Dokk1 (photo by Aarhus Public Libraries).

Rethinking the Library’s Role in an Urban Context  Aarhus, a waterfront city situated on the Bay of Aarhus, is the second largest city in Denmark. It has a large university and substantial number of  networks  and start-ups in the areas of culture, innovation and sustainability. The City of Aarhus wished to develop the industrial harbour areas and made the decision that the new prominent waterfront areas should be for everyone and not exclusively for expensive apartments or offices. At the same time, there was an expressed need to create a hinge that would connect the city to the water and change the flow of city movement. With a new public library as the centrepiece of the vision, the



6 Dokk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis:  

 93

strategy was developed to pull people to this new part of the city, even before it had all been turned into a new and attractive city space. Thus, Dokk1 became the heart of the large waterfront development project, with the goal of reclaiming the space for the public after years of industrial activity. Dokk1 has become a natural hub. It is situated at the crossroads of the green recreational route running along the waterfront and the promenade leading the public from the city centre towards the sea. Dokk1’s glass facades afford 360degree views inside and out, connecting the library to its surroundings. Europa Square spreads underneath the building where travellers arrive and meet in an area characterised by activity and with public art at its centre. The bastion upon which the library is situated provides 360-degree views of the surroundings. A playground landscape for families of Aarhus wraps around the library, supporting the vision of it being a special place for children and families. The newly opened light rail has a stop under Dokk1, making it easily accessible by foot, bike, car and public transportation. Dokk1  is a Danish low energy class building 2015. Solar panels, sea water cooling, LED lighting and low thermal transmission glass are key elements in this effort. With its close connection to the urban setting, the library has become a  dynamic urban hub, placed at the crossroads of culture, infrastructure and  city-flows.  Inside,  Dokk1  is an open landscape that facilitates learning, knowledge sharing, innovation and a sense of community. It is a covered democratic urban square that provides a flexible framework for contemporary life. Its open spaces flow seamlessly into one another, inviting the user on a journey of self-discovery. 

Conceptual Transformation From the very beginning of  the preparation  processes,  it became  clear that  a strong vision was needed that was rooted in the specific community needs of Aarhus (Figure 6.2). Through many conversations in think tanks and strategy groups consisting of a wide range people from across the city, the vision for Dokk1 was boiled down to four statements:  –– A space for co-operation –– A place for dialogue, knowledge, ideas and inspiration –– An open informal learning space –– A unique place for children and families

94 

 Marie Østergård

Figure 6.2: Developing Dokk1’s vision took many think tanks and strategy groups (photo by Per Bille).

The Dokk1 vision also demonstrated a shift in the general perception of a library. The vision did not mention books or technology but insisted on focusing on interactions and human growth.  When building a new library, one builds for 100 years, not for the next 10. Knowing already that this might be a long project, it was imperative that the vision could stand the test of time and ensure a relevant library throughout changes of media formats and technological inventions. The vision needed to focus on the one thing that is consistent and that every library should be about – people. Dokk1 marks a  library  paradigm shift from a focus on physical media to a place for people and relationships.  The intention of the vision is to represent a new generation of modern hybrid libraries. It is about giving the space to the citizens and letting them leave traces, inspiration and information for others to use. Dokk1 has become the place where citizens and various city organisations establish new connections and relationships between ideas, knowledge and people. Instead of being a space for media, space has become the media.



6 Dokk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis:  

 95

Partnerships and Programming  Dokk1 has provided the framework for numerous services and cooperative activities created in  partnership  with organisations, institutions, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and groups of citizens (Figure 6.3). Before moving to Dokk1, the library established a partnership strategy which defined the reasons for partnerships and the areas within which the library would focus its partnership work. Building on many years of research, which explored the benefits of and opportunities for establishing partnerships, it became evident that close cooperation with others, involvement with the community and a clear strategy, as well as a pragmatic view of enhancing  library  competencies, would be essential for the success of Dokk1, as well as for the continuous evolution of the library and its role as a central community hub.

Figure 6.3: Dokk1’s programming relies heavily on partnerships (photo by HAY Festival).

Partnerships in Dokk1 are always about creating services and programmes for citizens that could not be done without the skill set of partnership organisations. At the same time, it has become clear that partnerships in many ways are the drivers of library development and new opportunities. Partnerships are an essential part of the programming in Dokk1. Every month there are approximately 120 individual programmes and events in Dokk1,

96 

 Marie Østergård

of which approximately 60% are carried out by or with partners. To be able to perform this amount of activities in partnerships, it is essential that all members of staff can create and keep partnerships as well as transform the partnerships into programming. Partnerships are always about relationships and it is imperative that they are always kept on the operational level.  Staff are  constantly developing new partnerships or trimming existing partnerships  to  maintain and develop services, programming and competencies for the benefit of the users.

User Involvement and Design Thinking User involvement has been a key issue throughout the development of Dokk1. To develop something that was to change the library concept and be in accordance with community needs, the knowledge required needed to come from various knowledge arenas, and through the involvement of numerous users and networks. From the vision and core values over the competition programme to the actual design of spaces and services, thousands of citizens, politicians, professionals, library colleagues, students, architects and engineers have directly been involved in the development of Dokk1. The process had three development principles: –– User  involvement: essential for bringing the relevant knowledge into the project at the relevant time. –– Interdisciplinary cooperation: necessary to develop new solutions and create synergy between knowledge domains in both the construction of the building and concept as well as the services and programming. –– Last responsible moment: decisions should  always  be made at the last responsible minute to incorporate as much knowledge and development as possible before making determining decisions for the future. This principle demanded an  iterative  process of concurrent development, where themes were dealt with in each phase of the project but with an increasing level of detail as the project proceeded.  Over  many years, Aarhus Public Libraries have experimented with numerous  formats of user involvement, design thinking  and interactions  in  its constant development of the library concept. Before and throughout the process of Dokk1 there was a substantial build-up of knowledge based on  user-involving experiments in Aarhus as well as the brilliant works of colleagues in other libraries and institutions, nationally and internationally. The knowledge gained



6 Dokk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis:  

 97

has been embedded in the design process for Dokk1. We operated with two parallel development tracks to get as much knowledge from users as possible and at the same time making sure the building process was moving along and receiving the right input. Track one was the Library’s  Transformation Lab (https://www.aakb.dk/ english/transformation-lab). This space was set up in the middle of the existing library, where services, furniture and ideas for Dokk1 were prototyped and tested. It was a living lab for both staff and users that provided the possibility for everyone to experiment and learn. Within the same mind-set, it was decided that all project and development work throughout the 12-year project period should be evaluated in respect to learnings that could be used in the future library. Track two was the development and involvement in the building process itself, working on solutions to specific construction issues, in cooperation with users, architects and engineers  at every stage of the project.  User groups were formed around topics such as acoustics, accessibility, lighting and wayfinding, and solutions were developed, discussed and tested (Figure 6.4).  The findings were  integrated into the project and contributed to the massive knowledge build-up for Dokk1 to draw from, during project development and through continuous development after the opening. 

Figure 6.4: Design thinking workshop (photo by Aarhus Public Libraries).

98 

 Marie Østergård

User involvement and design thinking was and still is a large part of the way Aarhus Public Libraries operates, in smaller incremental changes as well as larger and more radical developments.  For  a number of  years,  Aarhus Public Libraries have partnered with Chicago Public Libraries in projects supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on how to develop a stronger mind-set on design thinking in libraries. The Design Thinking Toolkit (IDEO 2015) was a product from the first project and published in 2015. It has been translated into numerous languages and is used around the world. This shows that design thinking can have a true impact in developing libraries that align with community needs.  It has become evident that applying design thinking methods to development and work in general not only improves quality but causes the community ownership of the library and its spaces  to grow significantly.  When the library creates physical spaces for open co-creation, users take ownership of the spaces and the library increasingly becomes a community hub for innovation.

Redefinition of Spaces Working with users in the design process and the  Transformation Lab made it clear that users and partners are eager to engage. Spaces and staff communicate co-creation. Thus, the concept of un-programmed spaces is incorporated and continuously worked with in the library. Although a lot of libraries work with spaces that are flexible and can be transformed, what can  actually be  done in those spaces is often invisible to the users. It is important to work with the indicators of flexibility to stimulate users and partners in getting their own ideas for activities and space usage. In the user initiatives in Dokk1, the benefits of having spaces that are open and not fully designed have become obvious. The library space does not belong to the library staff anymore but to users and partners. It has become a space where people can leave their own fingerprints. For library  staff,  these spaces make it possible to experiment and prototype and quickly adjust according to user inputs. A strong part of the vision of Dokk1 is its role as a place for human growth and development. The building is promoting and enhancing the interactive and flexible elements of learning, creating and co-operating through a multitude of open and closed  areas and activities.  Flexibility is  in many ways a  key principle in the construction and in the running of Dokk1. The building does not have load-bearing walls. Instead it is erected on nine concrete cores and numerous



6 Dokk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis:  

 99

concrete pillars. With its large open layout, spaces are defined by furniture, shelving and activities. Everything is designed to be able to change, be modified or change function (Hapel et al. 2015). The shelves form an interior structure that creates spaces and oases instead of taking up space. The layout of the shelves creates a diversity of spaces that can provide different arenas for a variety of usage throughout the building. The oases can quickly change mood and purpose through furniture and activity and cater for a large diversity of events, learning and being (Figure 6.5). In many  ways,  the library interior has been conceptualised as an inner city. The shelves are the buildings that create streets and squares, the grid that causes specific flow and movement. The spaces between the shelves are the squares and parks, where public life happens, and new meetings and opportunities occur.

Figure 6.5: Spaces quickly change in purpose and mood through flexible furnishings (photo by Aarhus Public Libraries).

The oases and flexibility in spaces come in many shapes. Some spaces change content and setting every  day and others less frequently.  There are numerous small and large stages and makerspaces for adults, children and tweens, with the principle that the spaces can completely change content with very few moves as they are basically open spaces programmed by the activity and the furniture. The two large multi-purpose halls are flexibility incorporated. They have flat floors,

100 

 Marie Østergård

can be divided, change direction, facilitate projection on many walls, change acoustics, create a large diversity of lightscapes, be open or closed to the outside areas, while even the digital ceiling in the foyer can change content.  The  Transformation Lab  is  a prototyping space for interactive activities, to test creative ideas with partners and users, which changes according to its activities and inhabitants. The Ramp is a five-step huge staircase. Each step can have its own environment and  change content as desired. The entire ramp can be changed into one stage with seating for 400 people and used for conferences or debates.  The Box is a large space for children and families. It is a soundproof room for physical play that changes theme over time: for example, street playing, table tennis and soft tactile environment.  Together with the many large and small oases, these spaces form a library that users and partners can influence endlessly and that changes every time you visit, in a robust architecture that can absorb these changes and make them even stronger.

Technology as Interaction  Dokk1 represents a new generation of modern hybrid libraries. One of the core values of Dokk1 is  to create a building that bridges citizens, technology and knowledge. Empowering citizens through  inspiration, knowledge and learning in multiple analogue and digital media formats is crucial. Technology is part of the whole building (Figure 6.6). Users are exposed to new technologies that invite them to interact and leave traces and information for others to use.  Through our prototyping and  tests,  we learned that  technology plays an important part in re-inventing the physical library and that it is often the simple techniques that  produce the  greatest impact.  To support this,  we have tried to make technology play a part throughout the building in the stories the users tell and the influence they have on services and spaces in a large variety of formats. The 170  large displays and screens around the building are used as a platform for civic media instead of only providing curated content. When a user posts a picture on Instagram and tags it with #dokk1, it will appear on the large display screens and become part of the shared story about Dokk1. The technology underlines that the library belongs to the citizens. The Gong is an art piece by artist Kirstine Roepstorff (Figure 6.7). It is a large tubular bell hanging in the middle of Dokk1. It is connected to the maternity ward in Aarhus and when a child is born the parents can push a button and the Gong will go off in Dokk1. Another installation is the interactive binoculars that take one



6 Dokk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis:  

 101

Figure 6.6: Dokk1 offers multiple digital platforms and surfaces for experimentation (photo by Aarhus Public Libraries).

Figure 6.7: The Gong by Kirstine Roepstorff (photo by Aarhus Public Libraries).

102 

 Marie Østergård

up in the air and give the opportunity to zoom in on specific locations and sites around the city area. Both installations connect the library to the city and to the rest of the world. In the arrival area, a soundscape welcomes everyone. The installation is connected to Instagram, with users’ videos mashed up and the sound transformed into a soundscape using data. The soundscape is used to create a safe and welcoming atmosphere throughout the day, but it is also a narrative of life in Dokk1. A large digital ceiling at the entrance to the Great Hall can be programmed by others to stimulate emotions and context before entering a performance. In the area for children and families, an interactive floor promotes collective and differentiated learning styles through play and physical activity. The children use their  bodies to interact with the floor. Other installations such as book dispensers  and interactive tables bring out reviews, books and suggestions from the library  system, making the library content accessible in new ways (Bech-Petersen 2016). The list is longer, but the imperative is that Dokk1 must offer digital and physical  platforms and surfaces that can be taken over by partners, artists or students  who wish to  experiment with new technology, new media, so as to learn how to create new experiences. Technology must be an opportunity for the users to add something to the digital layer in the building and at the same time empower users to interact and reflect.

Conclusion  The conclusion is quite probably that there is no conclusion. Since the opening of Dokk1 in 2015, it has been obvious that the library needs to be continuously changing and flexible (Figure 6.8). The library changes through the involvement and usage of users and partners to the benefit of the community and of the library concept. New libraries are built for 100 years.  Dokk1,  like other public institutions,  must align with community needs and political goals. It must be able to accommodate new societal needs, creating increased ownership among citizens and provide the framework for the creation of communities. Library staff must work to involve partners and users in the creation of new services and democracy formats.  Dokk1 is  an example of  social sustainability. The  diversity of spaces, services and programmes are opportunities for users from all social levels, educational backgrounds, religious beliefs and political convictions to be able to find a space for engagement with others, a learning session, solitude, recreation, performance, for democratic participation, socialisation, cultural experiences and knowledge gaining.



6 Dokk1 – Re-inventing Space Praxis:  

 103

Figure 6.8: Dokk1 (photo by Aarhus Public Libraries).

It is in Dokk1’s DNA that functionality is flexibility. It has a strong potential for change that can support changing human needs in the coming 100 years, if permitted to do so.

References Bech-Petersen, S. 2016. “Dokk1: Co-Creation as a New Way of Working in Libraries.” AIB Studi 56, no. 3: 441–450. Hapel, R., K. Schulz, and M. Østergård, eds. 2015. Rum til Forandring: Dokk1: Aarhus’ nye Mødested = Space for Change: Dokk1: Aarhus’ New Meeting Place. Århus: Århus Kommunes Biblioteker. IDEO. 2015. Design Thinking for Libraries: A Toolkit for Patron-Centered Design. http:// designthinkingforlibraries.com/. Accessed August 5, 2018.

Vicki McDonald

7 B  uilding Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track Abstract: This paper explores how strategic vision and policy guide building design, service design and delivery, and provide clarity of purpose. It emphasises that policy and strategy can keep library managers on track to deliver outstanding library services aligned to the vision. It demonstrates how in 2017, after 10 years of operation in the transformed building, the journey for the State Library of Queensland (SLQ) continues to ensure its place in the Queensland community, as well as in a world that embraces both print and digital collections, and a place for all Queenslanders. Keywords: Library planning; Library buildings – Design and construction; Strategic planning; Library management; Collaboration; Art in libraries

Introduction The State Library of Queensland (SLQ) is the leading public reference and research library in Queensland. SLQ is responsible for collecting and preserving a comprehensive collection of Queensland’s cultural and documentary heritage, providing free access to information for all Queenslanders and for the advancement of public libraries across the State (Figure 7.1). The objective of the Libraries Act 1988 is to contribute to the cultural, social and intellectual development of all Queenslanders (State Library of Queensland 2009). Queensland is a state of diverse landscapes, from the Great Barrier Reef to the rich farmlands of the Darling Downs, the world famous beaches of the Gold Coast and thriving state capital of Brisbane. Queensland’s population is approximately five million, yet it is a vast state in physical size. Its land size is 1.8 million square kilometres. In 2001, SLQ released its strategic visioning policy, Smart Libraries Build Smart Communities (State Library of Queensland 2001). The policy, endorsed by the state government, set out a framework for the transformation of the library to a twenty-first century library. The key platforms for the transformation included: rebuilding the reference and research collections, a new library management system to provide improved discovery of collections, a new organisation structure to deliver new priorities and an Indigenous libraries services strategy. The most visible and physical platform for the transformation, however, was the https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-008

 7 Building Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track 

 105

Millennium Library Project (MLP) part of the AUD$227.3M (US$175M) Millennium Arts Project.  The Millennium Library Project was an AUD$70m (US$54M) redevelopment project of the existing library building which opened in 1988 and was designed by Robin Gibson as part of the Cultural Centre. The redevelopment scope was to provide additional space for client service delivery, a repository for collections and address significant access issues. But, through planning that was linked to vision and strategy, the impact of the final building far exceeded expectations. The success of the building design by Donovan Hill/ Peddle Thorp in meeting its design objectives was recognised by the Royal Australian Institute of Architects when it was awarded the RAIA 2007 Sir Zelman Cowen award for Public Architecture, recognised as Australia’s leading award for public buildings. It has also been acclaimed as the “best public library I’ve seen anywhere” (Hill 2007).

Figure 7.1: State Library of Queensland (photo by Jon Linkins).

The MLP was more than a redevelopment of an existing library building. It was a key enabler to transform SLQ services to a world-class library of the twenty-first century. Essentially, SLQ would be transformed from a paper-based repository and reference service to a dynamic physical and virtual library providing access for all Queenslanders to a vast array of information, services and experiences. The project’s aspiration, which was used in all communications, was “building tomorrow’s library today”. Throughout the project, which was announced in 2001 and delivered in 2006, it inspired the project team to dream big and not be limited by what at times seemed like a modest budget to achieve the aspiration

106 

 Vicki McDonald

(Figure 7.2). The tagline was also used by the Queensland Library Foundation to raise philanthropic and sponsorship funds for new spaces.

Figure 7.2: Imagine campaign booklet (graphic by State Library of Queensland and Donovan Hill).

A key imperative during planning for the new library was that policy and strategy, not the building, would influence service design and delivery – and this is an important point. In planning the new library, the project team comprising architects, designers and library staff was influenced by libraries, galleries and museums. Several international benchmarking tours were taken by members of the project team. The State Librarian and lead architect visited 26 libraries, galleries and museums across the world, while two directors visited memory institutions in North America, London and Norwich. It was acknowledged that benchmarking should not be limited to libraries and that galleries and museums could inspire new services and building design. Observations and discussions with international colleagues on these tours, together with the personal experience and expertise of the project team, influenced the thinking and planning for the new building. The benchmarking tours served to identify elements that the project team both wanted and did not want in the new library. The tours also helped the project team to prioritise design elements during the inevitable value management phase. For example, members of both tour teams were very impressed with the design of The Getty in Los Angeles, particularly the visual impact of white shelving. So, even within the constraints of a tight budget, it was agreed that white shelving would help define the identity

 7 Building Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track 

 107

of the new library. It became a priority to replace the existing pink shelving with new lower shelving throughout the building.

Six Spheres During the MLP planning, the library leadership team, together with the architectural team, developed the Six Spheres framework (State Library of Queensland 2004). The Six Spheres was developed through a series of workshops to guide service design and it was important that the building design would enable this framework. The Six Spheres are as relevant today as they were in 2003. They have transcended time and still provide guidance on how SLQ wants to be known by its clients and stakeholders. The themes continue to guide planning and service delivery: –– An accessible place. To fulfil SLQ’s statewide role and provide equity of access, the goal is to provide welcoming physical and virtual environments with staff that are visible and client-focused to enable clients to easily navigate a simplified and accessible collection. –– A constantly transforming place. Libraries are places of transformation through contact with a book, information, expert staff and other people. The services and spaces in the new building will be designed for maximum flexibility and adaptability. A space used for a display one week may be used for a poetry reading or community forum the week after. –– A virtual place. The State Library will be a place where the roles of books, places and libraries have been revolutionised. It will explore synergies between real and virtual public domains, and make the immersion in the virtual an enriching and rewarding, rather than an isolating, experience. Through its redeveloped website the State Library will have a revitalised existence independent of its physical spaces. –– A place of interaction. Libraries are a vital part of the infrastructure sustaining a sense of community and building cohesiveness and social capital. The State Library will participate in the life of the community through Brisbane-based and state-wide programmes and activities and the website. The State Library will be a place where special things can happen, a sense of wonderment develop and everyone has their own place, with collective spaces for learning or pleasure. –– A place with atmosphere. The redeveloped State Library will be a unique public building, celebrating what is special about Brisbane. It will link to the river, city and cultural, educational and community precincts of South Bank. When information is global, the sense of local becomes more important.

108 

 Vicki McDonald

–– A voice in its place. The State Library is the custodian of the documentary heritage and knowledge of Queensland. The notion of ourselves as knowledge ancestors shapes and drives our thinking about the collections we build and services we offer. The redeveloped State Library offers much to a Smart State, with an active collection speaking to clients and messages delivered in several media. The State Library plays a key role in providing free and equitable access to information, contributing to informed, open and vigorous discussion, inspiring learning, creativity and the free exchange of ideas.

We Took Risks In designing the new library in the first years of the twenty-first century, and within the scope of the Six Spheres, the project team wanted to push the boundaries of what a library could offer its community. It was an opportunity to introduce new service delivery models which would encourage interactivity, as well as group and independent learning. A great deal of planning was focused on making the library a destination and a hub for the community. The new building was designed to provide a range of spaces that would support programming that encouraged clients to debate and discuss current issues. Some risks were therefore taken.

The Infozone As with any redevelopment project, the existing building and its inherent design impact planning. For a range of reasons, it was not possible to have collections in the ground floor of the existing building. Inspired by visits to information commons in university libraries, such as Lied University in Las Vegas, the response was a new space called the Infozone. The Infozone has public access computers, free Wi-Fi, newspapers for browsing and a space to hang out. As it has no collections, the restrictions of no bags, no food and no drink that generally apply in a state library have not been applied. Back in 2005, the concept of a state library allocating significant floor space to an informal meeting space and PCs, with no collection, was ground-breaking. It was challenging the assumption that state libraries were only spaces for serious reference and research services. The Infozone has been a success and is now supporting SLQ’s digital inclusion priorities by providing free access to Wi-Fi and Internet to marginalised communities. It is also a key destination for tourists seeking to stay in touch with families and friends. Its popularity has led to increased opening hours.

 7 Building Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track 

 109

The Corner The boundaries of contemporary thinking were also pushed in planning The Corner, a space for under-8s and their carers (Figure 7.3). Inspired by the Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A) in London, the focus was to connect with a new audience for a state library: children. As with any significant change, the introduction of The Corner was supported with new policies and practices (Piscitelli 2011). To guide the development, a committee was formed to explore the concept and provide expert advice on policies, practices and programmes. Workshops were held with staff, stakeholders, as well as children and their families.

Figure 7.3: The Corner is a space for children under eight years old (photo by Leif Ekstrom).

The Corner is now recognised nationally for its child-centred approach to programming. With the support of their parents and families, children can explore and engage in the creative hands-on and minds-on experience of a digital exhibition, online games and rhyme-time or reading activities. The space is staffed by arts workers seven days a week from 10am to 3pm. There are three themes per year, with activities based on each theme. For example, in 2017, one theme was Little Antarctic Division, based on Sophie Scott goes South; by award-winning Australian children’s author, Alison Lester. The Corner has been very successful and outgrown its allocated floor space, meaning that options for expansion will need

110 

 Vicki McDonald

to be explored. There are also plans afoot to take The Corner conception the road to public libraries across Queensland.

Inspirational Spaces While The Infozone and The Corner were purpose-specific spaces, what perhaps surprises first-time visitors to the new building are its awe-inspiring spaces that are available to the staff and the Queensland community. The philosophy behind these spaces was to provide truly public spaces that could be the backdrop for a diverse range of public interactions. Independently, each of the spaces has the potential to deliver on each of the Six Spheres. These spaces are: –– The Knowledge Walk. One of the frequent criticisms of the original building was the difficulty to find the front door and the lack of an accessible entrance. The response was the Knowledge Walk, an expansive area offering many entrance points to the building. It is a meeting and gathering space as well as the venue for a range of events such as author book signings at the annual Brisbane Writers Festival. It also offers a safe venue for 24x7 Wi-Fi access. –– The River Decks. Adjacent to The Infozone, the River Decks are canopied by a sprawling Poinciana tree, and offer uninterrupted city and river views. They are popular for venue hire, as well as being contemplative spaces for library visitors. –– kuril dhagun Talking Circle. Adjacent to the kuril dhagun Indigenous Knowledge Centre, the Talking Circle is an outdoor area comprising an undercover fire pit and four smaller discussion spaces. Situated on Kurilpa Point, the space has cultural significance to the Indigenous community (Figure 7.4). –– The Queensland Terrace. In the tradition of the Greek agora, The Queensland Terrace is a gathering space for the community. Adjacent to two auditoriums, it is frequently used as a networking space following symposiums, in-conversation events and lectures. A totally open space, it takes advantage of Queensland’s climate, bringing the outside in and providing views of the city and surrounding greenery. The six-metre-high mirrored ceilings reflect the Tasmanian oak cabinets displaying a remarkable collection of tea cups and saucers. Whereas the agora was a marketplace, the Queensland Terrace tea cup collection acknowledges that Queenslanders enjoy a cup of tea as they discuss the issues of the day. A tea cup can also be a symbolic family treasure passed down through generations; the sole possession of relatives when they arrived in Australia; a cup used to share tea with a long-lost friend; a reconciliatory cuppa with a family member, or one that sparks a special memory (State Library of Queensland 2016).

 7 Building Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track 

 111

–– The Red Box. Located on level 2, the Red Box is a peaceful space against the dramatic river backdrop and panoramic city skyline. It is a terraced room that is popular for individual study, but is also used for talks and readings, presentations and even intimate wedding ceremonies

Figure 7.4: A night by the fire in the Talking Circle, kuril dhagun (photo by Joe Ruckli).

A Constantly Transforming Space Over the last 10 years, the library has continued to evolve. New services have emerged, as well as some spaces being transformed for service delivery. New services and spaces have emerged to respond to the needs of the community and the continuing aspiration to be a library of the twenty-first century.

The Asia Pacific Design Library The libraries Act 1988, which is SLQ’s legislative framework, has as one of its objectives that “opportunities should be developed for international collaboration and for cultural exports, especially to the Asia-Pacific region”. Following the opening of the redeveloped library, and leveraging the acclaim for the building

112 

 Vicki McDonald

design, it was decided to explore and support design as a community of interest. The Asia Pacific Design Library, known as APDL, was born. APDL is a unique design hub for lectures, exhibitions, research, studios and publications, as well as a trusted archive of historical and contemporary Queensland design and designers. It delivers an inspiring programme of worldclass design-related events including lecture series, workshops, exhibitions, design residencies and tours. Programmes support community engagement through innovation, experimentation and play, while also creating opportunities for equal access to library services through design. Located on Level 2 of the State Library of Queensland, the Design Lounge contains the design collection and is a shared physical space for exhibitions, workshops, design reviews, meetings and research. The collection is organised into five key categories: Public Places, Better Living, Communication, Design Thinking and Fashion. Building on the success of The Corner, APDL also offers programming for children. The Little Designers workshops, for example, are hands-on creative workshops for children under eight and their families (Figure 7.5).

Figure 7.5: Little Designers workshop in the Asia Pacific Design Library (photo by Orion Zuyderhoff Gray).

 7 Building Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track 

 113

Our Virtual Presence One of the Six Spheres is a virtual place, where the synergy between real and virtual public domains is explored. Websites need to be constantly changing. SLQ was the first library in Australia to migrate from a traditional web OPAC to the Primo discovery platform in 2007. This platform transformed access and delivery for all collections, particularly for eResources. In the years since there has been incremental improvement to discovery of collections and services. Over the next 18 months, the website will be redeveloped to assist clients to not only explore services, but also enable more effective discovery of collections. There is a need to, again, undertake a redevelopment of discovery services to ensure they have a contemporary look and feel and are keeping pace with emerging platforms. As part of the commitment to the virtual presence, there has been an intentional strategy to put SLQ collection content on platforms people are searching, with links back to SLQ online content. Content can be accessed through Flickr, YouTube, Wikipedia and Historypin.

The Edge A new space, The Edge, opened in 2010. Its inspiration was institutions such as the V&A in London and The Getty in Los Angeles, where the benchmarking tours observed hands-on programming related to the collections. The aim was to create a new facility where young people could connect with each other and the world, through new and emerging media alongside traditional forms of cultural activity. In the last seven years, some of the programming at The Edge has changed, but the philosophy is still aligned to original aims (Figure 7.6).

Figure 7.6: The Edge makerspace (photo by KILN).

114 

 Vicki McDonald

The Edge is now recognised as a national leader in the makerspace movement. In the Digital Media Lab there is a full range of professional software for graphic design, sound and audio editing, web development, video editing and more. Clients of The Edge also have access to fabrication tools such as specialist tools including a laser cutter, soldering station, 3D printer, sewing machine or CNC Routers. The aim is to attain MIT Fab Lab accreditation in 2017.

Galleries Keen to profile the SLQ collections, the initial building design provided two indemnified galleries and a treasures wall, all with temperature and humidity control (Figure 7.7). In addition, there was an exhibition studio without climate control and display spaces in kuril dhagun Indigenous Knowledge Centre, The Infozone and adjacent to The Corner. The realities of resourcing so many galleries and display spaces became evident after several years. SLQ did not have the human and financial resources to curate, design and prepare collections for an exhibition schedule these spaces warranted. It was necessary to reduce the scheduling of exhibitions and some display cases were transformed to semi-permanent displays.

Figure 7.7: Hot Modernism Exhibition at SLQ Gallery, State Library of Queensland (photo by Joe Ruckli).

 7 Building Tomorrow’s Library Today: How the Six Spheres Vision Kept us on Track 

 115

The indemnified spaces have been retained, but one of the gallery spaces known as The Studio has now been transformed into the Business Studio (Figure 7.8). It is an area specifically designed to support aspiring entrepreneurs and start-ups to make their innovative business ideas a reality. There is an Entrepreneur-in-Residence, workshops and mentoring sessions, high speed Wi-Fi, business collections, lunch box forums and research assistance. The Business Studio supports the Queensland Government’s Advance Queensland policy (Queensland Government 2017) which aims to invest in the future by harnessing innovation to strengthen and diversify the economy and create jobs.

Figure 7.8: The Business Studio (photo by Leif Ekstrom).

Recently, SLQ has adopted an exhibitions model that differentiates between exhibition, showcases and displays. It specifies the frequency of turnover but also the intent of each tier of exhibition. This change demonstrates the need to be pragmatic about what can be delivered, but the importance of being willing to reassess priorities.

116 

 Vicki McDonald

The Future As outlined, at the commencement of the twenty-first century, the State Library of Queensland set out with a bold ambition to have a library of the twenty-first century. Since the Future Directions policy document was first written in 2001, services have continued to be transformed and new services introduced. The award-winning building has provided the perfect platform for the transformation. However, it is always the policies and strategies that provide the framework for change and service development; the Six Spheres, which were developed in 2006, have proven to be a timeless inspiration.

References Hill, D. 2007. “Sketchbook: State Library of Queensland, Brisbane, Donovan Hill / Peddle Thorpe, Plus Some Notes on Libraries in General.” City of Sound. http://www.cityofsound. com/blog/2008/08/state-library-o-1.html. Accessed April 17, 2018. Piscitelli, B. 2017. “Understanding Museums: What’s Driving Children’s Cultural Participation?” Canberra: National Museum Australia. http://nma.gov.au/research/understandingmuseums/BPiscitelli_2011.html. Accessed March 11, 2017. Queensland Government. 2017. “Advance Queensland initiative.” Queensland Government.” https://advance.qld.gov.au/our-vision.aspx. Accessed April 13, 2017. State Library of Queensland. 2001. “Smart Libraries Build Smart Communities: Future Directions of the State Library of Queensland.” Brisbane: State Library of Queensland. http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/42084/20040519-0000/www.slq.qld.gov.au/pub/ policies/future%20directions%20inc%20cov.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. State Library of Queensland. 2004. “Annual Report 2003-04: Part 3: Millennium Library Project.” Brisbane: State Library of Queensland. http://www.slq.qld.gov.au/__data/ assets/pdf_file/0014/12524/SLQ_annual-report_03-04_part3.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. State of Queensland. 2009. Libraries Act 1987: Reprinted as in Force on 1 July 2009 Reprint No. 3C. Brisbane: Office of the Queensland Parliamentary Counsel. https://www.legislation. qld.gov.au/view/pdf/2009-07-01/act-1988-029. Accessed August 5, 2018. State Library of Queensland. 2016. “Tea and Me.” Brisbane: State Library of Queensland. http://www.slq.qld.gov.au/about-us/projects-and-partnerships/tea-and-me. Accessed August 5, 2018.

Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

8 C  ooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab: Collaborative Strategies in the Province of Barcelona Municipal Library Network Abstract: Libraries today create content through a mix of programming, workshops and innovative spaces: digital manufacturing workshops (fab labs), research and innovation centres (living labs), centres for performing arts and even kitchens. From a spatial point of view, these creative uses are changing the architecture of libraries. Libraries offer spaces designed to encourage collaboration and dialogue between users. This paper presents three very different projects in Barcelona, Spain in which collaborative strategies with external partners have generated inventive uses in libraries: cooking and multiculturalism in the Library of Fondo (Santa Coloma de Gramenet), the Living Lab in the Library of Volpelleres (Sant Cugat del Vallès) and a Fab Lab in the Library of Les Corts (Barcelona). Keywords: Collaboration; Library planning; Innovation; Public libraries; Libraries – Programming; User engagement

Introduction The role of public libraries has evolved rapidly in past years. The change from analogue information fixed on physical documents to digital information, virtual and ubiquitous, has caused the dematerialisation of collections. It has also led to new ways to access and handle information, as well as the birth of new uses inside the library. Today’s library creates content through all kinds of workshops and spaces: recordings and music editing studios, digital manufacturing workshops (fab labs), research and innovation centres (living labs), centres for performing arts and even kitchens. From a spatial point of view, these innovative uses are changing the architecture of libraries. Libraries need to offer spaces designed to encourage collaboration and dialogue between users; spaces that support conversation as a central element with acoustics to control sounds produced inside, for example, machines or music production. Such spaces have very specific requirements for audiovisual equipment, manufacturing machinery, computer equipment, stage lighting and acoustic insulation. This paper presents three very different projects https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-009

118 

 Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

in which collaborative strategies with external partners have generated innovative uses in libraries: –– Cooking and multiculturalism in the Library of Fondo in Santa Coloma de Gramenet. –– The Library of Fondo has a kitchen at its centre as a space of innovative use where cooking activities are carried out as a tool to enhance the values of interculturalism and citizen engagement. –– Living Lab in the Library of Volpelleres in Sant Cugat del Vallès. The Living Lab in the Library of Volpelleres is an experimentation space where computer programmes, aimed at facilitating access to reading and knowledge, are tested. The spatial organisation of the building allows this space, completely connected to the library, to work independently. –– Fab Lab in the Library of Les Corts in Barcelona. The library is located in a restored building where it shares a space with a digital manufacturing laboratory. The Fab Lab helps promote local talent. Each case is different for the following reasons: the type of collaboration, the use given to the new spaces, the evolution of the collaborative project over time, and the physical relationship between the spaces and library. Before looking look at each project in depth, it is important to put the project in context.

Brief Background to the Municipal Library Network of the Province of Barcelona Spain has a population of 47 million people and is divided into 17 autonomous communities, including Catalonia. With a population of 7.5 million people, Catalonia is divided into four provinces. The province of Barcelona has a population of 5.5 million people and 311 municipalities. The Diputació de Barcelona is a supramunicipal institution, whose purpose is to help the 311 municipalities provide citizens with municipal services established by law. The Library Services Management Office (LSMO) provides technical and economic assistance and manages the Municipal Library Network of the province of Barcelona. Currently the Municipal Library Network is made up of 225 libraries and 10 mobile libraries. In the 311 municipalities of the province, services are provided to 253 municipalities. 143 have a library and the other 110 receive the services through mobile libraries. Ninety-eight per cent of the population live in these 253 municipalities; only 2% of the population do not have library services near them.



8 Cooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab 

 119

One of the major responsibilities of the Library Services Management Office is to provide technical and economic assistance during the process of planning and creating new and renovated libraries. The Standards of Public Library in Catalonia 2008 provides a framework and quantitatively specifies the resources needed to deliver library buildings and good quality services (Nieto and Vilagrosa 2008). The Library Architecture Unit (LAU) was formed to provide advice and guidance throughout the whole library building process.

Cooking and Multiculturalism in the Library of Fondo in Santa Coloma de Gramenet Santa Coloma de Gramenet, a municipality of the metropolitan area of Barcelona, has a population of 120,000 people. The population density is very high, with an average age of 30. More than 110 different nationalities live together in the city. The neighbourhood of Fondo is the densest in the municipality and has the highest percentage of immigrants. In order to bring together the different cultures existing in the neighbourhood, the city council of Santa Coloma de Gramenet decided to build a central facility that includes a municipal market, supermarket, nursery and public library. According to the Standards, the library required a programme floor space of 1,700 m2, with approximately 2,200 m2 of built surface area. The leaders of Fondo wanted to promote the values of multiculturalism and citizen engagement through cooking culture. Thus, the decision was made to provide a space in the library for cooking. This project was called World Cooking, and its characteristics were defined simultaneously with the architectural development of the project.

The Architectural Project The goal was to create a building with a modern and innovative image (Figure 8.1). It was very important that every activity type, the market, supermarket, nursery and library, had easy access from the surrounding urban space. The site chosen met the project goal of being very central but had very challenging topography, which informed the ultimate design. Project planning and design began in 2006 and phased construction work began in 2010. Each part of the building was opened separately as it was com-

120 

 Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

pleted. The library opened in September 2014. The total surface area of the building is 9,000 m2 and the library covers 2,030 m2. At the start of 2006, the team of architects from Pich-Aguilera arquitectes presented the city council with a proposal that had great urban impact. The initial concept featured a composition of volumes and a combination of construction materials that visually differentiate each main function in the building, so that each has its own personality. Covered in a metal mesh, the proposed upper volume houses the library. Located below the library, the nursery concept features a hanging garden and beneath that level is the supermarket, which is clad in ceramic block. Each part can be accessed from the northern part of the site. Located below these volumes, the market can be accessed from the public square, located on the southern side.

Figure 8.1: Exterior view from the square (photo by Simón Garcia).

The concept organises the library on three floors. At the time of creating a conceptual draft, the programme related to World Cooking had not been defined; therefore, it was not in the brief given to the team of architects. In 2008, the city council used a competitive process to select the full design and construction team and ultimately award the project to the same team that designed the conceptual draft. During this time, the added World Cooking programme was developed into a space with a kitchen that could also be used as a bar-restaurant. This concept



8 Cooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab 

 121

necessitated ground floor access, adjacent to the entrance, as well as the ability to function independently when the library was closed. Further complicating matters, the ground floor nursery required more space, which resulted in reducing the area for the library. It became clear that the space for World Cooking could not be located on the ground floor. It was at this point that the city council decided to integrate it completely into the library, without the bar-restaurant function. World Cooking was defined as a space where it was possible to cook, teach and organise activities related to gastronomy. It was located at the end of the first floor in a space of around 140 m2 that could be closed off with sliding doors, depending on the type of activity taking place. It was accepted that it would not be possible to use it when the library was closed. In 2013, when the library was nearly finished, the city council decided to take over almost all the ground floor of the library to install another municipal activity, the citizen service. That decision made it necessary to relocate the activities planned on the ground floor, removing the opportunity for the library to have an entrance directly off the street. Therefore, on the ground floor, only one stairway and one elevator provided access the library (Figure 8.2). It is to be noted that at the time of editing this chapter, the library has recovered the space on the ground floor that had previously been taken over to install another municipal activity.

Figure 8.2: World Cooking is located on the first floor, shown plan south in apricot (graphic by Library Architecture Unit, Diputació de Barcelona).

The entrance to the library is on the first floor, along with the service area for processing documents on loan. Between the entry and the World Cooking space are the multipurpose space, which takes up a double height space with a very peculiar layout, the children’s area which is separated with glass walls in order to soundproof it from the rest of the library, and the magazines, music and image

122 

 Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

area. The World Cooking space contains a compact piece of furniture with a kitchen, fridge, oven and storage similar to a domestic kitchen. Access to the second floor is provided by a large stairway, located on a double height. It attracts a lot of attention, since it is possible to view all the areas of the library from the stairs (Figure 8.3). On this floor are the general area, the training room, the teamwork room and the staff area. There is also an aesthetically pleasing courtyard, where users can go out to read.

Figure 8.3: Access stairway to the second floor (photo by Oscar Ferrer, ago 2).

The highlight of the library, from an architectural point of view, is how the section of the building has been resolved and how the volume has been perforated inside. The effect created by the double heights is one of a single large area, even though the library consists of different levels. Furthermore, it facilitates natural ventilation and the entrance of sunlight, resulting in energy saving.

World Cooking The World Cooking project provides cultural references to the territory and offers a community space for a culturally diverse area of Santa Coloma de Gramenet. The main objectives are to promote the mix of cultures, genders and ages; to



8 Cooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab 

 123

provide a meeting and engagement space; to generate a feeling of belonging to a group and the city; and to promote tolerance and respect among users. The World Cooking space offers a range of activities (Figure 8.4), including: –– Scientific information on nutrition and food, facilitated by cooks and university professors. –– Cooking courses for people of different origins and sessions to share cooking experiences. –– Social events such as fusion cuisine, reading clubs and presentations.

Figure 8.4: Cooking activity in the World Cooking space (photo by Mariona Chavarria).

The project has been developed with the collaboration of many different agents: Universitat de Barcelona through the culinary innovation centre Bullipedia, fostered by the renowned chef Ferran Adrià, the local cooking school, professional chefs, the primary school of the neighbourhood, the local commerce association, the city council and the Municipal Library Network of the province of Barcelona.

Evaluation The architectural project was developed without the project World Cooking being defined. This factor caused difficulties and changes to a process that, also, took longer than expected. It would have been more effective to have a previous

124 

 Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

reflection process, with all the agents involved, which specified a complete and detailed functional programme. Almost two years after the facility opened, World Cooking has received very positive reviews. Among other things, it has attracted people who for different reasons do not visit public spaces, especially not libraries. The project has been incorporated into all activities of the library and its success has shown the need to allocate more resources (economic and human) to improve the service and organise more activities. With regard to the physical space, apart from the advantage of having World Cooking located in the centre of the library, we must note the following problems: –– Noise problems when certain activities are being carried out; even though there are sliding doors, in some cases the noise disturbs library users –– An unsatisfactory system for eliminating smoke and odour –– Inability to access the space when the library is closed The city council considers this collaboration project a model to emulate in the future. It now is impossible to conceive of the library without the kitchen, or the kitchen without the library. The two entities enhance one another.

Living Lab in the Library of Volpelleres in Sant Cugat del Vallès Sant Cugat del Vallès, a municipality located 12 km from Barcelona city, has a population of 88,000 people. Construction is not dense, with predominantly detached houses. The neighbourhood of Volpelleres has been recently urbanised and is inhabited mainly by young families, with a mid to high education level and access to new technologies. The neighbourhood association, made up of a high number of people linked to the university, convinced the city council of Sant Cugat del Vallès that the new library should incorporate the Living Lab of the Computer Vision Center of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. The Living Lab is an innovation laboratory that builds links between culture, technology and society in an experimental setting. The library functional programme was created jointly between the municipality and the Library Services Management Office. It stated that the library would need to have 960 m2 of programme floor space and the Living Lab 100 m2. The Living Lab needed to be connected directly with the general area of the library for the users to take part in the Living Lab activities. At the same time, it was necessary for the Living Lab to function independently when the library was closed.



8 Cooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab 

 125

The Architectural Project The creation process was relatively short. The project began in 2013, construction work began in 2014 and the library opened in March 2015. The built-surface area of the library is 1,330 m2.The library is located on the ground floor of a new residential building. The site is rectangular, but the available floor area was irregular since there were six vertical communication cores to access the apartments and one ramp to access the car park below grade. Furthermore, it was necessary to reserve ground level space for several retail spaces. The city council put the team Orteu, Piferrer, Farré, OP TEAM arquitectes in charge of the project. The plans of the library went through many iterations during the development of the project due to a conflict between those wishing to improve the accessibility and visual link between interior and exterior and those with interests connected to the retail spaces, which impacted the Living Lab. In the first drawings of the architectural project the Living Lab was located inside the library but did not have an independent access from the exterior. However, through a series of location changes of retail spaces, it was ultimately possible to give the Living Lab independent access and to achieve the functional programme. The functional objectives were to create an accessible library open to the exterior, with a Living Lab fully integrated, but possible to access when the library is closed. The architects managed to give the library visibility and the character of communal use, even though it is located on the ground floor of a residential building (Figure 8.5).

Figure 8.5: View from the exterior (photo by Adrià Goula, OP TEAM arquitectes).

The library is organised on a single level with access through a courtyard that works as an exterior hall. Inside, the library is distributed around a central axis

126 

 Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

from which it is possible to access the different areas. On one side is the general area, split in two parts. On the other side are the children’s area, the staff area and the Living Lab, which is separated by a wall made of glass, so it is possible to have a complete view of the lab. At the end of the library are the training room, the teamwork room and the multipurpose space, which like the Living Lab can also work independently when the library is closed.

The Living Lab The Living Lab (Figure 8.6) is a public space of technological transfer where university groups of the Computer Vision Centre do research on technology to facilitate access to reading and knowledge. It is a collaborative project between the neighbourhood association of the district, the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, the city council and the Municipal Library Network of the province of Barcelona. Users have free access to a series of interactive computer programmes and, in exchange, they act as a testing ground that provides information to the researchers in order to develop and improve their products.

Figure 8.6: Living Lab (photo by Santi Romero).



8 Cooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab 

 127

The objectives of the Living Lab are linked to the library objectives: identify challenges, explore solutions and develop proposals “from,” “with,” and “for” the people. Very different activities are carried out, such as the project The Library Visits the Museum, during which a group of library users guides and gives instructions to two people from the museum, who broadcast the visit online. Another project is, I am My Drawing, where a group of children, after listening to a story, create their own story and draw the characters, which are then digitised. Afterwards, the children dramatise the story and with gesture detection technology give movement to the characters they have created, resulting in an animated film.

Evaluation The inclusion of the Living Lab has provided added value to the library. The inhabitants of the neighbourhood and citizens from across the municipality are participating in a range of different creative activities in the space. The library has broadened its range of action and some of the projects are having international impact. Users are very proactive and find the new experiences very interesting. The library has become a place in which activities that users do not typically expect in a library occur daily. The current challenge is to keep planning new activities and attracting a sector of the audience that still feels intimidated by the technology. With regard to the physical space, some noise issues have been detected because the glass separation is not soundproof enough for some of the activities carried out in the Living Lab.

Fab Lab in the Library of Les Corts in Barcelona The district of Les Corts is located in the southwestern area of the city of Barcelona. The density of population is lower than the average of the city and there are mostly middle class young families. The plan was to build a library for a population of 88,000 people. According to the Standards, it was necessary to have a programme floor space of 3,500 m2, around 4,700 m2 of built surface area. At the moment of writing the functional programme of the library, the creation of a Fab Lab, was not planned. It was decided that the library would occupy an existing volume formed by one industrial unit that had once been a textile factory, beside two annexed buildings internally conjoined. The industrial unit, built in the beginning of the

128 

 Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

twentieth century, is a rectangular single-story building. Due to the fact that it is a protected building, it was not possible to modify the volume or the structural type. Furthermore, the façades and the original covers had to be restored. The two annexed buildings, higher than the industrial unit and also rectangular, were not subject to any protection regulations.

The Architectural Project The project began in 2010 following a competition process, won by Ricard Mercadé-Aurora Fernández Arquitectes. The construction work began in 2015 and the library opened in January 2018. In the winning proposal one of the annexed buildings would be partially demolished in order to create an access square. The library’s lobby was located in the other annexed building, which had its interior emptied on one side, resulting in an immense space that linked with the industrial unit. This way, there was a good visual connection between all the floors in the annexed building and the industrial unit, with only one floor. The project was put on hold for over two years because of the economic crisis. When it was reactivated there were budget cutbacks, so the architects were asked to study a new proposal with the following changes: the library had to be reduced by more than 800 m2, the layout of the two annexed buildings could not be modified, and one Fab Lab would be added, as part of the network Ateneus de Fabricació which already had other similar spaces in the city. In the revised proposal the basic design ideas are maintained. The library has 3,800 m2 of built surface area and is organised in four levels. On the ground floor there is the entrance area, the Fab Lab, the information area at double height and the children’s area, which has its own courtyard. The magazines, music and image area is located on top of the children’s area. On a level above there is the general area and the training room. On the top floor there is the multipurpose space, the teamwork rooms and staff area. The configuration of the building makes it possible for the teamwork rooms and the multipurpose space to work independently from the rest of the building, so they end up being spaces very easy to use for the library, the Fab Lab and for other different uses. The Fab Lab is located on the right side of the entrance area and it takes the space where originally one of the buildings was supposed to be demolished in order to create an exterior square. The Fab Lab is then linked to the library through the lobby and, with a system of rolling screens that divide the lobby in two parts, it is possible for the Fab Lab to work independently when the library is closed. The Fab Lab occupies a surface of 250 m2 of built surface area and has a



8 Cooking and Multiculturalism, Living Lab and Fab Lab 

 129

very good visual relationship with both the entrance lobby and exterior, so it will work as a display window for the activities that will be carried out (Figure 8.7).

Figure 8.7: Definitive proposal exterior view (photo by Ricard Mercadé-Aurora Fernández Arquitectes).

The Fab Lab The Fab Lab is a collaboration project between the network of Ateneus de Fabricació and the city council of Barcelona. It promotes creations and collaborations of all kinds between all types of people interested in science and technology. The Fab Lab provides users with materials that are usually economically unavailable to individuals. As the first public Fab Lab in the world (Figure 8.8), its aim is to create a space of debate and technological production, a place where anyone can express his or her talent and creativity. It is equipped with software and production machines that let users turn their ideas into digital information, and digital information into useful objects for society, providing a social return for society.

Conclusion The success of these experiences encourages the Library Service Management Office of Diputació de Barcelona to keep looking for collaboration strategies that bring additional value to public libraries.

130 

 Santi Romero and Imma Sabater

Figure 8.8: Fab Lab from the Lobby (photo by Santi Romero).

Originally, the main mission was to spread knowledge. It was then decided to increase the social value of the library, creating services and meeting spaces to promote personal relationships, social cohesion and citizen involvement. Now, we are also focusing on the promotion of creativity, which is the first phase of the knowledge cycle. We understand that in order to create it is necessary to learn, experiment and produce. We must offer learning and experimentation spaces and, of course, ways to cooperate and collaborate with different external agents that support the activities we want to promote. Currently, we have three specialisation lines: social scientific, technological and creative or artistic practices. We hope the number of experiences continues to increase over time.

References Nieto, J., and E. Vilagrosa. 2008. “Los Nuevos Estándares de Bilioteca Pública de Cataluña (2008).” Barcelona: Diputació Barcelona. https://www.diba.cat/ documents/16060163/22275360/Estandards_castella.pdf/cc6c1985-c4df-4eca-a7ed4a03724010fb. Accessed August 5, 2018.

Part 3: Cooperative collections Despite the dramatic growth of e-resources, the need for innovative, accessible storage solutions continues to be a vitally important issue, particularly in research intensive academic and national libraries. This section shares innovative solutions to the tug-of-war between space for people and space for collections.

Charles G. Forrest

9 T  he Library Service Centre: A Collaborative Partnership for Legacy Collections and Programme Innovation Abstract: Academic and research libraries use the best available technology to acquire, conserve and transmit the inscribed cultural legacy. For centuries the technology of choice has been print on paper and the codex form of the book, leading to the acquisition and management of very large physical collections. A growing shift to digital formats causes physical collection growth to slow down, prompting many libraries to use high-density solutions such as compact shelving and automated retrieval systems to maximise remaining on-site square footage for collections. The repurposing of on-site collection space is often combined with the development of off-site storage facilities that feature enhanced temperature and humidity control for the long-term preservation of printed materials. This paper will describe a cooperative initiative between Emory University (Emory) and the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) to develop, design and build such an off-site facility, a joint initiative that resulted in the creation of the Library Service Centre. The use of off-site storage has enabled the libraries of both institutions to rethink their use of valuable space in the heart of campus, as well as initiate master planning efforts that describe multi-year efforts to renovate and innovate library services and spaces. Keywords: Library cooperation; Library materials – Storage; Academic Libraries; Libraries – Programming

Introduction In their role as cultural memory institutions, academic and research libraries use the best available technology to acquire, conserve and transmit the inscribed cultural legacy. For five centuries the means of inscription has been based on printon-paper and the codex form of the book, leading to the acquisition and management of very large physical collections. However, the twentieth century witnessed rapid new technological developments for the creation, storage and transmission of information. Libraries have often been early adopters of these innovations. As the academic library pursues a shift from content consumption to content creation, valuable central campus space for physical collections is increasingly repurposed as space for collaboration and co-working. The library’s stewardship https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-010

134 

 Charles G. Forrest

of intellectual assets requires a careful and thoughtful approach to the management of legacy collections, especially rare, valuable and unique material. Many libraries have chosen to use high-density solutions such as compact shelving and automated retrieval systems to maximise remaining on-site square footage for collections. The repurposing of on-site collection space is often combined with the development of off-site storage facilities that feature enhanced temperature and humidity control for the long-term preservation of printed materials.

Physical Collections in the Library Academic and research libraries have been traditionally built around a closedstack model featuring fixed shelving, with an access model based on staff retrieval and delivery. This on-site model is still in use for special formats, high-risk items and special collections. The open-stack model gained popularity in the twentieth century, supporting self-service retrieval and physical browsing. As collections continued to grow, often within fixed allocations of square footage, compact moveable shelving was introduced in both open- and closed-stack situations, in an effort to keep as much material as possible on-site and quickly accessible. Automated storage and retrieval systems (ASRS) in central campus libraries are the twenty-first century expression of the closed-stack, staff-retrieved model of on-site physical collection storage and access. In off-site facilities, standard-height fixed and moveable shelving can be an economical solution, especially in repurposed space where ceiling height is limited. High-bay fixed shelving, sometimes called the Harvard Model, can be used in places with higher ceilings, such as converted warehouse space and purpose-built facilities, to make maximum use of the total volume of space available. Such high-bay shelving can be mounted on moveable carriages. Both fixed and moveable high-bay installations use established, cost-effective standard warehouse shelf-picking equipment. However, while the addition of moveable carriages increases storage density, it also increases operating costs. Finally, while automated storage and retrieval systems ultimately offer the highest density storage per volume of space, operating and maintenance costs for automation and mechanical systems can make them the most expensive solution. More and more institutions are exploring existing, or developing new, cooperative solutions to off-site storage, to help manage the cost of maintaining legacy physical collections, as well as to accommodate the continued growth of rare and unique special collections and archives.



9 The Library Service Centre 

 135

Emory, Georgia Tech and EmTech Georgia Tech is in downtown Atlanta, while the main Emory campus is eight miles east-northeast in suburban Druid Hills (Tables 9.1 and 9.2). While both institutions share a similar mission focused on teaching, research and service, their missions are complementary and produce little competition for faculty, students or research dollars. Profiles EMORY UNIVERSITY

GEORGIA TECH Established

1885

Public/Private

Public Institute (STEM focused)

Enrollment Undergraduate Graduate & Professional

25,000 15,000 10,000

Business, Law, Medicine, Nursing, Public Health, Theology

Schools

Engineering, Architecture, Computing, Sciences, Liberal Arts, Business

28,000 University faculty & staff: 13,000 Emory Healthcare: 15,000

Faculty & Stoff

18,000

Emory Healthcare Hospitals and Clinics

Other

None

1836 Private University 15,000 8,000 7,000

Table 9.1: Institutional profiles (table by Emory University). Financials ($ USD) EMORY UNIVERSITY

GEORGIA TECH

$4.6B Annual operating budget {FY16) Emory University: $1.9B Emory Healthcare (est): $2.2B

$1.5B

$6.7B Endowment $572.4M Totalresearch funding awards & sponsored research (FY15) Table 9.2: Institutional financials in USD (table by Emory University).

$1.9B $648.2M

136 

 Charles G. Forrest

Their libraries (Table 9.3) reflect these complementary characters with 17% overlap in collections, low among members of the Association of Research Libraries. Libraries EMORY UNIVERSITY 4 million

GEORGIA TECH Total volumes

Candler Library 1926 Main Library Candler Library renovated 1955 Woodruff Library 1969 Woodruff Libra renovated 1998

2.5 million 1906 College of Architecture Library (Andrew Carnegie; now admin space) 1953 price Gilbert 1965 Crosland Tower,

Table 9.3: Current collection size and main library facility history (table by Emory University).

Emory and Georgia Tech have long shared areas of common interest in Neurosciences and Biomedicine. More than 15 years ago the two institutions established EmTech, a 501(c)(3) corporation, at that time a biotechnology business incubator initiative to provide support for biotech start-ups. When the libraries identified a common need for conditioned space for long-term retention of physical collections, EmTech was restructured to provide an umbrella for planning, construction and operation management of the initiative and the new facility (Figure 9.1). The Library Service Centre Steering Committee provided project planning and management services under the governance authority of EmTech and the respective Boards of each institution.

The Library Service Centre After nearly two years of site preparation and construction, the new joint Library Service Centre (LSC) was dedicated on March 17, 2016 (Figure 9.2). A secure climate-controlled 55,000-square-foot facility, the LSC includes a 30,000-squarefoot storage module that uses state-of-the-art technology to create optimal longterm storage conditions for both general and special collections owned by both institutions (Figure 9.3). With construction and initial operation funded equally by each institution, the LSC features high-bay fixed shelving, a reading room for on-site use of materials and a robust service programme that includes two deliveries per day of physical items as well as electronic delivery of scanned content such as journal articles and conference papers.



9 The Library Service Centre 

Figure 9.1: Project organisation chart (graphic by Emory University).

Figure 9.2: The Library Service Centre (photo by Silk Bandana Studios).

 137

138 

 Charles G. Forrest

Figure 9.3: Mechanical systems for main vault (photo by Silk Bandana Studios).

Initial ingest began during the summer of 2016, when a total of more than 1.6 million items were processed into the facility (Figure 9.4). When initial ingest is complete, the LSC will contain some two million items representing more than

Figure 9.4: Processing floor during initial ingest (photo by Charles Forrest).



9 The Library Service Centre 

 139

90% of Georgia Tech Library holdings (Georgia Tech Library 2018) and all of Emory’s current off-site collections (Emory Libraries and Information Technology 2018). The main storage module is cold at 10°C (50°F) and dry with 30％ RH (relative humidity). Systems are designed to ensure no abrupt daily variation and minimal season variation, in order to ensure long-term preservation of these important intellectual assets. Most of the items in the LS are treated as a single collection and managed to serve the faculty and students of both institutions, as well as the larger scholarly community. Holdings are findable and visible in both libraries’ online search and discovery systems, and can be used in the on-site reading room by special request. A robust retrieval and delivery service provides 24-hour turnaround for most requests (Figure 9.5). Lending periods are aligned with the current status and privileges of the individual requester and typical interlibrary lending processes and policies.

Figure 9.5: Main vault, with truck entrances to right and emergency generator in foreground (photo by Silk Bandana Studios).

In addition to electronic delivery of scanned content, the LSC is equipped to provide larger-scale digitisation services for internal preservation efforts and grant-supported projects (Figure 9.7). Near- future developments are projected to include exploration of drone delivery service from the LSC to the Georgia Tech campus, as part of a research initiative focused on the operation of autonomous drones in densely populated urban areas. The LSC provides optimal long-term storage conditions for physical collections in a range of formats, along with a robust service programme to ensure that important intellectual assets will be available to current as well as future genera-

140 

 Charles G. Forrest

tions of students and scholars (Figure 9.6). The continuing use of off-site storage has enabled the libraries of both institutions to rethink their use of valuable space in the heart of the campus.

Figure 9.6: Main vault interior (photo by Silk Bandana Studios).

Figure 9.7: Scanning and digitisation services area (photo by Silk Bandana Studios).

Renovation and Innovation Working with an outside consultant, both the Emory and Georgia Tech libraries have recently completed master planning initiatives to review and reinvent their current service models, in response to innovations in teaching, learning, research and scholarship, as well as the changing needs and expectations of their students and faculty. Conducted in cooperation with their respective offices of Facilities Planning, Design and Construction, the master planning effort focused on library space, including new and emerging uses of library space, as well as the shift from storage of physical collections to active, collaborative learning and digital scholarship.



9 The Library Service Centre 

 141

The Emory Libraries master planning effort was intended to engage a broad range of stakeholders in the creation of a programmatic vision for the enhancement and expansion of library spaces, to ensure strategic alignment and operational effectiveness of public space, staff space and support space. The desired outcome included the need to describe a phased approach to create dynamic and collaborative library spaces across the Emory campus for study, teaching, research, project development and discourse. Georgia Tech Library master planning aimed to define the library of the twenty-first century in the context of renewal, with a focus on nurturing the scholarly community, by creating inspirational space. Long-term strategies include recognising the need for continuous transformation of existing physical space to accommodate new and emerging initiatives within existing decades-old buildings long life, with recognition of the central location and role played by the library on the Georgia Tech campus (Bennet et al 2017). Implementation of the initial phases of each library’s master plan is underway, including floor-by-floor renovation, such as the renovation of Level 1 Learning Commons space in the main library at Emory during the summer of 2017, and pilot projects to lay the groundwork for subsequent phases over the next decade, including the new Data Visualization Lab on the first floor of the of the Georgia Tech library that opened in January 2018.

Conclusion The research library is charged to deliver access to an appropriate mix of physical and digital information assets, to support, enable and enhance a larger institutional mission of teaching and learning, research and scholarship, and service to the academic community and larger society. The shifting balance toward digital access means the library must explore innovative ways to exercise its stewardship role over physical collections, both on-site and off-site. The development, design, construction and operation of the Library Service Centre in Atlanta, Georgia is a story of two libraries that made common interest around the need to conserve and deliver access to important materials, at a scale not achievable by each institution alone. It serves as a model of the kind of collaborative partnerships between and among libraries that ensure long life for important legacy collections while using central campus library facilities in an efficient, innovative and cost-effective way.

142 

 Charles G. Forrest

References Bennett, C., W. Hagenmaier, F. Rascoe, L. Rolando, M. Axford, W. Baer, L. Critz, and C. Renfro. 2017. Reimagining the Georgia Tech Library. Atlanta: Georgia Tech Library. http://renewal. library.gatech.edu/sites/renewal.library.gatech.edu/files/reimagining_the_georgia_ tech_library_1.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Emory Libraries and Information Technology. 2018. “Library Services Center.” Atlanta: Emory University. http://web.library.emory.edu/about/libraries/other-libraries/libraryservice-center.html. Accessed April 24, 2018. Georgia Tech Library. 2018. “About the Library Services Center.” Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology. http://librarynext.gatech.edu/library-services-center. Accessed April 24, 2018.

Acknowledgments The Architecture Group; BNIM Architects; brightspot strategy; Emory University; EmTech; Georgia Institute of Technology; KSS Architects; LP3 Architects; Silk Bandana Studios; Spacesaver Corporation; Whiting-Turner Construction

Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer

10 T  he Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland: A Successful Multi-Cantonal Cooperation Abstract: This paper explores the genesis and building process of the Kooperative Speicherbibliothek Schweiz/Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland (CSLS) in Büron and outlines its operation during the first two years since inauguration, while also describing the institutions that govern the CSLS and the solutions found for the various governance and business challenges. Keywords: Library cooperation; Library materials – Storage; Libraries – Space utilisation; Library buildings – Design and construction; Automated storage and retrieval systems; High density storage

Introduction In February 2016, the Kooperative Speicherbibliothek Schweiz/Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland (CSLS) started operations with the ingestion of the first items coming from the Zentralbibliothek Zürich/Zurich Central Library, Switzerland. This beginning marked the culmination of a process that had started seven years earlier. In 2009, Ulrich Niederer, the Director of the Zentralund Hochschulbibliothek Luzern/Central and University Library of Lucerne, contacted cantonal and university libraries in Switzerland with the aim to build a cooperative storage facility in order to solve the imminent storage problems many archiving libraries were facing. In a joint effort, the Central and University Library of Lucerne, the Zurich Central Library, the University Libraries of Zurich and Basel and the Central Library of Solothurn developed new forms of cooperation on the institutional level. All participating libraries had to learn that building and operating an Automated Storage and Retrieval System (ASRS) off-site storage facility is not just the addition of a conventional storage facility. Rather, it involves new workflows and technologies coming from the world of logistics.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-011

144 

 Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer

The Building The CSLS building (Figure 10.1) is approximately 70 metres long, 30 metres wide and 20 metres high. It consists of two separate parts, the first being the working area where the books are prepared for storage and orders are processed, which measures 70 metres by 10 metres over five floors. –– The ground (or first) floor is the delivery floor for incoming or outgoing material; courier services have 24 hour-access to this area –– On the second floor, the books are cleaned, processed in the warehouse management system (WMS) and stored in plastic boxes in order to be sent to the storage area –– The third floor is reserved for orders by customers and the scanning or copying of document delivery orders –– The fourth floor is empty at the moment and is reserved for additional picking stations and offices should further modules be built –– On the fifth floor is a visitors’ platform that provides a view into the storage area This part of the building also contains all technical installations for the entire facility. The second part of the building is the actual storage area; it measures 70 metres by 20 metres with a height equal to the working area. It contains 14 metres of high-bay shelving for 110,000 plastic boxes, which hold 27 books each on average, as well as the overhead conveyor belt system for container transport between storage area and picking stations. This first storage module has a maximum capacity of 3.1 million items. While the working area hosts a normal climate regarding temperature, humidity and oxygen, the storage module has an oxygen-reduced atmosphere with a maximum oxygen level of 13.5 percent to prevent fire. The storage module has no active air conditioning; temperature and humidity are controlled with the help of massive concrete walls, outside insulation and the books themselves. At the beginning, standard conditions were set for temperature and relative humidity at 18° Celsius and 45 % +/- 5%, respectively. When it was learned that heating and cooling would be necessary on only one to two days per year (based on the average temperature of the last 10 years) it was decided to set more flexible conditions: a temperature range of 7 ° to 22° Celsius, but not more change than 1° Celsius per day. Relative humidity remained at 45 % +/- 5 %; within these limits it was possible to forego the installation of monoblocs for heating and cooling. However, the precautionary installation of the necessary ducts within the storage area was insisted upon. An installation



10 The Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland 

 145

Figure 10.1: The CSLS building (photo by Ulrich Niederer).

after the insertion of the shelving high bays would have been quite impossible. Monoblocs could thus be installed for heating and cooling in the future and connected with the ducts to start active air conditioning, should it prove necessary. During the first full year of operation, temperatures were registered between 8 and 22 degrees Celsius but with the promised very slow increases and decreases, as well as a marvellously stable relative humidity of around 45%. Initially, just after the finished construction process, the humidity was over 80%, but that was reduced within a few days when the production of nitrogen started in order to lower the oxygen level, as well as through the use of dehumidifiers. The building and logistics infrastructure (cranes and conveyor belts as well as the administrative and HVAC areas) cost 30 million Swiss Francs (USD32M). A further storage module of the same size will cost approximately 14 million Swiss Francs (USD15M). The average storage cost per item will decrease significantly with each step taken forward, as it can make use of the existing processing and HVAC infrastructures.

146 

 Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer

Reasons to Build a High-Bay Storage What were the reasons to build such a seemingly cost-intensive and technically challenging building? Four basic cost-driving factors must be considered to answer this question, two of which were found to be universal. The first is the cost of fire prevention: installing and maintaining a sprinkler system, especially in high bay constructions, versus oxygen reduction. The second is the cost of steel. Are actual shelves needed in the shelving construction as in traditional bookcase storage, in mobile shelving and in Harvard type storage facilities? Or are only steel angles needed to take the containers in an automated system? The other two cost factors are locally determined. The first is the price of land. Land prices are very high in Switzerland and the parties involved are therefore very interested in a storage building with as high a density as possible. Second, the salary level is generally high in Switzerland and work regulations set rigid requirements. For example, order pickers used in Harvard-type storage facilities can only be operated by skilled workers formally licensed to operate this kind of equipment; these professionals are much more expensive than students or other temporary staff many facilities use in other parts of the world. A thorough evaluation and full cost comparison of different types of storage, fixed shelving, compact shelving, outsourcing and an Automated Storage and Retrieval System (ASRS), led to the conclusion that the Lucerne collections of about 1.5 million volumes could be stored through outsourcing storage or in an ASRS with equal costs, but clearly less expensive than the other forms of storage. Scaling collections to three million items led to an advantage of an ASRS, a schoolbook example for the economies of scale. Ulrich Niederer, then Director of the Central and University Library of Lucerne, was tasked to search for partners with the same collection storage needs. Niederer found seven potential partners: –– Zurich Central Library –– the University Libraries of Zurich, Basel and St. Gall –– the cantonal libraries of Solothurn and Aargau –– the Fonoteca Svizzera Unfortunately, the Fonoteca Svizzera, the Cantonal Library of Aargau and the University Library of St. Gall had to leave the project during the process for various reasons. The University of St. Gall later decided to re-join the project and began to store their collections in the CSLS in the fall of 2017. The partners bring a total of approximately 2.8 million books, which means that the CSLS will be filled to 90% of its capacity in a very short time. Therefore, sooner, rather than later, construction of the next module will have to be consid-



10 The Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland 

 147

ered. The lot on which the CSLS stands is large enough to allow for substantial extensions. Storage modules could be added to hold a grand total of 14 million volumes. This maximum capacity corresponds to about half the actual collections of all Swiss archiving libraries. The thinking is on quite an expansive scale.

Organisational Structure Finding a widely accepted organisational structure was not easy and turned out to be a predominantly political process. The libraries and their funding bodies (universities, foundations, parts of a cantonal administration) usually report to cantonal governments. The present six institutions report to five cantonal governments, all of which had clear views on how to set up this new multi-cantonal facility. The crux of the matter was that the views differed widely. After long deliberations, it was decided to set up the CSLS as an independent institution, not as an extension of one library, and to have it governed by two quite separate entities: a public limited company (plc) and an association. The plc owns the ground and the building, and is financing all construction and principal maintenance work. Participating institutions can, but need not be, shareholders; at present shares belong to the Canton of Lucerne, the Central Library of Zurich, which is an independent foundation, and the University of Basel. The operative business is run by an association comprising the participating libraries; it rents the building from the plc. The staff of the CSLS consists of a CEO and his assistant, three logistic operators, a facility manager and a librarian. During the first phase of ingestion, until all partners have stored all their holdings, these permanent employees are reinforced by temporary staff. The CEO reports to the president of the association.

The Building Process The village of Büron lies on the banks of the Suhre, a small creek that runs through an ice-age alluvial valley, with unstable gravel ground. Over 250 piles of 25 metres therefore had to be sunk into the ground to form a stable foundation able to bear the enormous weight (close to four tons per m2). Sixty of these piles are equipped with heat-changers to extract geothermal heat for the heating and cooling of the working area. The walls consist of Elsässer elements, prefabricated 36 cm thick sandwich-construction concrete plates and steel reinforcements. These elements are filled with concrete on-site, allowing for a very quick construction process

148 

 Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer

(Figure 10.2). The outside insulation is another 30 cm thick, protected by a Corten steel façade. The self-supporting roof is covered by 20 cm of concrete which carries a photovoltaic installation that produces about 180 megawatt hours of electricity per year. Of this, the storage library uses about 40% directly throughout the year and supplies the national public electricity net with the rest. If electricity could be efficiently stored, it would cover 88% of the needs of the CSLS.

Figure 10.2: Construction of the storage area (photo by Ulrich Niederer).

The six cranes that run in the aisles and store or fetch containers and the conveyor belt system which transports the containers from the storage area to the picking stations in the work area are provided by the Swiss firm Stöcklin Logistik AG. They are industrial standard except for the load-handling devices on the cranes and are placed above each other and not side by side which is an important space saving measure. The conveyor belt system is placed under the roof, on top of the high-bay shelving (Figure 10.3). This positioning saved the planners from having to double the number of robots or cranes needed to fetch the book cases, or to lose a lot of ground at one end of the shelving. Since there are comparably few orders, one robot for a relatively long alley (70 m) of two double-stocked shelves is quite enough. The oxygen reduction system consists of two redundant compressors for the production of nitrogen and enough space for additional compressors, should



10 The Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland 

 149

further modules be added. Air ducts are pre-installed in the storage are, and there is enough space for monoblocs in case mechanical cooling, heating or humidification should become necessary. This is not the case at the moment.

Figure 10.3: The CSLS robotic storage system (photo by Ulrich Niederer).

Collections The collections from the various partners are stored and borrowed according to the rules and regulations of the individual partner. Normally, physical items contained in these collections can be borrowed by a user. The monograph collections of each partner remain independent and are not de-duplicated, since the de-duplication of monographs is very labour-intensive and expensive. Serials are the exception. Serials ingested become the collective possession of all partners, in order to create a larger collection and de-duplicate multiple items. The selection process involves a thorough examination of the completeness of the serial run and the state of preservation of the different collections. A programme and database was developed for this purpose. This deduplication allows savings of valuable storage space to a significant degree with the estimated overlap close to 30%. Removal of the serial duplicates will happen in the near future, but de-duplicated items will not be destroyed, nor will they be deleted from the various catalogues until a true Swiss Union Catalogue is created through the Swiss Library Service Platform project (SLSP). Items in the collective collection are treated as archival material and must not leave the building of the CSLS, but may be copied or studied on-site in the reading room.

150 

 Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer

Operation The CSLS offers a full range of services to its partners (Figure 10.4):

Figure 10.4: One of four CSLS picking stations (photo by Ulrich Niederer).

–– Storage and archiving of printed or audio-visual material. According to a Letter of Intent dating from 2015, partners have the right to store a maximum amount. The books are stored in emission-free plastic boxes measuring 40 cm to 60 cm, with two heights (25 cm and 35 cm) for different book formats. The books are normally stored standing upright in several rows, with folio formats stored horizontally. Each book has its defined, permanent place in a box; while on loan it must be replaced by a plastic dummy item in order to protect the remaining books from inclining. In order to find a certain item easily, the box is divided in virtual quadrants; during the ingestion process each item must be assigned to a certain quadrant. This costly workflow will spare the logisticians a lot of time picking orders in the future because the monitor highlights the position of the requested book in a different colour. –– Cleaning of books. Every book needs to be cleaned before storage. The CSLS owns two Depulvera cleaning machines, but partners are free to clean their books beforehand on their own premises.



10 The Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland 

 151

–– Packaging of unbound serials. Collections that are delivered in cardboard boxes not suitable for long-time archiving can be unpacked and bound in acid-free cardboard and plastic ribbon. This workflow saves a lot of expense for binding journals stored in the CSLS after a year. –– Document delivery of physical items. Physical items, with the exception of serials in the collective possession of all partners, can be lent out to customers either by courier or post. –– Document delivery of scans or print copies. Articles are delivered according to Swiss Copyright Law to customers either by download of scans or sending print copies by post. –– Reading Room. The CSLS offers a small reading room for research in its collections.

Interfaces Programming a variety of software interfaces between the various systems involved (Figure 10.5) was required to facilitate services provision. –– LMS – WMS. By chance, all partners use Aleph 500 as their Library Management System (LMS), which facilitated the task of programming an interface between the LMS and the Warehouse Management System (WMS), using an industrial standard programme provided by the Swiss firm Stöcklin Logistik AG. The LMS sends a set of metadata for the items to be stored via file transfer protocol (FTP) to the WMS. Each item has a defined place in the storage box and can be identified through its barcode number for retrieval, if necessary. –– MyBib – WMS. All partners that contribute to the collective holdings use MyBib eDoc by the German firm ImageWare Components GmbH to process their document delivery orders. These are placed through a known item search in the LMS and are transmitted through the aforementioned interface directly to the WMS. To facilitate the processing of orders that are placed through services like SFX or a free-text form on the library’s website, ImageWare programmed an interface that allows the transmission of orders from MyBib eDoc to the WMS directly. –– MyBib eDoc – MyBib eDoc. Since the CSLS handles orders from four different MyBib eDoc installations in Basel, Lucerne, St. Gall and Zurich, it was necessary to programme a single point of entry for the operators to eliminate the need to switch from one MyBib eDoc installation to another during the processing of document delivery orders. It was also desired that the document delivery cooperation profit as much as possible from the shared col-

152 

 Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer

lection. A new interface allows partners to redirect a request for a serial not owned by the partner. The customers are not aware that they are receiving copies from the CSLS or another library. Copy fees are charged by their home libraries.

Figure 10.5: CSLS software interfaces (graphic by Philipp Marti, Central and University Library Lucerne).



10 The Cooperative Storage Library Switzerland 

 153

Courier Services The CSLS uses different courier services for the delivery of physical items: –– IDS-Courier Service: the university libraries of the German speaking part of Switzerland operate a courier service that circulates between Büron, Aarau, Basel, Bern, St. Gall and Zurich once a day. –– Lucerne Courier Service: since virtually all of the Central and University Library’s holdings are housed in the CSLS, with the exception of the newest items and the most valuable parts of its rare and special collections, the library has its own courier that drives from Büron to Lucerne twice a day. –– Postal service for single items either to libraries or customers that do not use the IDS Courier Service.

Costs It is important to bear in mind that the CSLS is an independent institution and has to recover all costs from its customers. Up to now, it has not received any subsidies. Costs involved are full costs; they comprise capital costs, storage costs, operations costs and overhead costs. Capital costs including mortgage and amortisation are calculated into the rent. Storage costs are charged according to the reserved space. Lucerne for example has reserved ample space for growth; it pays not only for its actual collection of one million items, but for the calculated growth of the next 10 to 15 years, which means 1.5 million items in total. Apart from the immediate reserved space costs, each partner pays its proportional share of the working area, the empty space and the overhead costs for the operation. This proportional share will of course decrease with each new partner. The operations costs during the first two years of operation were charged by the CSLS to its partners according to the letter of intent. The quantities for each service, including lending and document delivery, were estimated by each library; these estimates were the basis for calculating operative costs for the letter of intent. Each service was timed and priced according to industrial standard times for each step involved. After the first two full years of operation, billing will be based on the actual number of services undertaken for each library and all services will be re-calculated according to the real-time measurements for each step.

154 

 Dani Tschirren and Ulrich Niederer

The Future After its first two years of operation, the CSLS stores 2.2 million volumes. Adding up all the extra reserves (approximately 0.6 million items), the total capacity of 3.1 million items will be filled to 90% which means that a new module will have to be built for any new partner. Based on feedback both nationally and on an international scale it is expected that new partners will soon be found.

Facts and Figures as of January 2018 Holdings: 2,167,174 items Individually owned holdings: 1,385,693 (64%) Collectively owned holdings: 781,471 items (36%) Containers hold 27.1 items on average (31.4 items in octavo per small container, 19 items in quarto per big container) Net weight (without containers): 1,842 tons Max weight per container: 60 kg Average weight per container: 24.5 kg (small container), 34.2 kg (big container) Average weight per item: 0.64 kg (octavo), 1.5 kg (quarto) Electricity produced by the photovoltaic installation (2017): 179,236 kWh

Dorothea Sommer

11 G  arching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments Abstract: In order to preserve printed collections, academic libraries need sufficient storage capacities and favourable storage conditions. This chapter will focus on one of the outstanding examples of such a storage library in Germany, the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Speicherbibliothek/Bavarian Storage Facility Garching. The storage library in Garching was built to serve as an auxiliary stack building for the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek/Bavarian State Library. With an acquisition rate of up to 140,000 volumes per year, the Bavarian State Library was forced to move substantial portions of its holdings to off-site locations, away from the main library building in the Munich city centre. The chosen location was Garching, a northern suburb, where the storage library lies in close proximity to other research institutions and is part of one of the largest research campuses in Germany. Designed as an industrial building, the Garching buildings are a modular and extensible storage facility which features compact mobile shelving systems. The first building was finished in 1988, the second building in 2005, while a third building has been approved for funding and is expected to be finished in the early 2020s. The chapter describes the genesis and development of the Bavarian Storage Facility Garching, emphasising the necessity for long-term government funding. Keywords: Library materials – Storage; Libraries – Space utilisation;  Library buildings – Design and construction; Bavarian State Library; Libraries – Collections

Introduction Storage in research libraries is under pressure for several reasons. Despite the growing numbers of electronic journals, the growth of print collections shows no sign of diminishing and the prevailing academic cultures in many disciplines are averse to disposing of paper copies. Within libraries the use of space is becoming critical and institutional strategies increasingly promote student-centred approaches to the layout of the building in order to provide favourable student experience. Extra storage space comes low in funding priorities (CHEMS Consulting 2005).

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-012

156 

 Dorothea Sommer

This statement from a 2005 study by CHEMS, a leading Consultancy in Higher Education Policy and Management for the UK Research Libraries, still holds true today and also applies to German academic libraries. In Germany, there is an increased awareness, once more, that printed collections are in need of favourable storage facilities. This is part of the discussion on how to pursue collection policies in a learning and research environment that offers both access to print and increasingly to electronic media. The media shift requires developing new concepts about content. In a global library world, big data analysis makes it increasingly possible to look at virtual collective collections from a holistic perspective. Within the Wissenschaftsrat/German Council of Science and Humanities, a group of scholars and library specialists specifically concerned with organisational matters of academic libraries also acknowledged the importance of suitable storage conditions and capacities for the printed heritage, and stated in its recommendations from 2012: The preservation of non-digital media needs sufficient storage capacities and professional support [...]. This is in part very expensive but absolutely necessary to preserve the print collections’ worth, both with regard to its material value as well as its value for research purposes (Wissenschaftsrat 2012, author’s translation) (Die Bewahrung von nicht-digitalen Medien erfordert ausreichende räumliche Lagerkapazitäten und professionelle Pflege […]. Das ist zum Teil mit hohen Kosten verbunden, aber unerlässlich, um den Werterhalt sowohl in materieller als auch in wissenschaftlicher Hinsicht zu sichern).

Moreover, in its 2013 survey and the consequent recommendations from 2015, the Koordinierungsstelle für die Erhaltung des schriftlichen Kulturguts/Coordination Office for the Preservation of the Written Cultural Heritage (Koordinierungsstelle für die Erhaltung des schriftlichen Kulturguts 2015) in Germany identified the necessity to store printed collections in favourable conditions as a key requirement in addressing the permanent preservation of the national heritage in the written tradition. In its recommendations, a separate chapter is devoted to buildings and facility management. The chapter emphasises the necessity for permanent financial support by the governing and financing bodies of the libraries. Furthermore, the report states that a regular monitoring process regarding the implementation of norms and standards of storage facilities, such as ISO 11799 (International Organization for Standardization 2015), shall be introduced. However, the Coordination Office also noted that, since 2009, the conditions for the preservation of the written and printed tradition have improved in Germany. In that context, it refers to the Bavarian Storage Facility Garching as an outstanding example. This article will focus on this storage facility and explore

11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 

 157

what constitutes the success story of Garching in the past, present and, hopefully, in the future.

Responsibility for Collecting and Storing The Bavarian State Library, with over 10.5 million volumes, is one the largest research libraries in Germany and Europe. The Library’s responsibility for archiving and storing is based on several regulations that cover its entire collection: –– The 1663 Legal Deposit Act is valid on a national as well as federal level. According to this Act, all publishers in Bavaria must submit two copies of all books published, including new releases, to the Bavarian State Library. The Bavarian State Library archives one copy and passes the other on to the respective regional deposit library in one of the seven administrative districts of Bavaria (Oberbayern, Niederbayern, Oberfranken, Mittelfranken, Unterfranken, Oberpfalz and Schwaben). –– A second obligation is the preservation and archiving of the special collections that have been funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft/ German Research Foundation over the course of previous years. In this context, the Bavarian State Library mainly collects literature from the fields of History and Classical studies, Music and Musicology and Eastern European Studies. For these fields, the State Library has acquired highly specialised literature, in particular from abroad, which it has been archiving. At present, the Special Subject Collections are transformed within a new programme line of the German Research Foundation into Specialised Information Services (https://tinyurl.com/ydes9yxa). In view of the media shift, the new programme line has a focus on digital media products and services, but sometimes still includes the acquisition of printed media, depending on the different regions of the world and the respective publication culture. –– The third obligation is based on a “collection inherent reason” (Kempf 2005, 81). In Germany, as in many countries in the world, there is a general cultural-political agreement that provides libraries with the mandate to protect and organise their collections in perpetuity. This is certainly true for the great universal libraries and those state and/or university libraries with an archival obligation for the literature of the state or region. However, it has to be noted that university libraries in Germany are especially under increasing pressure to permanently preserve their collections (Roeder 2016).

158 

 Dorothea Sommer

One can observe an evident trend to dispose printed collections in favour of media that are available digitally (Vogt 2017). However, the Bavarian State Library archives all of its holdings and, as a basic principle, does not discard anything. The collections of the State Library can thus be seen as a research reserve for both Bavaria and Germany. Garching was built to serve as an auxiliary stack building for the Bavarian State Library. As such, it is one of two storage library locations in Bavaria for archiving print materials. The second storage facility is situated in the north of Bavaria, at the Universitätsbibliothek Regensburg/University Library Regensburg (4,400m², 1.35 million volumes).

The Past The central building of the State Library at Ludwigstraße was initiated by the Bavarian King Ludwig I (1786–1868) who commissioned the architect Friedrich von Gärtner (1791–1847) to build a representative building for the court library in the Romanesque style. Its construction lasted from 1832 to 1842. The central building ran out of capacity in the 1970s; originally, Gärtner built the library for a collection of only 500,000 volumes, with an acquisition rate of 2,000 books per year at the time. One could have assumed that the spacious building would have had room for manuscripts and books for several more centuries. However, mass production in the book publishing industry in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries dramatically changed the requirements for space laid down in the original space estimate. Today, the Gärtner-building in the Ludwigstraße serves a capacity of 4.5 million volumes (with more than 3.5 million used), which means that nearly seven million volumes of the 10.5 million volumes need to be accommodated in off-site premises.

Garching I In the 1970s, it was a challenging endeavour to obtain the finances and land for a much-needed extension of the Bavarian State Library (Mücke 1989). The greatest difficulty lay in the obvious fact that an extension within the city of Munich was not going to be possible. The reasons were due to regulations of city building planning as well as the rising costs of real estate prices in the city centre. Munich is one of the most expensive German cities with regard to real estate prices. Therefore, it was necessary to find a suitable alternate location for a storage library

11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 

 159

outside the city centre. The chosen location was Garching, a suburb in the north of Munich. The State of Bavaria funded the land and building for a total of 25 million Deutschmark (USD13M); however, to meet the medium-term need for storage space, the Garching library would have required even more funding. Since the initial financial requirements of 70 million Deutschmark could not be met at once, it was decided to create a modular space that could be built in four stages with an ultimate capacity for eight million volumes.

Location The decision for Garching as a location was taken in 1979. The storage library lies in close proximity with other research institutions. Today, Garching is one of the largest research campuses in Germany with institutions that focus on basic research as well as technical high-end applications: the campus of the Technical University of Munich (TUM), several institutes of the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften/Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, diverse departments of the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München/ Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and the Leibniz-Rechencentrum/ Leibniz Supercomputing Centre of the Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften/ Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities. The location for the storage facility had to meet several criteria. Sufficient space that was affordable and expansible was required. The municipality of Garching demanded a building with maximum eaves height of nine metres. The open areas around the building were to be covered with plants and grass. Finally, the municipality of Garching emphasised its expectation of a well-structured building with appealing facades. In addition, the State Library in the city centre was to be within reach. Admittedly, the distance of 19 km (approx. 12 miles) is quite far but, with the motorway nearby, it would be possible to establish a courier service to enable a quick turnaround of books. The building was to be designed in a way to store the books in a compact and well-arranged manner. The storage library is situated at the interface between a residential area of the municipality of Garching and various buildings devoted to research, science and education. The residential area is located to the south, TUM campus is located to the north and west and the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics in the east. Moreover, the TUM fire department is conveniently based in the immediate neighbourhood.

160 

 Dorothea Sommer

The Building After a planning period of five years and a construction time of another three years, Garching I was finished in 1988 (Figure 11.1). The storage facility has clearly been designed as an industrial building. Garching I consists of two square building elements with four floors each, with the total length measuring about 28.8 metres with a middle zone of 8 metres. At the corners, there are towers (Figure 11.2) which incorporate stairs, elevators and diverse maintenance rooms.

Figure 11.1: Garching I (photo by H.R. Schulz).

Each floor has a height of 2.58 to 2.68 metres and is laid out with steel and concrete flat slabs. The floor can carry about 1,500 kilopond per square metre thereby allowing for the installation of compact shelves. Whereas the interior is characterised by a reinforced concrete skeleton, the building envelope is made of bricks with rather thick walls of approximately 50 centimetres. The thermal mass of the building guarantees control of the inside of the building’s environment to protect the collections. The massive walls allow for little sensitivity towards climate changes. The room climate was laid out with 18 °C and 50 % relative humidity; in order to provide ventilation, the compact shelves remain open during the night.

11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 

 161

On the outside, the building envelope has white aluminium panels on a metal sub-construction and vertical elements with narrow horizontal windows. This metal skin is about 50 cm away from the brick walls behind it which allows for air ventilation that additionally protects the building. Thus, outside temperature changes reach the building’s interior only with great delay and exercise a rather moderate influence on the collections, which largely consist of organic cellulose material. The storage facility has, as already mentioned, narrow horizontal windows which admit natural light into the stacks at regular intervals and provide a visual link to the outside world. At the same time, they automatically serve to extract smoke in the hopefully unlikely event of a fire, as well as naturally ventilate the building. The windows of the offices have solar control glass and exterior blinds for sun protection.

Figure 11.2: Garching I towers (photo by H.R. Schulz).

Garching I has a gross building area of 9,170 m² and a capacity of 7,022 m² for shelving and office rooms. The compact shelves, which operate electronically, are arranged according to the diverse formats into folio, quarto and octavo size (Figure 11.3). Shelving constructions for the folio-size books can be found in the

162 

 Dorothea Sommer

basement of the building, the quarto-size volumes on the ground floor and the octavo-size books on the two upper levels. Altogether, it was possible to transfer over 2.5 million volumes to Garching I.

Figure 11.3: Compact shelves at Garching (photo by H.R. Schulz).

Garching II At the end of 1995 the storage library reached the limits of its capacity, making it therefore necessary to extend the building. The application for an extension had been submitted to the Bavarian government in 1990 and the Bavarian State granted about 50 million Deutschmark in 2001, which made it possible to start the planning process in 2002/2003. The construction of the second building, which was very similar to the first, began in 2004 and was finished in 2005 (Figure 11.4). The building area was slightly larger this time with a total surface area of 9,156 m², thus allowing for a capacity of three million books. Together, the storage facilities of Garching I and II have capacity for about 5.5 million books.

11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 

 163

Figure 11.4: Garching II (photo by H.R. Schulz).

Garching II ran out of space in 2010. At that time, the Bavarian State Library annually acquired about 140,000 books. In order to accommodate the books situated outside the main library at the Ludwigstraße and storage facilities of Garching, it was necessary from this time onwards to rent other stack buildings (these are the stack buildings in Neufahrn [4,470 m2] and the Euroindustriepark [4,492 m2.]) Once again, State Library staff had to decide about the value and use of the collections to be stored, the requirements for adequate storing and preservation as well as the service level for readers. User services have been organised in a way that 60% of book requests can be handled at the main library building, but already 40% of all requests have to be obtained from the various decentralised storage buildings, with Garching being the main one. The general principle is that high use and high value material is stored in the main building at Ludwigstraße. A crucial factor for successful day-to-day operations was the organisation of ingoing and outgoing traffic on the premises in Garching, and the layout and location of the delivery zone. This was handled well. The delivery zone (Figure 11.5) is weather-proof by way of a glass roof-construction that leads into a loading and unloading area within the building. A free standing steel portal protects the building’s facade from potential damages caused by manoeuvring lorries.

164 

 Dorothea Sommer

Figure 11.5: Delivery zone at Garching (photo by H.R. Schulz).

The Future: Garching III Meanwhile, it is necessary to design a new storage facility which again will be an extension of the current building complex in Garching. The main imperative for the Bavarian State Library, once more, is to design a building that offers a maximum amount of storage on a minimum footprint. The current compact shelving scheme will be implemented again. Assumedly, there is still a need to collect and archive printed physical media in the future. The trend to switch from predominantly print to predominantly digital material affects serials and journals more than monographs. In Germany, approximately 90,000 books were published in 2015 (Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels e.V. 2016). Germany is one of the largest book markets after China, the United States, Great Britain, Russia, India and Japan (Wikipedia 2018). The Bavarian State Library currently acquires 140,000 books per year from all over the world. Calculations for Garching III are based on a slightly diminishing but fairly stable acquisition rate of at least 130,000 books per year. Current estimates show that the library will need a new building in 2024 at the latest. The surface area available for an extension is 9,630m², which is somewhat larger than Garching I or Garching II (Figure 11.6 and 11.7). On the plus side,

11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 

Figure 11.6: Garching I-III floorplan (graphic by Staatliches Bauamt München 2).

 165

166 

 Dorothea Sommer

Figure 11.7: Garching III section-elevation (graphic by Staatliches Bauamt München 2).

the municipality of Garching now accepts more over-ground storeys than in previous years. Thus, Garching III can possibly be planned with four instead of three over-ground levels. According to current plans initiated and supported by the Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Bildung und Kultus, Wissenschaft und Kunst / Bavarian State Ministry for Education, Culture, Science and Arts, the storage facility will serve two institutions: the Bavarian State Library and the University Library of the Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU), which is situated right across the street at Ludwigstraße. Whereas the Bavarian State Library needs to accommodate approximately 4 million books, the University Library would like to store 1.6 million books. Since there is not going to be enough space for the total amount of books from both institutions, it was decided to divide up the surface area of approximately 11,255m²; two thirds will be at the disposal of the Bavarian State Library, with the remaining third for the LMU University Library. The Bavarian State Library will thus be able to store another 3.2 million books in Garching, but will need to rent another facility to accommodate future collections. The intention is that the Bavarian State Library and the LMU University Library will not run a collaborative but rather cooperative scheme, with clear divisions of space for stacks and administration with regard to their respective collections. According to current plans, this will also apply to the delivery zone, in order to maintain autonomous transport service opportunities for books. The application for building Garching III was submitted to the Bavarian government in August 2016 and approved in 2017. Building costs are expected to amount to 44.5M Euro (USD50.3M).

11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 

 167

Conclusion The decision to create a modular and extensible storage facility in Garching has proven to be successful over the last 30 years. To outsource storage is clearly a viable solution for the space problems brought about by extensive and ever-growing physical collections in heritage institutions. At the same time, off-site storage also entails risks connected with funding, preservation and security. Most of all, storing collections anywhere else but in a conveniently situated library building creates for users significant access problems since a simultaneous use of a library’s physical and digital collections is still not always possible. In this context, it is relevant to note that, for German-speaking countries, the Bavarian State Library is the library with the largest amount of freely accessible digital content, because of its involvement in the Google Books Library Project (Figure 11.8). Currently, over two million volumes of the library’s copyright-free physical collections are available digitally. This decisively improves access to the content of the collections, not only locally in Munich but worldwide. However, the digital media of the Bavarian State Library is still a rather small, if growing, part of the overall collections of the institution, which were assembled throughout the centuries since its foundation in 1558.

Figure 11.8: Proportion print collection/ digitised book collection at the Bavarian State Library in 2017 (graphic by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek).

168 

 Dorothea Sommer

Last, but not least, storage solutions for physical collections, in particular off-site solutions, will become more important in line with the availability of ubiquitous electronic content. It makes it possible that precious space in libraries, centrally located for patrons, can be converted into attractive user spaces (Figures 11.9 and 11.10). One finding of a recent study on user behaviour in Germany is that small, poorly equipped libraries with limited opening hours no longer attract users (Vogel and Woisch 2013). They want spacious locations with many diverse learning places, excellent technical equipment and cafeterias, all of which can be found in the Bavarian State Library.

Figure 11.9: Patrons queuing before the main reading room opens in the morning (photo by Bayerische Staatsbibliothek).

11 Garching – the Bavarian Storage Library: Past, Present and Future Developments 

 169

Figure 11.10: Patrons enjoying the Bavarian State Library’s cafeteria (photo by H.R. Schulz).

The character of a storage facility needs to be defined, whether it will be a bright, dim or dark archive, to preserve the printed physical collections. Since the available space is always limited and provides a final frontier, libraries permanently have to keep an eye on the management of the respective collections in all their different format expressions and accordingly have to make necessary adjustments. The approaches towards storage are various and have to be considered on an institutional or sometimes even collective level (Sommer 2017). All this depends on the respective institution’s mandate and mission for public supply of literature.

170 

 Dorothea Sommer

References Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. 2016. Bewahren.sammeln.entdecken. Jahresbericht der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek. Munich: Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. https://www. bsb-muenchen.de/fileadmin/pdf/publikationen/jahresbericht/bsb_jb_2016.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels e.V. 2016. Buch und Buchhandel in Zahlen 2016 (für 2015). Frankfurt: Börsenverein des deutschen Buchhandels. http://buchmesse.de/ images/fbm/dokumente-ua-pdfs/2016/buchmarkt_deutschland_2016_dt.pdf_58507.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. CHEMS Consulting. 2005. Optimising Storage and Access in UK Research Libraries: A Study for CURL and the British Library. North Yorkshire, U.K.: CHEMS Consulting. http://www.rluk. ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/CURL_BLStorageReptExecSummary.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. International Organization for Standardization. 2015. ISO 11799:2015 Information and Documentation: Document Storage Requirements for Archive and Library Materials. Geneva: ISO. Kempf, K. 2005. “Storage Solutions in a Co-Operative Library System.” Library Management 26, nos. 1–2: 79–88. doi:10.1108/01435120510572905. Koordinierungsstelle für die Erhaltung des Schriftlichen Kulturguts. 2015. Die Erhaltung des Schriftlichen Kulturguts in Archiven und Bibliotheken in Deutschland. Bundesweite Handlungsempfehlungen für die Beauftragte der Bundesregierung für Kultur und Medien und die Kultusministerkonferenz. Berlin: KEK – Koordinierungsstelle für die Erhaltung des Schriftlichen Kulturguts an der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz. http://kek-spk.de/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf_Downloads/KEK_Bundesweite_ Handlungsempfehlungen.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Mücke, M. 1989. “Die Speicherbibliothek Garching.” ABI Technik 9, no. 4: 297–307. Roeder, C. 2016. “Aussonderung von Printbeständen an Wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken in Deutschland.” Bibliotheksdienst 50, no. 12: 1014–1040. doi:10.1515/bd-2016-0124. Sommer, D. 2017. “Kooperative Aussonderung – Kooperative Speicherung: Aktivitäten und Planungen von Bibliotheken im europäischen Rahmen.” ABI Technik 37, no. 2: 82–92. doi 10.1515/abitech-2017-0021. Vogel, B., and A. Woisch. 2013. Orte des Selbststudiums. Eine empirische Studie zur zeitlichen und räumlichen Organisation des Lernens von Studierenden. Forum Hochschule 7/2013. Hannover: Hochschul-Informations-System. http://www.dzhw.eu/pdf/pub_fh/fh-201307. pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Vogt, R. 2017. “Koordinierte Aussonderung und Kooperative Archivierung von Printzeitschriften.” Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie 64, no. 6: 329–336. Wikipedia. 2018. “Books published per country per year.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Books_published_per_country_per_year. Accessed March 18, 2018. Wissenschaftsrat. 2012. Empfehlungen zur Weiterentwicklung der Wissenschaftlichen Informationsinfrastrukturen in Deutschland bis 2020: Wissenschaftsrat. Berlin: Wissenschaftsrat. https://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/archiv/2359-12.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018.

Part 4: Crafting the Project Story No building project can succeed without a story that resonates with its community members, funding agencies, governing authorities, and staff. This section offers methods to define a unified vision and communicate the project story effectively.

Jeffrey M. Hoover

12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories Abstract: Librarians and library planners can work directly with communities to craft narratives that will describe their future libraries. The outcomes of this collaborative process become the criteria by which library building design options are evaluated. The process of developing the criteria and deriving designs builds community cohesion and community consensus behind library projects and ultimately creates better libraries. Outlined in this paper are basic organisational structures for interacting with communities via activities and tools that are digital and tangible, as well as graphical and narrative. The approach is illustrated with case studies describing the process and the completed buildings, or building designs for unbuilt projects, that have employed a range of community engagement techniques. Case studies include the 43,000 square foot (3995 square metres) newly constructed 2017 AIA/ALA award winning Varina Area Library in Henrico County, Virginia, as well as in-progress library projects: Seekonk Library, Seekonk Massachusetts; Forrer Learning Commons, Bridgewater College, Virginia; Wayland Free Public Library, Wayland, Massachusetts; and the Fairfield Area Library, Henrico County, Virginia. The following techniques were employed and evaluated: –– Encouraging participation with online community surveys, employing preliminary feedback loops –– Hosting hands‐on community drawing exercises illustrating “How I use the Library” as a basis for communicating and documenting the diversity of use patterns in current facilities –– Telling “A Day in the Life” stories about future library activities and resources –– Establishing future library facility goals on a space‐by‐space basis to supplement big picture aspirations, using community focus groups –– Incorporating community evaluations of facility design solutions as they evolve –– Graphically indicating how various elements of the community demographic will extract value from a future library based on use patterns anticipated and illustrated by individuals from the community Employing these processes, a community can write the story about its future library, assess the graphics to illustrate the story, and document understandings and anticipation of future use. Keywords: Library planning; Community engagement; Library buildings – Design and construction https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-013

174 

 Jeffrey M. Hoover

Where to Begin? There are many and varied ways that community involvement in a library building programming and design process can begin. Professional planners and architects are often brought in once sufficient momentum has been generated behind the project on the part of library and community leadership so that there are some initial funds to expend on preliminary professional planning and design services. The following is a summary and compilation of methods of community engagement developed. They continue to evolve through a series of recent successful library projects. The first step is a survey of library patrons and community members at large in both online and paper formats. There are various techniques for garnering participation beyond the library’s circle of dedicated patrons including direct mailings to community members, and distribution of surveys at polling places on Election Day. However, there are many community-specific solutions. The full spectrum will not be elaborated here, since they need to be derived locally. While libraries regularly survey their patron bases, the purpose of our survey is to solicit information that will be useful in configuring new or renovated spaces. The questions, and the interpretation of the answers, should focus on providing insights about community preferences for the quantity and character of library spaces. While the spaces will be in support of services, collections and activities, the survey should be tuned to yield information about spatial qualities. The basic questions to ask are these: –– What works? –– What does not work? –– What is missing? Habitual patrons of the library will be keen to identify beloved attributes that they do not want to see sacrificed in the interest of improvements or expansions in other areas. Most patrons are able to identify aspects of the library that do not work well. Non-users can usually provide perspectives on dysfunctional aspects as well as perceived deficiencies. With some exploratory questions about alternate library facilities and other destination spaces in a community that are preferred over their local library, information about missing attributes, spaces and character can be gleaned. For academic library projects, a graphic survey has often been employed, recognising that students are often over-surveyed and can find completing yet another one burdensome. A graphics-based survey can be a pleasant departure from the norm and therefore get broader participation.



12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories 

 175

Initial Meeting When the survey is launched, the initial meeting, or series of meetings1, is announced. This meeting needs to occur while the survey is still open for input. Typically there are three important agenda items for the meeting: –– Report on the preliminary survey responses –– Complete an exercise about library use –– Explore potential future library examples Garnering preliminary feedback from the survey and sharing it with the participants at the meeting is important for generating thought and discussion about individual and collective preferences for the future library. It is important to illuminate as broad a spectrum and as diverse a set of opinions as can be gleaned from the feedback. It provokes a reaction that generates commentary and discussion, exposing the community to the diversity of perspectives about the library that exists within their own community. It also encourages the participants in the room to complete a survey form themselves and to encourage their friends to contribute their perspective (Fig. 12.1). Generally, the preliminary comments are summarised: “This is what your neighbors are saying about your future library. Shouldn’t your voice be heard? Offer your thoughts now and include them in the final survey results.” There is a report on “Who’s Talking” to illustrate the demographic profile of the respondents. If, for example, seniors or single people or teens are under-represented, individuals of that demographic are encouraged to contribute. Next on the agenda is to engage the participants in a hands-on exercise. It is important to keep the exercise simple so that all can participate and also important to use the exercise as a mechanism to generate community dialogue about the future library. One such exercise is “Show us how you use the current library.” The space should be set up with round tables for six to eight people. Participants should be encouraged not to sit with people with whom they came to the meeting, in order to have diversity. At each table, a single large copy of the current library facility plan, crafted to be easily understood by the lay public, is provided, together with enough different coloured markers for each person at the table to have a different colour. The assignment is to draw on the plan, “how you use the library”, from where they park and enter the building to where they go inside and where they stop and spend time (Fig 12.2). The graphic result is a multi-coloured 1  For the planning of the Fairfield Area Library for the Henrico County Public Library system, a total of six initial meetings were held on various weekday times, plus a weekend meeting, in order to enable participation from as many constituencies as was practical.

176 

 Jeffrey M. Hoover

Figure 12.1: Slides sharing community survey results (graphic by Tappé Architects).

Figure 12.2: “How you use the library exercise,” Henrico County Library predesign process (graphic by Tappé Architects).



12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories 

 177

markup of the existing library with lines connecting the spaces that are important, and blobs or dots or stars indicating the places where patrons dwell or linger. The critical part of the exercise, however, is for every participant to describe out loud a day at the library, so that the others at their table will hear. In this way, the participants are exposed to the diversity of ways that the library is valued in the community and thereby develop an understanding of how areas or services that are not important to them personally may be essential services or desired destinations for others. A participant who is not a library user, and may have come to the meeting to state that the library is neither relevant to the community nor valued by the taxpayers, will be enlightened to both the value and relevance of the library to others. Via an exercise like this, new awareness is made about the diversity of ways the library is used, even among folks who are project detractors, and new understandings are realised as a community conversation about the future library is initiated. Following the exercise is a good time to further expose all the participants to the spectrum of potential future library environments and services. Be provocative; draw on successful examples from disparate places and explain that this will not be your grandparents’ library. (Fig. 12.3)

Figure 12.3: Slides positing that future libraries will be different from past or present libraries (graphic by Tappé Architects).

178 

 Jeffrey M. Hoover

However, shape the message and illustrate it in a way that will be both eye-opening and reassuring to the community. Explain that there are hosts of ideas and opportunities for the future library (Fig. 12.4). For example, illustrate that new libraries can make community and cultural connections; offer a new welcoming character relative to an existing facility; incorporate the most advanced or appropriate information technology; and create opportunities for focused concentration. Exposure to alternative library scenarios builds on the new awareness that participants have learned from their community in the earlier exercise.

Figure 12.4: Service ideas and opportunities slides (graphic by Tappé Architects).

Next Interaction with the Community By the second community meeting, the survey will be closed and the results both documented and analyzed. Rather than focus extensively on the results, provide a brief summary, thank everyone and let them know where they can review the



12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories 

 179

report in the library or on line. Report on the activities from the last meeting, providing some projected scans of the exercise. In the intervening time between the community meetings, usually four to six weeks, the Library Building Programme document describing the functional requirements of the future library can have been developed or updated with the library leadership and staff. Together with describing the functional requirements, and quantifying the seating, collections, computer workstations and all furnishings and equipment, it will be critical in the narrative descriptions of each functional area of the library to identify goals on a space-by-space basis. What type of information is sought in the space-by-space goals? A traditional Library Building Programme identifies the activities being supported in each space, the qualities that are needed for building finishes, lighting, power and data, acoustics, and how much stuff to put in the spaces. What the goals section should communicate is something about why the spaces are needed in the library and what the library hopes to achieve by community use of the spaces. For instance, the Teen Collaboration Zone / Homework Center section of a library would have the following attributes listed under functions: Functions performed: Group study, project work and social interaction. The goals identified are less tangible and measurable, but arguably more meaningful: Service goals: Establish spaces that facilitate collaborative study between teens, without disturbing other library patrons (including other teens). Create a teen population ready for collaborative problem solving in higher education and in their work lives. Foster understanding between individual students as they pursue group problem solving. Aside from the value this has in documenting the intentions of the library and communicating it to the architects and designers before they craft space and select supportive finishes, furnishings and equipment, it has value to the community conversation about the library. Given that, in a free society, the library is an institution of pivotal importance and an essential service on par with police and fire departments (a personal/professional bias), every member of the community should become comprehensively familiar with the programme for any future library by reading the Library Building Programme in its entirety. This is, of course, a bit of tongue-in-

180 

 Jeffrey M. Hoover

cheek rhetoric. Few will read the Library Building Programme; however, community engagement and active dialogue about the Library Building Programme can occur in the context of an exercise in the second community meeting. In order to facilitate the community conversation about the Library Building Programme, a concise document needs to be made. From the functional area descriptions, the functions and goals for each public space are extracted. Staff spaces are reviewed independently with the appropriate individuals/groups within the staff organisation. These can be organised in clusters or zones of service, for instance the Welcome Zone, the Community Programmes Zone, the Commons/Community Living Room, Adult Services, Teen Services and Children’s Services. Most zones will fit on a single-sided sheet of paper. This is concise enough to be digested by laypeople from the community in the context of an evening meeting. During the community meeting, the brief documents are distributed to each table in the room. Each table receives a single zone, enough copies for everyone at the table to have their own copy, as well as pens/ pencils and highlighting markers. Participants may want to move to a table that has the content to which they feel most connected and want to offer their perspective. The exercise/assignment is as follows: –– At each table, each participant should skim the functions, understanding that they have been predetermined and will be ultimately vetted by the library leadership –– The participants should focus on the goals, facilitated by having a spokesperson at each table read the goals out loud –– As they review the goals, they should individually highlight the goals that resonate with them, strike the goals that do not, and write what they feel is missing –– Each participant then articulates a personal perspective to the others at the table –– At the end of the review and discussion period, a spokesperson from each table reports back on the table’s topic and the areas that were the focus of conversation so that the entire group of attendees is aware of the overall issues. Subsequent to the meeting, a written summary report is drafted and made available in the library and online for the benefit of community members who want to participate but were not present. Further perspectives can be integrated into a final report summarizing community feedback. Once feedback is garnered and assembled, a significant achievement relative to community involvement in the planning and design process will have been realised. The community will have taken an active part in crafting the narrative that describes its future library.



12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories 

 181

From the most recent application of this technique, some of the pertinent influences on the Library Building Programme that came out of the community process included the following community realisations (Fig. 12.5): –– Learn to cook: a teaching kitchen can be an essential component of a community meeting room –– Free technology: a Digital Media Lab should be central and not lock up the technology when not used for instruction. –– Change daily: Story Hour rooms need to be able to change –– Share space: space is more essential than technology for collaboration –– Thinkspace: quiet concentration space is still an essential ingredient in twenty-first century libraries

Figure 12.5: Henrico County community pre-design planning workshop (photo by Jeffrey Hoover).

Additionally, community outreach efforts can be taken to people where they congregate, rather than requiring them to come to the library. Meetings can be held with teens at their schools, or seniors at the senior centres to gain perspectives about aspects of the library important to them (Figure 12.6).

182 

 Jeffrey M. Hoover

Third Community Participation Session After the narrative from the community has been incorporated into the Library Building Programme, initial design explorations can begin with enhanced understanding of community perspectives. At the third meeting, again, generally four to six weeks after the previous meeting, initial design options can be presented. To encourage community involvement and garner feedback, participants at the gathering are asked to note their general comments on sticky notes during the presentation of the optional designs. In addition to the general comments, the participating community members also place area-specific comments on sticky notes and put them on the plans in areas of concern. By their relative density, these notes provide a graphic indication of areas of particular interest to the community that merit additional design consideration. By the actual written comments, the community expresses their thoughts on the developing plans at a granular level that the design team can incorporate as they pursue the next phase of design. Again, these comments become part of the story that the community is writing about its future library. Additionally, attendees can be asked to make an informal vote for the overall option they prefer. While having them place a star on the preferred option provides immediate visual indication, the voting is best done anonymously, since a person about to vote cannot avoid being influenced by the prior votes. To expand participation to those who were not present at the community gathering, or who opted not to be part of the public display of voting, the voting can be extended online, where participation is anonymous.

Results From feedback, community members appreciate the opportunity to participate in the planning of future library buildings. Representative comments2 received when the techniques described above were employed: … wonderful feeling I had at yesterday’s meeting… I felt heard… I felt I am participating in a constructive process that will lead to a gigantic success! The energy was palpable, and I so look forward to the future steps of the process. 2  Quotes from community members involved in planning sessions held with the community for the Faneuil Branch of the Boston Public Library.



12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories 

 183

Additionally, library administrations familiar with community processes from multiple planning and design projects have reinforced the positive impact3: The community appreciated the inclusionary group exercise. I’m going to share it with the leadership team at BPL as we strategize for how we can work with the community to align our goals a bit better.

Additional Outreach/Engagement Techniques An additional online technique was used at the Surrey Library in British Columbia, Canada, reported on by Library Journal in 20134. Via the library blog (Figure 12.6), an invitation for open-ended responses was made in a format that would be shared and available for moderated comment as the project evolved.

Figure 12.6: Henrico County Library blog from 5 November 2013 (graphic by Tappé Architects and Henrico County Library). 3 Quotes from the Director of Branch Services, Boston Public Library. 4 http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2012/06/buildings/lbd/case-study-how-social-media-built-alibrary-library-by-design-spring-2012, accessed March 15, 2018.

184 

 Jeffrey M. Hoover

The community was encouraged to “Use images or words… from around the country, the world or your imagination.” During the planning stages, graphic results were featured on a Flickr page (Figure 12.7), with initial characterisations and subsequent follow-up comments from the community. This facilitates a dialogue, albeit an online one, between community members about the library that takes place independent of direction by the design team or library.

Figure 12.7: Henrico County Library “Library Concepts” Flickr page (graphic by Tappé Architects and Henrico County Library).

An additional technique, which is face-to-face rather than online to engage the community with the story of its future library, is to write, and illustrate, a draft version of “A Day in the Life of Your New Library” book (Figure 12.8). Neither the narrative nor the illustrations describe the physical character of the building, but



12 Communities Craft Future Library Stories 

 185

instead hint at the experiences that a broad spectrum of patrons could have in the library, to increase awareness of the diverse ways different members of the community will be able to use the library.

Figure 12.8: “A Day in the Life of Your New Library” community input tool (graphic by Tappé Architects).

The story is read aloud, with projected illustrations, at a community gathering. The community is then asked: –– Is the story appealing? –– What about that story resonated with you? –– What surprised you in the story? –– Does the story include the perspective of a person like you? –– Is there a chapter missing? What or whom would it be about? The Varina Area Library in the Henrico County, Virginia, Library System was one of the projects referenced above for both the social media input and the day in the life story approach. When the building was completed, it received a combined award for excellence in library building design from both the American Institute of Architects and the American Library Association (Figures 12.9 and 12.10).

Conclusion Employing these, or similar, processes, a community can write the story about its future library, assess the graphics that attempt to illustrate the story, and doc-

186 

 Jeffrey M. Hoover

ument understandings and anticipation of future library use. Having done this, a library facility can be produced that is finely tuned to the community demographic and therefore uniquely local. Having the quality of uniqueness can be a component of success for any institution in an increasingly globalised culture.

Figure 12.9: The Varina Area Library (photo by Chris Cunningham).

Figure 12.10: Varina Area Library collaboration zone (photo by Chris Cunningham).

Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

13 S  takeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies Abstract: The design of new or major renovations to library facilities requires considered involvement of stakeholders to ensure that the final designs reflect the diversity of users, changing needs and expectations. Two stakeholder engagement processes, one for the University of Saskatchewan Murray Library Master Plan working with the design team Group2 Architecture Interior Design Ltd. and Perkins+Will and a second for the Regina Public Library George Bothwell renovation and expansion project, are presented and reviewed. The relative success of the processes and considerations for improvement on future library projects, both academic and public, are outlined. Keywords: Library planning; Strategic planning; Community engagement 

University of Saskatchewan Murray Library Master Plan The University of Saskatchewan, located in the City of Saskatoon, is a Canadian public research university serving over 20,000 students. The University Library is composed of seven branches including the Murray Library which is in two buildings, Murray South and Murray North, constructed in 1954 and 1970 respectively (Figure 13.1) and totalling 15,505 square metres (167,000 square feet). As library services evolved over the last two decades, two phases of renovation were completed on three of the nine floor levels. To address specific shortcomings relating to the University Archives and Special Collections and the lack of student space, a third phase was identified and awarded to the design team led by Group2 Architecture Interior Design (https://www.group2.ca/) with Perkins+Will Canada (https://perkinswill.com/) in 2012. Initially, Phase 3 of the University Library Transformation Project was intended to expand on the work of Phases 1 and 2, which created two floors of user-centred space including service space supporting student success including for example writing help, group study rooms, and ‘us’ space for individual or group study. In addition, it introduced a café on the ground floor. Phase 3 was to rejuvenate and expand space for the general collections as well as the services https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-014

188 

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

Figure 13.1: Existing Murray Library (photo by Group2).

associated with University Archives and Special Collections. As planning progressed, however, the University Library determined that rather than developing design plans for each phase it would be better served by developing a master plan for all Murray Library spaces that reflected the vision for its future services, spaces and collections.

Existing Building and Spaces The Murray Library, the largest of seven branches, is in the heart of the University of Saskatchewan campus, with collections primarily in the humanities and social sciences. Students, faculty and staff from across the campus use this library more than a million times each year. It houses the technical services and information technology units of the library system, library administration and University Archives and Special Collections, which contains rare and unique collections used for classes and by researchers and scholars from on campus and around the world. The Murray Library offers a variety of services and programmes. The Learning Commons is a collaboration of the University Library, Information and Communications Technology, Disability Services for Students and Culinary Services.



13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies 

 189

Murray Library’s Student Learning Service offerings include assistance with writing, mathematics and statistics, study skills, peer-assisted learning and structured learning sessions. Other services in the library include an extensive array of computers, IT support, reference, circulation, library instruction, interlibrary loans, group study rooms, help for students with learning disabilities and a café.

Consultation Process The University of Saskatchewan Murray Library Master Plan was implemented to outline both programming and architectural planning strategies so that decisions implemented in the short term could be carried forward to create legibility and consistency in future renovations. To develop the strategies, three stakeholder consultation workshops were conducted with faculty, library administration and staff, as well as university facilities and maintenance staff. A fourth workshop focusing on students was undertaken using the outputs of the first three sessions to ensure the student voice would be considered within any master plan and design decision.

Future Trends Workshop The first of three stakeholder working sessions focused on future trends for academic libraries. Breakout groups discussed the current needs and goals of the University of Saskatchewan Library and the ways that these needs might change with the evolution of the academic learning environment, examining past, present and future trends: Past: –– Focus on collections –– Quiet, individualised study space Present: –– Focus on collections but consolidated and a just-in-time approach –– User space greater than stack space –– Group/collaborative spaces (we space) –– Social learning space (us space) –– Quiet study and research (me space)

190 

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

Future: –– Expanded programmes and services –– Focus on learning and research, less on teaching –– Library as the heart of campus –– Information technology integration –– Crossroads for knowledge and culture

Guiding Principles Workshop The next working session was conducted to engage participants in articulating and prioritising guiding principles specific to the University of Saskatchewan Murray Library Master Plan. Consideration was given to the current functions of the library and space allocation and how they must change over time to meet evolving academic learning and research needs.

Scenarios Workshop At the third and final workshop, participants conducted a spatial exploration of the programme in the context of the previously-developed guiding principles. Participants were again divided into three groups, each of which included participants from a cross-section of library programmes and functions. Groups were provided with scaled programme blocks and floor plans and tasked with developing functional distributions that reflected ideal programme adjacencies and locations (Figure 13.2). Three scenarios were created with key similarities: –– Emphasis on ‘we’ and ‘us’ spaces on the ground and first floors, ideally accessible after hours –– Need for a centrally-located Reading Room, as well as other quiet ‘us’ spaces –– Use the natural daylight in the North Building for people-oriented programmes –– Constrain collections to specific floors where natural light is scarce –– Consolidate Special Collections to one complete floor –– Consolidate Library Administration to one complete floor Along with the guiding principles, these common ideas formed the starting point for the development of the final master plan.



13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies 

 191

Figure 13.2: Scenarios Workshop process (photo by Group2).

Student Focus Groups Although specific student representatives were invited to participate in the first three stakeholder sessions, attendance was limited due to schedule conflicts. As a result, a fourth series of consultation sessions was added to collect student input regarding the proposed master plan. These hour-long sessions provided an overview of the background, principles and the ideas behind the proposed master plan. The students were guided through a series of pre-scripted questions to gather feedback on the items they expressed as important to the plan.

Regina Public Library George Bothwell Branch Project Regina Public Library (RPL) is in Regina, the capital city of the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. The large central library and eight branches are located in neighbourhoods throughout this fast-growing city of 230,000 people.

192 

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

The lease for the George Bothwell location, with a footprint of 1288 square metres (13,865 square feet), was due to expire after 20 years. The RPL Board empowered the library administration to negotiate with the landlord and confirm the opportunity to expand into an additional adjacent 305 square metres (3,287 square feet) of retail mall store front space. The expansion and continuation of the lease would allow the library to amortise capital improvements over a longer period. In June 2015, Regina Public Library launched a Request for Proposal process (Regina Public Library 2015) to appoint design services for the expansion and renovation of the George Bothwell Branch.

Location The George Bothwell Branch serves the whole of the south and west side of the city (Figure 13.3). The geographic placement of the branch within the city’s busiest retail mall, the availability and ease of public transit, abundant parking and the large senior population within its branch catchment area have caused it to become the second highest net use location outside of the central library. The layout and design of space had been problematic for many years, with principal concerns being the lack of capacity to create quiet space and the oversized assignment and lack of functional efficiency in staff work areas and materials handling spaces in this high-net return location. Despite some approaches at refreshing furniture and finishes, the carpet, heating, ventilation and air conditioning and most millwork were original to the mid-1990s construction.

Figure 13.3: Existing George Bothwell Branch (photo by Group2).



13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies 

 193

Services and Programmes Significant data is collected at RPL about programmes and services in each location. In addition to a robust programme of general assessment, the library had undertaken user satisfaction and observational studies at all locations to determine user behaviour, expectations and perceptions. The community at this branch have high expectations and make tremendous use of the space for WiFi, fixed computing and personal use of technology. There is high demand and attendance by all ages for programming delivered in two enclosed rooms, a significant children’s collection and family learning space, and a small teen space. One area with the highest demand and lowest satisfaction was the large and light-filled quiet magazine and newspaper reading area, which was unfortunately located adjacent to the preschooler open space. While the community demographic profile can aid in planning, the branch has an influx of users from all community boundaries in the city because of its location within the busiest retail mall in the city - a fact confirmed through the GIS mapping at the checkouts.

RPL Bothwell Consultation Process The selected design team, led by Group2 Architecture Interior Design, was tasked with investigating three renovation options representing varying levels of investment to support the library board’s decision to undertake the most viable design option, in terms of both cost and fulfillment of goals. To develop the various options, two stakeholder consultation workshops were conducted with library administration and staff, library board members, members of the surrounding community and customers of the existing branch. The workshops comprised an initial visioning workshop from which guiding principles were derived and a second user feedback workshop which reviewed the principles. In addition to the process outlined below, the library administration held three open house sessions targeting the public attending the branch as well as several RPL staff meetings, including two meetings with the staff assigned to the branch. All input and feedback contributed to the final schematic design.

Visioning Workshop The first of two workshops focused on articulating a common vision for the project by soliciting input from library administration and staff, library board members,

194 

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

members of the surrounding community, representatives of the community associations within the branch catchment area, the president of the trade union and customers of the existing branch. Participants were divided into five groups to work through two guided exercises, brainstorming and a planning scenario.

Guided Brainstorming Exercise To begin the brainstorming exercise, an overview of current best practices and trends in twenty-first century public library design provided a reference for re-imagining the potential of the George Bothwell Branch. Trends such as sustainability, accessibility, flexibility, community focus and the experiential nature of the modern public library were presented and discussed. The exercise focused on questions designed to articulate key principles and priorities. Key themes derived from the group discussion were: Services: –– Accommodate and support technology use for all –– Support new Canadians –– Support families, while not providing childcare –– Address branch-specific demographics Spatial: –– Provide places for conversation as well as places for quiet –– Adaptable, flexible, multi-use space –– Expanded study space for both individuals and small groups (‘me’ space and ‘we’ space) Sense of Place: –– Home away from home –– Place to socialise; Starbucks library; casual with coffee (‘us’ space) –– Spaces for exploration by children Aspirational: –– Knowledge-sharing –– Community-building –– Nurturing creativity –– Library is for everyone



13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies 

 195

Planning Scenarios Exercise Participants conducted a spatial exploration of the prospective project based on the outcomes of the brainstorming. Groups were provided with both scaled programme blocks and floor plans and tasked with developing functional layouts that reflected ideal sizes, locations and adjacencies for particular activities (Figures 13.4 and 13.5). Five floor plan scenarios were created and common elements identified.

Figure 13.4: Scenarios exercise process (photo by Group2).

Guiding Principles After the visioning workshop, the design team combined the results of the brainstorming activity with the planning scenario exercise to develop guiding principles which included: –– Diversity of environments, noise level and activity zones –– A place for community and socialising

196  –– –– –– –– ––

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

Enhanced access to and support for technology Respect for diversity of community and sense of place Nurture learning, creativity and curiosity A place for inspiration and fun A place for refuge, comfort and tranquility

User Feedback Workshop Three weeks later, a user feedback workshop commenced with a review of the guiding principles and a critique of the further development of the project allocation based on three levels of intervention. Each of the three interventions or options was ranked as to its capacity to address each of the guiding principles. Groups were asked during the workshop to comment on the way in which the guiding principles were addressed in the plans. Comments were collected on red, green and blue adhesive notes which adhered to the plans, denoting the following: –– red adhesive notes: items that did not meet the guiding principles and/or were poorly translated from the earlier input (stakeholders were particularly adept at utilising the red adhesive notes) –– green adhesive notes: items that successfully addressed the guiding principles and/or were correctly translated from the earlier input –– blue adhesive notes: items not previously considered or blue-sky ideas The result of the user consultation process was a final set of three design options that addressed the changing nature of library activity by accommodating an increased demand for diverse environments, social spaces and access to technology without compromising the essential character of the library as a place for quiet contemplation. From the three design options, the library board chose to pursue the most extensive renovation as it addressed the greatest number of the guiding principles as well as known deferred maintenance items, making it the most prudent financial decision to address long-term needs.



13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies 

Figure 13.5: George Bothwell Branch schematic design floor plan (graphic by Group2).

 197

198 

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

Stakeholder Engagement Processes: Shared Successes and Challenges The stakeholder engagement processes for the RPL George Bothwell renovation and expansion project and the University of Saskatchewan Murray Library Master Plan shared numerous successes including: –– the broad participation of library staff and faculty/community groups –– consistency of the engagement of groups over multiple sessions –– exploration of future trends –– development of guiding principles –– effective exercises for programming scenarios The continued broad participation of library staff and faculty was attributed to the success of the initial stakeholder workshop leading to subsequent interest to contribute to the process. The combination of delivering information via lecture and breaking into small groups for discussion and concept development allowed participants both to share expertise and gain an understanding of additional factors for consideration. Challenges encountered during the engagement processes for both projects included: –– lack of consolidation of the guiding principles –– inadequate visualisation of the existing three-dimensional spaces –– under-representation of specific segments of the user population within the stakeholder sessions The guiding principles used as a touch point during the design process were divided into sub-sections. However, the number and relatedness of the principles were found to be too numerous to be easily utilised as checks during the development of the design. As several principles were related, it might have been more effective to group the principles and develop sub-lists of actions or initiatives. Visualisation of three-dimensional space by stakeholders is a common challenge to the development of facility designs (Figure 13.6). As the University of Saskatchewan Murray Library Master Plan includes two buildings, Murray South and Murray North, each with multiple floor levels, it was critical for the stakeholders to understand the existing disconnect between the two buildings and the potential interconnection of the existing floors through additional links or ramps. Stacked floor plans along with building sections, a type of architectural drawing illustrating the cut through a building from rooftop to foundation, were provided



13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies 

Figure 13.6: Stacked Murray Library floor plans (graphic by Group2).

 199

200 

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

but due to the abstract nature of the information were not sufficient to convey the potential for bridging opportunities between the two buildings. Similarly, the location and relationship of the expansion space for the RPL George Bothwell renovation and expansion project were difficult to visualise as the existing space was not connected to the interior mall.

University of Saskatchewan Murray Library Master Plan Unique Challenges The unavailability of students to participate in the first three stakeholder sessions led the team to conduct separate events focused on obtaining student input. Two sessions were held, one in the afternoon and another in the evening, to reduce the potential for scheduling conflicts for those students wishing to participate. Food was provided at each to entice students, as they needed to take a break to arrange lunch or dinner. The lack of input by future students was not addressed in the process.

RPL George Bothwell Renovation and Expansion Project Challenges Challenges encountered during the engagement process for the RPL George Bothwell Project included: –– Short evening sessions with limited time available for the activities –– Shifting participants from only a personal understanding of a library to a broader, shared understanding –– Under-representation from young adults and children compared to usership –– Lack of input from non-users of the library There is a fine line between providing adequate time for an activity with fulsome exploration and providing too much time. The time of day for the sessions was considered at the outset and an evening session selected to accommodate the schedules of a greater number of community members. However, the compressed time available for an evening session meant that the activities were often rushed but nonetheless exhilarating. The discussion of future trends was key for the group and it was important that input came from a wide variety of participants, not just the session facilitators. As such, there must be sufficient time allocated



13 Stakeholder Engagement Processes and Strategies 

 201

to both presentation and dialogue. To broaden the participants’ understanding of a topic, both time and multiple inputs are required. The three drop-in open house sessions hosted by the library administration allowed for more input from the diverse community who could not all be included in the stakeholder sessions.

Future Considerations for Stakeholder Engagement Based on the experience of the referenced stakeholder engagement sessions, the following lessons learned are offered: –– Structure the time and location of the sessions to be most convenient for the stakeholders –– Identify stakeholder groups and invite representatives –– If possible, explore engagement through social media –– Communicate three-dimensional information in multiple forms –– Harness stakeholder expertise –– Dedicate more time to what is possible Considering where stakeholders, important to the process, may be found and how to focus their attention on your project is vital. Hosting the RPL session within the impacted branch library was found to be very positive, as it was a familiar and convenient location for the stakeholders. The time of day and length of sessions should be structured to suit stakeholders, while also considering that longer, more intensive and multiple sessions provide a higher quality of input. An important consideration is how to connect with stakeholders not currently using the facility. Representatives of an organisation that are specifically asked to participate are more likely to commit to both longer and multiple sessions than individual stakeholders, which may increase the quality of the input to the process. Organisations stay connected to the process, both through updates from participating individuals and by inter-relationships of the organisations involved. Connecting with stakeholders via social media requires the consideration of many implications that can be complex to navigate for public institutions. However, this type of engagement can provide a broadening of the input even if limited in terms of depth and continuity. Connecting with stakeholders via social media allows those individuals who are interested, but limited by time and ability, to attend specific events and to contribute to the process either by completing a survey or providing comments. Use of social media can address differences in communication styles between various generations.

202 

 Julie McKenna, Laura Plosz and Troy Smith

Communicating three-dimensional information is complex and uses language not familiar to all stakeholders. Traditional communication methods such as architectural building sections and plans are simply not sufficient to achieve a high level of understanding and subsequent input. The use of three-dimensional digital visualisation and constructed physical models should be considered for all processes even if only conceptual or rough in terms of the level of detail. The greater the number of communication methods used, the better the chance of connecting to a wider group of stakeholders. Each stakeholder participating in an engagement process has a specific knowledge or experience that is relevant to a project. Give consideration as to the best method for collecting and sharing information with the larger stakeholder group; addressing specific knowledge or experience successfully validates the process for individuals as they know they have been heard and contributes to the shared knowledge and perspectives informing the development and prioritisation of guiding principles. Exposing participants to ideas, concepts and precedents is basic to the process. Unless the project team focuses on exposing stakeholders to elements beyond their own experiences, the project will be limited to what is already available locally or within conventional media. The most difficult component of stakeholder consultation is undoubtedly moving beyond what is already in place and demands and deserves the greatest amount of time and energy. Libraries, both academic and public, require considered involvement of stakeholders to ensure that new or renovated facilities reflect the diversity of users and the changing needs and expectations. The way in which the input of stakeholders is obtained and integrated into the design is a basic building block for the success of the facility design. Changing demographics, learning styles and knowledge-sharing capabilities mean that the process must evolve to keep pace with the changing face of the modern library.

References Group2 Architecture Interior Design Ltd. and Perkins+Will. 2016. University of Saskatchewan: University Library Transformation: Project Branch Libraries Master Plan. Saskatoon: University of Saskatchewan Library. https://library.usask.ca/documents/ UniversityLibraryMasterPlan.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Regina Public Library. 2015. RPL George Bothwell Branch Renovations Request for Proposal Construction Management Services. Regina: Regina Public Library. https://www. reginalibrary.ca/sites/default/files/guides/ConstructionManagementRFP.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018.

Tuula Haavisto

14 A  Dream Come True of Citizens – the New Helsinki Central Library Abstract: A remarkable discussion about libraries was held by the Helsinki City Council politicians in January 2015. During this meeting a final decision was made to build the new Helsinki Central Library for 100M Euros (USD1.2M), with 75 votes for the project and only 8 votes against. High-quality speeches on the importance of libraries were given throughout the three-hour discussion, one after another. How was this possible? Has the fair wind continued? The key was, and continues to be, genuinely involving citizens in the project from the very beginning. The participation of citizens has resulted in booming and concrete public support for the project. Inside the library, it has demanded new thinking and the learning of new skills. Introducing participatory methods is a kind of revolution, if taken seriously. This paper analyses the new Helsinki Central Library project and addresses the impact of intense citizenship involvement over the years. Keywords: Library planning; Community development; Political participation

Introduction The new pulsing heart of the city is scheduled to open in the centre of Helsinki in December 2018 (Figures 14.1 and 14.4). Opening the library will be the end of a good story and the beginning of a new story. It will be an important point in the history of a dream come true, shared by citizens, library professionals and politicians. The final Helsinki City Council decision to commit to the development of the building in January 2015 was nearly unanimous. The political discussion before the voting was of high quality, with well-based opinions that focused on the importance of libraries in society. How was that possible? It is usually difficult to get a decision made to build an expensive public building without any commitment to cover the economic costs. One key is that the people of Helsinki, in general, supported and still strongly support the project, and the library has been able to make this support visible. The main method used throughout the entire planning process has been listening to and actively involving the citizens. The project was a pioneering effort in the field which has guaranteed positive media interest. On the other hand, politicians recognise the need for this kind of public space in city centrums. Helsinki is not the only city building a big central library. At the https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-015

204 

 Tuula Haavisto

same time, the new Deichmanske bibliotek in Oslo is under construction. DOKK1 in Århus has been admired by the Helsinki City Library leadership and staff, who also know of fine central libraries in Canada, including the Halifax Public Library in Nova Scotia. Elsewhere, staff in the authors’ workplace have recently become acquainted with new library buildings in the Basque country of northern Spain.

Background Public libraries have a special significance for the Finnish people and in their history. Libraries are loved and well used across the country, with a relatively equitable library network remaining across the country even if the tightening economy is threatening it increasingly. Finland’s libraries have high usage numbers, with Finns avid readers and library users (Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland 2016) in comparison with international standards (Libraries. fi 2016), making library services the most used cultural service in the country (Sokka et al. 2014). It is important to note that school libraries are rare in Finland; schools and kindergartens are served by public and especially mobile libraries. Citizens’ favourable attitudes towards public libraries are reflected in the public discussion on the central library. Over the course of the planning process, no opposition to the project was raised, nor strictures against the building itself, after the announcement of the architecture competition winner in 2013. The favourable public opinion of libraries is also widely shared by the Finnish decision makers. The initiative for the new central library building came originally from the 1998 Minister of Culture, Claes Andersson, known and appreciated as a poet, psychiatrist and football player. In 2013, the Minister of Culture at that time, Paavo Arhinmäki, declared the central library as the headline project of Finland’s Independence’s 100 Jubilee, celebrated in 2017. By giving the central library this remarkable status, the government also committed the state to take part in funding the project. Government financing covers approximately 30% of the building costs. The Helsinki politicians recognised a genuine need for public space for citizens in the city centre. A very concrete case is the University of Helsinki. When the university opened a new main library, Kaisa House, in the city centre in 2012, it was originally planned for 5,000 daily visits, but it soon proved to be much more popular than expected; the building’s daily usage peaks now at over 9,000 visits (Helsinki University Library 2016). As university libraries in Finland are open to everyone, ordinary citizens come to the Kaisa House as well as academic students and researchers. This not only shows the need for public non-commercial space



14 A Dream Come True of Citizens – the New Helsinki Central Library 

 205

in the city centre, but also expresses people’s enthusiasm for making libraries their own shared spaces.

Figure 14.1: Rendering of the new Helsinki Central Library at night (graphic by ALA Architects).

Helsinki City Library also has a visible case concerning the need for open public space in the city centrum. Since 2005, Library 10 has operated in the Main Post Office Building near the future central library. Its floor space is only 800 m², but the library attracts approximately 2,000 to 2,500 visitors per day. The usage numbers of the Kaisa House and Library 10 were essential in promoting the decision to build the new central library.

Participatory Practices From the Very Beginning The real story of the new central library began in 2007, when the Mayor of Helsinki, Jussi Pajunen, launched a central library review process. It was led by a consultant from outside the library world, Mikko Leisti. The final report of the review process, Central Library: Heart of the Metropolis: The Heart of Helsinki: Review Report (Central Library Review 2008) laid a long-lasting foundation for the goals and visions of the project.

206 

 Tuula Haavisto

Already the review process included ordinary library users at the early stage of development. Different kinds of users were interviewed and participated in group discussions. In fact, it was at this point in the final report of the review process’ that user consultation was outlined as one of the key elements for the way forward. After publishing the review report in early 2008, Helsinki City Library started the planning process in earnest. The ambitious vision was to model the central library planning project as a new kind of inclusive city planning process which would not only ask people’s opinion through surveys, but actually include them in the planning, thus creating a library which would be truly owned by the citizens. Now, 10 years later, one can state that the goal has been well achieved. How did the library engage and involve citizens in rather bureaucratic and distant planning processes? The central library project brought about various approaches to this problem and continues to experiment with ways in which library users and regular citizens can be brought into different stages of planning processes (Helsinki City Library 2017). One of the early and most successful participatory practices was the launch of the Tree of Dreams in 2010 (Figure 14.2). It was both a digital platform and a real tree touring around the city at different events, collecting library dreams as leaves to its’ branches. People were asked to write down their wishes of what the future library might be. What should it offer to the citizens? The Tree of Dreams collected approximately 2,300 ideas. All material was categorised, analysed and further developed into pilot projects and trials developing content and services for the future library. When the planning of the interior design begun in 2016, the related dream material was studied as one source of inspiration and information. When thinking of user participation, budgeting is a difficult topic to be included. However, Helsinki City Library has pilot projects on that aspect as well. Library users were given a say in what kind of services would be offered in public libraries (Helsinki City Library 2012). In 2013, through budgeting workshops, citizens were given a choice on how to spend 100,000 Euros (USD123,066) to develop library services. From the Tree of Dreams ideas, eight dreams were shortlisted and developed into pilot proposals. In the autumn of 2013, three participatory budgeting workshops for citizens were arranged to discuss the pilot proposals and how to spend the assigned sum of money. The project proposals were individually budgeted beforehand and the threshold for participation was kept low. The workshop participants were not required to have any special skills for project planning or budgeting. Four projects from the shortlist were chosen to be put into practice in 2014. Through the participatory budgeting project (Figure 14.3), Helsinki City Library acquired concrete directions from the citizens for what kind of public



14 A Dream Come True of Citizens – the New Helsinki Central Library 

 207

Figure 14.2: The Tree of Dreams (photo by Helsinki City Library).

Figure 14.3: Participatory budgeting brought citizen input into prioritisation (photo by Helsinki City Library).

library services was anticipated and needed. By giving the owners of the libraries, the city residents, a say in financial decision-making, Helsinki City Library fulfilled one of the public libraries’ basic tasks in its advancement of democracy. The

208 

 Tuula Haavisto

feedback was clear: one of the workshop participants stated that it was actually great to see close-range democracy in action. In 2016 and in 2017, citizens were also offered the possibility of giving their opinions on the book acquisition for the new library. Users’ opinions help to acquire, for example, books in English in a country where it is not a native language. The open international architectural competition was organised in 2012–13. The general population was also consulted in this process, but more lightly than in many other participatory efforts. The reason was the particularly high esthetical and eco-efficiency requirements of the building. It would have been too complicated to translate all these requirements into a common language; there were too many elements to consider at the same time. However, the public had the possibility of seeing all 544 entries and giving their opinions on them. A good example of the popularity of the central library project is that the entry exhibition was originally scheduled to be open only for a week but, due to a public demand, it was continued for an additional week.

Figure 14.4: Aerial rendering of the new Helsinki Central Library (graphic by ALA Architects).

In the second phase of the competition, six proposals were shortlisted by the jury. They were exhibited in the Helsinki City Museum, online and on touchscreens throughout the city centre. Again, at this stage, the public was able to comment



14 A Dream Come True of Citizens – the New Helsinki Central Library 

 209

on the proposals and vote for their favourite building. In the second phase of the competition over 3,200 citizens voted for their favourite. The public vote on the future building was not the decisive factor for the new building, as the winner was chosen by a jury. Nonetheless, having a transparent architectural competition, during which people were invited to view the competition proposals and light-heartedly vote on their favourites, created a feeling of openness and participation. The Friends of the Central Library (2014–15) is another good example of participatory practice, which has consolidated its status as an ongoing user-driven development tool. The Friends of the Central Library aimed to engage a diverse group of citizens in the planning process through workshops, questionnaires and online tasks. The goal was to create a user-developer community by putting together a group that would be a good representative sample consisting of people from different parts of the city, different age groups, sexes and skill sets. The emphasis was put on getting people on board who were enthusiastic, influential in decision-making and willing to commit to work in a group. The group members were selected through a method imitating job seeking. They wrote job applications describing themselves and giving reasons why they wanted to join. From 95 applicants, 28 were chosen to participate in the pilot phase. Throughout the central library project, the nature of the participatory measures has changed according to the needs of the project. In 2016, the project was in a phase of service design, mainly to feed material for the interior design. Through the analysis of users’ needs, certain aspects of services and needs have risen and been taken forward for further development. One of the service design projects was family services and library functions from families’ points of view. The family library planning was carried out through workshops with families which were run by service design professionals. The workshops concentrated on service design as a total entity rather than individual services. They outlined directions for usability for the whole building, starting from signage and other functionalities, such as parking baby strollers and how to add playfulness to the building. Families are one of the main focuses for the building; the Department of Early Childhood Education and Preschool Education will be one of the permanent partners located in the building (Figure 14.5). Participatory planning has several dimensions adding value to library planning processes, offering a channel for close-range democracy, but also opening city decision-making process to the citizens. One future idea to open up Helsinki City’s acquisition processes, while offering the public a chance to influence interior design decisions of the central library, is furniture testing. The idea is that residents will have the opportunity to test out different pieces of furniture, chairs

210 

 Tuula Haavisto

Figure 14.5: Rendering of the children’s area (graphic by ALA Architects).

or tables and vote for their favourites. This could be realised in a way that opens up the decision-making of the city’s purchasing practices and increases the transparency of public spending and decision-making. Participation in planning is not limited only to users’ involvement. In the new central library, numerous partners will be working under the same roof, for example, the National Audiovisual Institute and Aalto University. These partners

Figure 14.6: The new library will accommodate active doers (graphic by ALA Architects).



14 A Dream Come True of Citizens – the New Helsinki Central Library 

 211

are a vital part of the planning process for a new multifunctional building. The entrance lobby area of the library will be a hub for partnership in the library and the lobby’s service design is being developed in close cooperation with the different partners (Figure 14.7). As shown, the central library project has introduced new methods of participatory planning into public planning, making the process more democratic and creating a sense of common ownership of a public institution. The building and its services also reflect new library thinking where users are active doers rather than passive consumers.

Keep Them Informed Summa summarum, from a decision maker’s perspective, there are many tempting elements in the central library project. First, the great popularity of the project is of course attractive. Secondly, the city of Helsinki is genuinely interested in giving citizens a say in city policies and processes. The central library project feeds this interest continually with a variety of tested experiences. Thirdly, the central library is the final element in fulfilling the central Töölönlahti area, which is important in terms of city planning: the cityscape will get an esthetical crown, thanks to the architectural level of the building. The library is also expected to be a tourist drawcard (Figure 14.8). Visitors today want to see the everyday life of a city and in Finland libraries are an everyday phenomenon.

Figure 14.7: Rendering of the library’s entry lobby (graphic by ALA Architects).

212 

 Tuula Haavisto

The library staff and other key players of the project, such as the Deputy Mayor and the City Construction Office, have succeeded in keeping the politicians and higher city officials well informed about all these efforts and results (Valleala 2016). From the beginning, the relationship with the media has also been favourable for the project.

Involving Decision Makers in the Story There is little sense in building a book depository in one of the best locations of the city centre. The new library will offer traditional library services, such as lending books, but the shift in public need is increasingly from borrowing to doing (Figure 14.6). The new library law in Finland, the Public Libraries Act (Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland 2016), underlines public libraries’ duties to promote active citizenship and democracy, but also requires libraries to offer spaces and facilities for learning, working and different leisure activities. This project has reflected well the spirit of the new law by promoting active citizenship during the planning process and continuing after the opening in 2018. All this material forms a good story. Our decision makers have the wellfounded feeling that they are part of a success story: they are creating a free, safe, culturally rich and innovative public space with great potential, a library that will be a people’s library in as broad a sense as possible.

Figure 14.8: Rendering of the main square (graphic by ALA Architects).



14 A Dream Come True of Citizens – the New Helsinki Central Library 

 213

References Central Library Review. 2008. Central Library: Heart of the Metropolis: The Heart of Helsinki: Review report. Helsinki: Central Library Review and Central Library Working Group, Helsinki City Library. https://www.competitionline.com/upload/downloads/109xx/10948_93071_ Centrallibrary_reviewre port.pdf. Accessed December 12, 2016. Helsinki City Library. 2012. Residents of Helsinki! Help us make Budget Decisions. http:// keskustakirjasto.fi/en/2012/10/15/residents-of-helsinki-help-us-make-budgetdecisions/. Accessed August 5, 2018. Helsinki University Library. 2016. “Finland’s Most Popular Learning Environment Kaisa House Attracts Over 9,000 Visitors per Day.” Helsinki: University of Helsinki. https://www. helsinki.fi/en/news/finlands-most-popular-learning-environment-kaisa-house-attractsover-9000-visitors-per-day. Accessed May 31, 2017. Helsinki City Library. 2017. “Voice of the City Residents: Participatory Planning.” http:// keskustakirjasto.fi/en/voice-of-the-city-residents-participatory-planning/. Accessed May 31, 2017. Libraries.fi. 2016. “Finnish Public Libraries Statistics.” Helsinki: Libraries.fi. http://tilastot. kirjastot.fi/?lang=en. Accessed August 5, 2018. Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland. 2016. “Finland is One of the Top Countries in the World in the Field of Library Services.” http://minedu.fi/documents/1410845/4150031/ Library%2Bservices/65df0ce2-685f-4c3c-9686-53c108641a5c. Accessed August 5, 2018. Ministry of Education and Culture, Finland. 2016. Public Libraries Act: (Translation from Finnish). Helsinki: Finnish Ministry of Justice. http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ kaannokset/2016/en20161492.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Sokka, S., A. Kangas, H. Itkonen, P. Matilainen, and P. Räisänen. 2014. Hyvinvointia Myös Kulttuuri- ja Liikuntapalveluista. Sastamala, Finland: Vammalan Kirjapaino Oy. http://kaks. fi/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Hyvinvointia-myös-kulttuuri-ja-liikuntapalveluista.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018. Valleala, S. 2016. “How is Central Library Coming About.” Helsinki: Helsinki City Library. http:// keskustakirjasto.fi/en/2016/09/26/how-is-the-central-library-coming-about/. Accessed August 5, 2018.

Vivian Lewis

15 New Models for Library Advancement Abstract: This paper, originally presented as a six minute and forty second PechaKucha at the IFLA World Library Congress in Wroclaw, Poland, proposes some new and constructive ways of thinking about fundraising for academic libraries. The approach demands three elements. First, the fundraising model requires framing fundraising not as the sole responsibility of the development officer but as an integrated, team-based activity involving a broadly defined advancement team with strong engagement from the senior leadership group. Second, the model necessitates a deep organisational commitment to establishing a laser-sharp set of fundraising priorities, rather than scattering a thin layer of efforts across a broad spectrum of unfiltered ideas. Finally, the approach demands a willingness and ability to frame priorities, not as modest requests but as Big Ideas to capture the attention and the hearts of potential donors. This article presents a reasoned and disciplined course for academic libraries to follow in the attempt to increase the success of their fundraising endeavours. Keywords: Academic Libraries; Fundraising; Library finance; Strategic planning

The Integrated Advancement Team or the ‘Three-Legged Stool’ Fundraising for academic libraries is often depicted as an uphill battle. Libraries are not sexy enough to attract big donors. Unlike faculties, the library does not graduate any alumni and hence lacks a defined constituency or natural affinity pool (Dilworth and Henzl 2017). The seemingly ubiquitous nature of digital content may also give some donors pause: some may question the point of paying for bricks and mortar libraries in the days of Google and Amazon. Enticing large donations to library renovation projects or other needs requires dogged perseverance, years of painstaking stewardship and, frankly, a huge serving of good luck. At least that is what is often said. Some may presume that the fundraising approach being documented requires a large professional advancement staff. In fact, the fundraising model is scalable to any sized organization. The author’s own institution, McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada, employs approximately 90 librarians and staff across three locations. The advancement work is shared between 1.5 fulltime positions with one development manager and a part-time public relations https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-016



15 New Models for Library Advancement  

 215

manager, supplemented by an intern working on events and stewardship. While the three functions are separated into different positions at the author’s home institution, two or even all three of the roles could be held by the same person. Less mature advancement programmes could begin by allocating small portions of a staff member’s work life to a particular function and then grow these allocations over time. At McMaster, the process started with 30% of the public relations manager’s time which then grew to 50% a few years later. The model is, at its heart, an exercise in the efficient and disciplined use of limited resources to achieve the greatest impact. The model presupposes a deeply integrated team framed around the 3Rs of advancement: reputation, relationships and resources. This fairly new model in the academy is based on the successful corporate strategy where marketing and sales forces are combined (Stevick 2010). In this model, the public relations or outreach lead helps build the organisation’s reputation by generating stories, press releases and blog posts. These stories help build the library’s public image, often associating the organisation with positive attributes such as quality service, innovative programmes and overall prestige (Peasley, Coleman and Royne 2017). The stewardship lead focuses on relationship building through the careful shaping of events, personal connections and cards (DiMattia 2008). Finally, the fundraising lead helps build resources through prospecting, donor visits and, ultimately, solicitations or asks. The model can be described as a three-legged stool, in which each function, public relations, stewardship and fundraising, is critically important. If any single function is weak, the stool becomes wobbly and the overall prospects for success are diminished. In the McMaster case, the advancement team works together very closely. They meet twice a month to discuss progress in their various portfolios and then once again with the university librarian to report in and seek further direction. The development manager and public relations manager’s offices are side by side down the hall from the university librarian, thus encouraging daily interaction. The three individuals are actively involved in planning each other’s next moves. When a new relationship is built, an event goes well or a new gift comes in, it is considered a success for the entire team.

Strong Focus on Strategic Priorities Having the right people in place is not enough. The successful organisation must also put the strategic plan at the core of the advancement model and impose a high level of discipline on the process. The result is not a large and dizzying array

216 

 Vivian Lewis

of unrelated projects; instead, the model forces the library to review its slate of objectives and identify the two or three most critical fundraising priorities for the coming period. Attention is then devoted in a deliberate way to supporting key, highly strategic needs. This approach helps mitigate any fear that the library’s fundraising program will distract it from its true mission or, worse yet, direct its mission in unintended and unwanted paths (Steele and Elder 2000). In McMaster’s case, the roadmap is framed as a formal Advancement Plan (Figure 15.1). The plan is not an abstract idea in the minds of the advancement team. Instead, it is a written document, drafted by the team, which commits each member to certain actions over a five-year period. The plan is divided into the three broad areas of focus: public relations, stewardship/events and fundraising. The advancement team is not a slave to the plan, but guided very strongly by it.

Figure 15.1: Library Advancement Plan Framework (graphic by Vivian Lewis).

The crafting of the Advancement Plan is no easy task and involves engagement with the entire senior leadership team. Identifying the top two or three fundraising priorities for the coming five-year period involves challenging conversations. Some individuals’ projects are chosen over others. Decisions are based on a complex mixture of significance (what projects will have the biggest impact on the lives of students and researchers?), likelihood of success (can we guarantee that we can do the work should a donor be found?) and anticipated level of donor interest (how likely are we to find a donor willing to fund this type of resource or activity?).



15 New Models for Library Advancement  

 217

The Advancement Plan also documents the specific strategies the organisation will use to meet its objectives in all three advancement areas: public relations, stewardship and fundraising. For example, the current McMaster Library Advancement Plan commits the library to posting at least two stories to the university news site every month, resurrecting a Library Advocate Award and making a certain number of estate asks each year.

Converting Priorities into Big Ideas Having a well-structured team and disciplined approach to priority setting is, unfortunately, still not enough. An advancement team needs to work with the library’s senior management group to translate the shortlist of key fundraising priorities into big and compelling ideas which will, hopefully, connect on an emotional level with the donors. These impact statements, which become the core message in the library’s cases for support, can take considerable reflection and discussion to arrive at. The leadership group may start with statements of fact such as “We want to renovate an old study space to provide more study seats, to improve navigation and to refresh tired finishes”. These objectives, while admirable, fail to make an emotional connection with donors. Sometimes the best way to land on the Big Idea is to continually ask the question Why? (Figure 15.2)

Figure 15.2: Asking Why? to arrive at the Big Idea (graphic by Vivian Lewis).

Putting the Pieces Together Here is what the model looks like in very concrete terms. First, the library as a whole crafts an enterprise-wide strategic plan. The plan documents all the highlevel projects various units intend to undertake in an effort to move the organisation along in support of its mission. Even in the smallest organisation, this list of strategic initiatives for any given period tends to be fairly long. Unfortunately, this is the easy part.

218 

 Vivian Lewis

Next, the advancement team works with the library’s senior leadership group to start doing the heavy lifting. Of the slate of 10 or 12 initiatives being planned for a given period, which two or three are the most important? Which ideas will have the biggest impact on users and help those involved meet their mission? And of these ideas, which are truly feasible within the prescribed time period? An honest reflection on this point often reduces the list considerably. Finally, of these high-impact, high-success pieces of work, which ideas would actually be enticing to current or prospective donors to fund? Renovating washrooms might have a huge impact and be quite doable within a time frame, but donors will probably not be interested in funding such activities. On the other hand, introducing updated study booths, complete with digital screens and lots of electrical outlets, will have a positive impact, can be simply ordered and installed and will probably be of great interest to many donors and graduating classes. Once the priorities are set, the team, in conjunction with the senior management group, begins the process of shaping compelling Why statements. What is the impact of a particular fundraising proposal? Why will this project make a significant, even life-changing, impact on the lives of students? These Why statements help create the emotional connection with prospective donors which might make the difference between getting the project funding or not. Once the narrative has been written, the advancement team, led by the public relations or communications lead, starts mapping out the stories in support of these goals. What articles will be written and placed on the library’s public website to help get the message out about successes or our most pressing space needs? When should the stories be positioned for optimal impact? Can any of the stories be repurposed in a variety of forums? The objective is, of course, to enhance the library’s reputation. The key point is that the choice of stories does not happen by chance. Instead, key stories are planned months in advance and targeted to specific audiences, with a specific set of messages in mind. The stewardship lead steps to the front at this point. He or she actively packages the stories together and shares them with specific donors in ways that are compelling, such as an email message with an embedded link, a handwritten card or a personal visit. The stewardship lead thinks about which donors care about this particular issue. Then, finally, the fundraiser moves into play. S/he is not starting from square one. Rather, s/he is leveraging the positive relationship created by the marketing campaign and shored up by the events and other personal touches executed by the stewardship lead. The donor knows what the library has accomplished and, hopefully, feels inspired to help support the organisation advance its work.



15 New Models for Library Advancement  

 219

Take the creation of a new makerspace at McMaster University Library as an example. In this case, the library identified the creation of this learning space as a key strategic direction for the coming year. Following lengthy conversation with the senior leadership group, makerspace was identified as a fundraising priority. The decision was made on the basis of the proposal’s significance (the students petitioned for such a space), sheer do-ability (the physical space was available and some preliminary design work had been undertaken) and anticipated donor interest (some corporate donors mentioned an interest in maker-culture). The project was reviewed from many angles to arrive at a compelling and authentic Why statement. In this case, the McMaster Library wanted to prepare the next generation of students from all disciplines to be innovative and creative Makers. The public relations manager wrote stories about the success of other similar initiatives in the library, while the stewardship/events intern planned and executed successful events. Strong relationships were built with potential donors. The gift was given. Stories were written about the gift and then the idea generation started again.

Conclusion The proposed model requires the organisation to frame fundraising not as the sole responsibility of the lone-wolf development officer but as an integrated, team-based activity. The model requires a strong organisational commitment to establishing a lean slate of two or three key fundraising priorities rather than a scatter shot of random fundraising efforts. Finally, the approach demands a willingness to shape priorities as big and compelling ideas to capture the attention and hearts of potential donors. The model does not require large investment of staff resources, but does require a commitment to a systematic and disciplined approach to fundraising practice.

References Dilworth, K., and L. S. Henzl. 2017. Successful Fundraising for the Academic Library: Philanthropy in Higher Education. First edition. Amsterdam: Chandos Publishing. DiMattia, S. S. 2008. “Getting the Money you Need: Relationships and Fundraising.” Online Magazine 32, no. 1: 22. Peasley, M. C., J. T. Coleman, and M. B. Royne. 2017. “Charitable Motivations: The Role of Prestige and Identification”. The Service Industries Journal 38, no. 5–6 (2017): 265–81. doi:10.1080/02642069.2017.1370457.

220 

 Vivian Lewis

Steele, V., and S. D. Elder. 2000. Becoming a Fundraiser: The Principles and Practice of Library Development. Chicago: American Library Association. Stevick, T. R. 2010. “Integrating Development, Alumni Relations and Marketing for Fundraising Success.” New Directions for Higher Education 2010, no. 149: 57–64. doi:10.1002/he.381.

Gobnait O’Riordan

16 R  e-imagining the University Library – a Transformative Opportunity Abstract: The past twenty years have seen transformative change in academic library design. This paper describes the development of the Glucksman Library at the University of Limerick (UL) in Ireland. The present library was designed in two phases with a student-focused 1998 design iteration and a 2018 development that adopted emerging technologies to enable knowledge creation and facilitate data-intensive research and digital scholarship. The paper explores the collaboration undertaken in terms of the space, design process and service development. Keywords: Library planning; Learning; Digital libraries; Collaboration

Introduction The University of Limerick’s inspiring New Glucksman Library (Figure 16.1), designed to transform the Library and University for scholarship in a digital age, opened in September 2018. The dynamic new library has been dramatically extended and reimagined with a sequence of interlinked, handsome, well-lit and beautifully proportioned spaces, each with a distinctive character allowing for mood change and multiple uses, from the quiet traditional study space to much more vibrant and technology-infused studio spaces. The design of the new library evolved over a twenty-year period during which the library experienced a faster and more disruptive pace of change than any place on campus as it responded to a diverse and complex digital landscape.

1990s Design The master plan for a new library, developed by Geoff Freedman from Shepley Bulfinch and Hugh Murray from MOLA in 1994, proposed a four-wing purposely designed library facility sited at the centre of the campus to be implemented in two phases. Library Phase 1 was completed in 1998 with a design that included many of the innovative features of 1990s library design. During this period, learning, student engagement and the incorporation of information technology emerged as essential features. The design for the new library at the University of https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110617535-017

222 

 Gobnait O’Riordan

Figure 16.1: Southern elevation, University of Limerick (photo by University of Limerick).

Limerick included an information commons, group study rooms, power and data at all desks, WIFI everywhere, multiple service points, extensive use of compact shelving and a library café. Although the design was increasingly learner-focused and incorporated technology in the learning spaces, the design remained strongly print focused. Further investment was made in 2011 to deal with acoustic transfer concerns, a common problem in 1990s library design, and to facilitate the reorganisation of library spaces to deliver more effectively study areas that enable silent, quiet and collaborative work. New developments such as RFID, self-service facilities, merging of service points and extended un-serviced opening hours were adopted. These initiatives maximised the effective use of the space available but the continued growth in student numbers led to shortage of space which continued to be a serious problem.

2010s Design The Library master plan was revised in 2006 for inclusion in a Public Private Partnership (PPP) by Alexander How from Shepley Bulfinch, with an emphasis on more space for students and collections. A draft design by Conor Pitman from RMJM was completed but the process, long delayed, was cancelled in 2011 as



16 Re-imagining the University Library – a Transformative Opportunity  

 223

a consequence of a deteriorating economic situation. Funding to recommence building was secured in early 2016 but it was clear that library design had changed significantly in the intervening years. That decade saw an intensification of change with new academic libraries adopting emerging technologies to enable knowledge creation and the development of studio spaces designed to facilitate data-intensive research and digital scholarship. The role of libraries was extended as social and cultural spaces hosting exhibitions and events for the campus and the larger community. The focus on learning continued with technology-rich learning spaces to encourage learning in new ways and enable experimentation in curricular development. In all, these new signature academic library buildings presented a new and dynamic model of library that was closely aligned to university objectives.

Figure 16.2: Variety of study space (photo by University of Limerick).

Collaborative Design Process A full review of building plans and advances in library design was undertaken in 2016 by a cross campus design team. The design team comprised a broad range of stakeholders including students, faculty, staff from Estates, IT and the Library, and a team from RKD Architects. Study visits to new library buildings were made and had a very significant impact on the design process. Iconic new library build-

224 

 Gobnait O’Riordan

ings presented ambitious and innovative approaches to learning and research and inspired new roles for the library that were having a significant impact on university experience. The visits also brought a sense of expectation and importance to the project and a realisation that this was a once-in-a-generation opportunity to be involved in something radical and innovative. The visits persuaded senior university representatives to champion a transformative design and take a strong role in supporting the inclusion of spaces for digital scholarship, collaborative learning, and community engagement. Faculty representatives saw opportunities for such new spaces to impact teaching and research but also the potential that event spaces could have in enhancing extra-classroom experience. The student voice was a critical aspect of the design process and students’ views at discussions and on study visits had significant influence on the final design. Students were very clear on the requirements for excellent study spaces for quiet and silent study, with a preference for booth-type study desks and for comfortable seating (Figures 16.2, 16.3 and 16.4). They also identified a need for collaborative study booths, more group study rooms and lounge seating. Students were directly involved in the selection of furniture by voting for preferred items at a furniture fair. The design team developed a clear perspective that good quality space design matters and that such space inspires attention, exploration and creativity.

Figure 16.3: Collaborative meeting space (photo by University of Limerick).



16 Re-imagining the University Library – a Transformative Opportunity  

 225

Design Principles The Design Team was certain that the design for the new library required a transformative response to the nexus of change in information provision, pedagogy, research practice and reader behaviour. In responding to these digital and social developments, the design needed to align clearly with University objectives and seek to use new spaces as a catalyst for advancing research and learning. The design should incorporate the transition from a print-based concept with services added on to one based on the growing evidence of the important relationships between the library and learning. It should also incorporate the concept of library space as a platform for research to support new forms of digital scholarship. Collections should not dominate the design but there was an intention that browsing collections would be presented in a manner to increase use. The design should maximise the role library space has in fostering academic and cultural engagement and opportunity for interdisciplinary interaction.

Figure 16.4: Lounge seating (photo by University of Limerick).

The design team expected that the design would draw on aspects of design from libraries of antiquity with space for the exchange of ideas, and from traditional libraries with space for solitary scholarship, but also introduce new ways of thinking about space and technology with a view to inevitable change. The

226 

 Gobnait O’Riordan

over-arching principles were that libraries are changing rapidly; any design is for the present; and spaces will be used differently in the future. These principles resulted in the following design objectives: –– Leverage UL’s tradition for innovation by providing technology-rich spaces with advanced computing, collaboration and communication tools to enhance scholarly traditions. –– Build on scholarly library traditions with more quiet and silent space focused on reflective study. –– Enable project and group work and interdisciplinary activity with flexible co-working spaces and equipment. –– Extend the library’s traditional role as a hub of learning with facilities for creative digitally-enabled scholarship, exploration and creation of new knowledge. –– Make our unique and distinct collections more visible to the community and more easily accessible for research and research led teaching. –– Provide collection storage for current and future needs.

Building Features The library enjoys natural light and wonderful outlook with a series of double height spaces and glazed walls that mean floors are interlinked vertically, thus ensuring a sense of communication between all areas and all levels. The central stairway and lightwell act as connectors between all levels and spaces. Great effort was made to eliminate corridors in the traditional sense, creating useful spaces which incorporate a series of break-out spaces, some quiet and calm, some busy and vibrant. These design features open reading rooms up to offer a dynamic quality, each with its own character. The placing of a new entrance in a central location has been critical to ensuring that the building operates as a single entity and not two distinct old and new elements (Figure 16.5). The new entrance marks the formal entrance to the building and also provides, very successfully, a visual link to tie the original and new parts together in a seamless manner. Allied to the entrance is a series of spaces which allow users the opportunity to interact with the facility in terms of orientation and understanding while providing access to key services and community spaces. Adjacent to the entrance, a consultation zone and information commons provide a flexible information and engagement space with a range of services in one place for ease of access, including Library, Information Technology, Disability, Peer Advisors and visiting services. A media wall is provided to showcase UL research and student achievements and enable pop-up events.



16 Re-imagining the University Library – a Transformative Opportunity  

 227

Figure 16.5: Linking old and new (photo by University of Limerick).

Also located at the entrance level is a revitalised and expanded Special Collections area including exhibition, reading, presentation and digitisation spaces to support the use of the library’s unique resources. Specialist climate-controlled, world-class storage facilities are provided to ensure special collections are guaranteed a safe and secure environment. The extended café and adjacent social lobby provide opportunities for social interaction, one-to-one and small group gatherings, as well as informal, short duration study. Central to the building is a spine which contains the book retrieval system (Figure 16.6). The initial concept for collection storage was compact shelving to allow the return of all books stored off-site. This solution was space-intensive and provided little growth space for collections. The development of an automated retrieval system released valuable floor space for study desks and provided significant storage capacity for future collection growth. The dedicated Digital Scholarship Studio provides a suite of open technologyrich spaces that bring together tools and staff to enable engagement with digital scholarship. A production space provides audio and video editing, 3D and maker services as well as a practice presentation space. A data visualisation studio and data analysis laboratory are provided for data-intensive work. Librarians, archivists, faculty and IT professionals offer consultations, instruction, and expertise on the use of digital technologies for scholarly communication, data management, use and visualisation, 3D printing, multimedia production and digitisation. The Graduate Commons is designed specifically for postgraduate students,

228 

 Gobnait O’Riordan

Figure 16.6: Automated storage (photo by University of Limerick).

faculty and researchers with a mix of single and collaborative study spaces, computer workstations, and social interactive space. An adjacent space is reserved for faculty use. The library houses a variety of meeting and event spaces including two information technology training rooms, five meeting rooms and 25 group study rooms. An Innovation space is designed as an active learning space to encourage creativity, innovation and problem-solving. With flexible furniture, it can be configured for a variety of research, teaching and collaborative activities. An Appellate Courtroom with full recoding and broadcasting facilities and the Popular Reading Room provide spaces for large group events.

Collaboration Integrated in New Library Design A defining feature of new academic libraries is the opportunities they provide for developing cross-campus collaborative relationships. Their very design positions the library as a partner with faculty and researchers in digital scholarship projects, digitising resources for research and developing library-based classes. There is opportunity for space-based programme partner relationships with



16 Re-imagining the University Library – a Transformative Opportunity  

 229

campus organisations such as learning centres, student engagement services and the Alumni Office. The technology-infused spaces encourages collaborative relationships with instructional designers, data researchers, librarians, archivists and programmers. The library could easily capitalise on new spaces by developing alliances with others on campus to deliver specialist training. There are many opportunities to use library space to curate events or to support with unique resources and exhibition campus events. It is difficult for any one unit to respond to the many opportunities new library spaces present. The library, by opening its doors to collaborative partnerships that can best be conducted in these new spaces, will enable more effective use of space and improved skills development. Indeed it may be that these collaborations will lead to the next iteration of library design.

Conclusion The new Glucksman Library, a creative space for learning and research at the heart of the University of Limerick campus, fosters learning and scholarship and addresses the changing needs of students, faculty and researchers in the digital age. Its design history tracks the transformation of academic library design over the past two decades. Libraries have been and are designed for a future of constant and rapid change. The only constant is to maintain close alignment with university needs, to keep an open mind and to constantly re-evaluate and rethink our library spaces.

References Bell, Steven. 2015. “One Technology That Will Change the Academic Library Experience.” From the Bell Tower. Council of Chief Librarians, California Community Colleges. December 2015. https://cclibrarians.org/outlook/one-technology-will-change-academic-libraryexperience. Accessed September 4 2018. Bennett, Scott. 2015. “Putting Learning into Library Planning”. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 15 (April): 215–231. 10.1353/pla.2015.0014 https://muse.jhu.edu/ article/578265/summary. Accessed September 4 2018. Bryant, Joanna, Graham Matthews, and Graham Walton. 2009. “Academic Libraries and Social and Learning Space: A Case Study of Loughborough University Library, UK.” Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 41, no.1: 7–18. Corrall, Sheila. 2014. “Designing Libraries for Research Collaboration in the Networked World: An Exploratory Study.” LIBER Quarterly 24, no.1: 17–48.

230 

 Gobnait O’Riordan

Council on Library Resources. 2005. Library as Place: Rethinking Roles, Rethinking Space. https://www.clir.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/pub129.pdf . Accessed September 5, 2018. Hickerson, Tom. 2014. “Designing, 21st Century Spaces for 21st Century Roles” Feliciter, 60, issue 6 (2014): 15–18. https://nsslibraryscience.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/designing21st-century-spaces-for-21st-century-roles.pdf. Accessed September 18, 2018. Lippincott, Joan, Anu Vedantham, and Kim Ducket. 2014. “Libraries as Enablers of Pedagogical and Curricular Change.” EDUCAUSE Review October 27. https://er.educause.edu/ articles/2014/10/libraries-as-enablers-of-pedagogical-and-curricular-change/. Accessed September 5, 2018. Mathews, Brian and Leigh Ann Soistmann. 2016. Encoding Space: Shaping Learning Environments That Unlock Human Potential. Chicago, Illinois: Association of College and Research Libraries. Spencer, Mary Ellen, and Sarah Barbara Watstein. 2017. “Academic Library Spaces: Advancing Student Success and Helping Students Thrive.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 17, no.2: 389–402.

Contributors

Contributors

Blackburn, Janette S. Principal at Shepley Bulfinch. Janette Blackburn, AIA, is a principal and leader in Shepley Bulfinch’s education practice. Her work is informed by a deep understanding of library research and learning environments, and her experience with the planning and design of academic library buildings nationwide during her 30 years of practice. Known for consensus building, her skills as a listener and communicator have proven to be highly effective in guiding a project’s decisionmaking process. She is passionate about the academic library’s potential as a change agent in the shifting landscape of higher education. Janette presents and publishes regularly, with her recent paper on stakeholder input included in the 2017 publication “Creating the High-Functioning Library Space; Expert Advice from Librarians, Architects, and Designers.” She is an active member of the American Library Association and the Society for College and University Planning.

2012. Gulcin was the Founding Director of Libraries at Ozyegin University in Istanbul, Turkey, from 2008 to 2011. Her previous roles include Director of Information Services at Bond University (2001–2008), Executive Manager of Physical Sciences & Engineering Library (1996–2001) and Manager of Library Multimedia Services (1986–1996) at the University of Queensland in Australia. Gulcin’s current and former roles have always involved working in partnership with researchers, faculty, publishers, architects and ICT solution providers. She has extensive experience in the areas of research support, publishing, digitisation, technology management, strategic management, innovation, learning spaces, information literacy, library-faculty-industry partnerships, marketing and virtual libraries. Gulcin has been involved in a number of ‘change management’, new library building and space renovation initiatives in libraries in Australia, Turkey and Singapore.

Brubaker, Kelly. Associate at Shepley Bulfinch. An accomplished library designer, programmer and planner, Kelly has worked on a wide range of collegiate libraries and learning commons throughout the United States. Her current and recent work includes library and learning commons projects for the University of Notre Dame, Virginia Commonwealth University, Atlanta University Center and Salem State University. Kelly has a unique ability to synthesise and test the integration and transformation of library spaces, all the while keeping an eye on the institutional culture of each university. Kelly is actively involved in the American Library Association (ALA) and Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL).

Forrest, Charles. Director of Library Facilities at Emory University (retired). Charles has more than 35 years of experience in academic and research libraries, including the University of Illinois Libraries at Chicago and Urbana-Champaign. At Emory University since 1988, Charles held a series of administrative positions in the library, including director of instructional support services, planning and budget, and most recently library facilities. He served as library project manager for many library construction and renovation projects, including the Center for Library and Information Resources, a major addition to and renovation of Emory’s main library. Charles has served as a library juror for the American Institute of Architects/ American Library Association Library Building Awards, the American Library Association/ International Interior Design Association

Cribb, Gulcin. University Librarian at Singapore Management University since

232 

 Contributors

Biennial Library Building Awards and Library Journal’s “New Landmark Libraries (Academic)” series. A published author and consultant, Charles is a regular presenter at conferences, workshops and institutes. He is currently principal and owner of Twenty-First Century Libraries Consulting (21CLC) in Decatur, Georgia. Haavisto, Tuula. Cultural Director, Cultural Services, City of Helsinki, Finland and former Library Director of the Helsinki City Library. Previously, Tuula was the Library Director at the City of Tampere, Secretary General of the Finnish Library Association and has held numerous librarian and researcher posts. Tuula holds a Master of Social Sciences, has been an active author and lecturer in Finland and abroad, is a library consultant (Tuula Haavisto Library Knowledge) and a member of the Board of the National Library of Finland. Hanken, Tamera. Library Director at Xavier University of Louisiana in New Orleans since 2017. Previous roles include: Head of Information Access & Resources at Singapore Management University (2013 to 2017); Director of Logistics & Resource Distribution Services at University of Nevada Las Vegas Libraries (2009–2012); Manager of Library Operations & Technology at Tacoma Community College in Washington State (2004–2009). Tamera’s current and former roles involve training and motivating staff to streamline workflow processes; undertaking stakeholder analysis of their library customer base; and engaging their positions critically and creatively to effect innovative approaches to managing library operations and services. This approach involves building staff competencies as well as introducing and integrating the lean process improvement methodology and encouraging the principles of continuous improvement and respect for people to promote efficient and effective operations.

Hoover, Jeffrey. Director of Library Design at Tappé Architects. Jeff guides the design and execution for all Tappé Architects’ library projects. His focus has been on the planning and design of learning environments for the past three decades. He has been actively involved with architectural conferences and symposiums throughout the world, speaking on the future of libraries and is nationally recognised for his knowledge of current library planning concepts and trends. For 17 years, Jeff has been invited to teach a class on library planning and design at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design through its Office of Executive Education. Koen, Diane. Senior Director, Planning and Resources at McGill University Library and Archives in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Diane joined McGill in 2003 as Associate Director, IT Services following an extensive global career with Geac Computers, Southam Business Communication and Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in the delivery of library technology solutions, retrieval software and scholarly publishing. Committed to physical and virtual transformative change in libraries, Diane is an active member of IFLA and Chair of the IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment Section since 2015. Lesneski, Traci Engel. Principal with the US-based architecture firm MSR, Traci focuses on design for libraries and other learning environments. She promotes an integrated design approach—equally valuing well-being, productivity, aesthetics and delight. Creating generative impacts for her clients and their communities inspires her. Recent building projects Traci has led include a 24/7 visual culture, arts and media creative hub for Haverford College in Pennsylvania and the renovation of Tulsa’s Central Library (in Oklahoma). A recognised thought leader in library design, Traci regularly contributes articles to library blogs and publications and lectures internationally including at



IFLA conferences and the NEXT LIBRARY Conference. As keynote speaker for the 2017 Public Libraries Western Australia Biennial Conference, she presented a talk entitled “The Generative Library: Design for Human Well-Being.” Traci is secretary of IFLA’s Library Buildings and Equipment Section, chair of the American Library Association’s Architecture for Public Libraries Committee and a member of the newly-formed American Library Association Sustainability Task Force. Lewis, Vivian. University Librarian at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. Vivian serves as Past Chair of the Ontario Council of University Libraries (OCUL) and is a member of the Board of Directors of both the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) and the Association of Research Libraries (ARL). A graduate of both the Harvard Leadership Institute for Academic Librarians and the ARL Leadership Fellows, Vivian writes and speaks on a variety of topics including transformational change in academic libraries, library development, evaluation and assessment and continuing professional development. McDonald, Vicki. State Librarian and CEO at the State Library of Queensland. Vicki is a key player in the transformation of the library sector in Queensland and understands the need for a strong, relevant and innovative library service. Vicki’s extensive national and international experience includes executive roles with State Library of NSW and Queensland University of Technology. As State Librarian, she is a custodian of Queensland memory and works in partnership with public libraries and Indigenous Knowledge Centres. Her appointment as State Librarian in 2016 follows a career of advocacy that started among the bookshelves of the Dalby-Wambo public library in regional Queensland. Vicki is the President of the Australian Library Information Association; she is also very active in the International Federation of

Contributors 

 233

Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). As Chair of Division I she will also be a member of the IFLA Governing Board. McKenna, Julie. Deputy Library Director at Regina Public Library in Saskatchewan, Canada since 2007. Julie oversees all Regina Public Library system public services including those delivered through the Dunlop Art Gallery and Film Theatre, assessment, space planning, furniture and shelving, and construction in their nine facilities. In her previous position as Associate University Librarian, University of Regina, she oversaw the design, delivery and assessment of emerging services, including space redesign. Julie’s principal research focus is evidencebased management decision-making, including the assessment of user experience and library space. She has a Master’s degree in Library Science and a Master’s degree in Human Resource Management. Prior to joining the IFLA Library Building and Equipment Section, Julie served for four years on the IFLA Statistics and Evaluation Section. Niederer, Ulrich. Former Director of the Central and University Library Lucerne. After his studies in German and English language and literature at the University of Basel, Ulrich taught literature at his university’s German Institute and finished his PhD. From 1991 to 1995 he worked as Deputy Director at the City Library of Winterthur and from 1995 to 2017 as Director at the Central and University Library Lucerne. Ulrich retired in July 2017. O’Riordan, Gobnait. Director of Library and Information Services at the University of Limerick. She previously held a number of senior posts at the University of Limerick Library including Project Manager for the construction of the Glucksman Library in 1988 and was the University’s first Web Editor. She was Manager of the National Sports Information Service at the National Coaching and Training Centre and the

234 

 Contributors

Irish representative on the International Association for Sports Information. Gobnait has a deep interest in library design and led the development of the €30 million New Glucksman Library which opened in 2018. Gobnait is a former President of the Library Association of Ireland. She is a member of the Irish Universities’ Association Librarians Group (UALG), the Consortium of National and University Libraries of Ireland (CONUL) and the Executive Board of the Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL). Gobnait is a Fellow of the Frye Leadership Institute. Østergård, Marie. Library Director at Aarhus Public Libraries and Dokk1, Aarhus, Denmark. As Library Director of Aarhus Public Libraries, Marie oversees the main library, Dokk1 and 18 branches. Since the beginning of her career in 2001 she has been part of Aarhus Public Libraries’ development of the library of the future. Focusing on interactions, user-involvement, leadership, partnerships, prototyping and communication in the library space, she has investigated new technologies, involvement processes and organisational learning. From 2005–2015 Marie was the project leader of the building of Dokk1, implementing and developing these ideas as well as introducing new forms of user- and citizen involvement in the planning and building of Dokk1. After the opening of Dokk1, Marie took on the position as Head of Community Engagement, Partnerships and Communications, continuing to work with re-creation and development of spaces, relations and service. She has throughout the years worked intensely with co-operation and partnerships – nationally and internationally – to ensure development and innovation in services for users. Plosz, Laura. Principal Architect, Group2 Architecture Interior Design, Saskatchewan, Canada and founding principal of the Group2 Saskatchewan studio. Laura combines

sustainable design expertise with an ability to manage complex projects, working with clients to gather consensus and move projects forward while maintaining budgets and minimising risk. Her consistent focus on projects involving public consultation and stakeholder input has allowed her to develop considerable skill in leading diverse groups through the early stages of the design process. Laura has led a number of projects to study and implement the renovation of existing public and academic libraries such as the Murray Library Transformation Phase 3 Project and the Regina Public Library George Bothwell Branch and Expansion Project. Romero, Santi. Head of the Library Architecture Unit at the Library Services Management Office (LMSO) of the Diputació de Barcelona since 2005. From 1990 to 1993 Santi worked in Taller de Arquitectura Ricardo Bofill before joining the LMSO in 1993. His work, which is focused on the advice and control of projects and works of public libraries in the province of Barcelona, has led him to intervene in more than 150 libraries. Santi received his Master’s degree in Architecture from the Escola Tècnica Superior d’Arquitectura of Barcelona. He has written numerous articles and lectures on library architecture both in Spain and abroad. Santi has been a jury member for various library architecture competitions and is author of “Library Architecture: Recommendations for a comprehensive research project”. He took part, as a Spanish expert representative, in the development of the Technical Report ISO/ TR 11219 “Qualitative conditions and basic statistics for library buildings”. Since 2005 he has been a member of the IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment Section Standing Committee. Sabater, Immaculada. Architect with the Library Services Management Office (LMSO) of the Diputació de Barcelona since 2007, responsible for the supervision of major



library building projects. In the course of her work over the last 10 years Imma has worked collaboratively with city councils, library staff, architects and furniture manufacturers in more than 60 processes to create new libraries or rethink and improve existing libraries in the province of Barcelona. Prior to joining the LMSO, Imma worked in Ajuntament de Barcelona, other architecture firms, ran her own architecture office in Barcelona and taught interior design at Escola d’Art I Disseny in Rubí. Imma received her Master’s degree in Architecture from the Escola Tècnica Superior d’Arquitectura of Barcelona.

Contributors 

 235

and processes required to deliver solutions which achieve design excellence and meet the needs of clients and stakeholders. Troy recently acted as Project Architect for the Meadows Branch of the Edmonton Public Library, as well as the Principal-In-Charge of the RPL George Bothwell Branch Renovation and Expansion.

Shepstone, Carol. University Librarian at Ryerson University in Toronto Canada. Carol joined Ryerson in 2017 and is pleased to be leading an innovative Library team in such a vibrant and fast paced comprehensive university. She came to Ryerson after 10 successful years leading Mount Royal University Library in Calgary Alberta, one of Canada’s most student and teaching focused undergraduate universities. During this time, Carol led the design of the new Riddell Library and Learning Centre facility. Her research interests include organizational culture, student perceptions of the value of academic libraries, library assessment and impact in higher education, and intellectual property.

Sommer, Dorothea. Deputy Director-General of the Bavarian State Library in Munich. Prior to this appointment, Dorothea was Deputy Director and Acting Director of the University and State Library Sachsen Anhalt at Martin Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberg in Halle and involved in several library building and design projects within its library system. She is currently a corresponding member of the IFLA Library Buildings and Equipment (LBE) Section Standing Committee after serving on the Committee from 2007–2015, including a two-year term as Secretary and a four-year term as Chair. She has published several articles on library architecture and edited two books in the IFLA publication series. She is co-editor of ABI-Technik, the leading German library journal on automation, library architecture and technology. Her professional interests apart from library architecture and design include library management, digital innovation, transformation processes and cultural heritage issues.

Smith, Troy. Principal Architect at Group2 Architecture Interior Design. After working in the Group2 Edmonton Studio since 2004, Troy returned to Saskatchewan in 2010 to raise his family and establish the Group2 Saskatoon Studio. Troy has over 15 years of experience in the design and construction of public buildings. He brings tremendous energy and enthusiasm to bear on complex, multi-user projects, often acting as primary client contact, design lead and job captain. Having worked with institutional clients including universities and municipal and provincial governments, he understands the systems

Souleles, John. Associate and Project Architect with DIALOG, an integrated architecture, engineering, interior design, planning, urban design, and landscape architecture firm with studios in major cities across Canada. He has worked on a diverse range of projects with a focus on libraries in twenty-first century academic and public institutions. In particular, his interest lies in modern libraries and the distinctions between academic, public and research model libraries. John is project architect for the Riddell Library and Learning Centre and numerous branch revitalisations

236 

 Contributors

within the Calgary Public Library system. As a LEED® Accredited Professional, he has a keen interest in sustainable design and sits on several committees that further the sustainable discussion within DIALOG. John has presented at industry conferences including the Green Building Symposium and Construct Calgary Conference. Tinaztepe, Elif. Associate and Senior Architect with Schmidt Hammer Lassen architects since 2005. At Schmidt Hammer Lassen architects Elif has been involved in international competitions as well as large scale educational and cultural projects from concept development to completion, including development of brief, user and public consultations, submitting for planning approval and design development through all stages as project leader. Elif uses her extensive experience with learning projects of complex character to successfully facilitate

dialogue with users and other stakeholders, both on ongoing projects as well as in international workshops. Elif received a Masters in Architecture from the Southern California Institute of Architecture and a BSc in Architecture from Istanbul Technical University, Turkey; she is a regular lecturer and workshop facilitator at international library and learning conferences. Tschirren, Dani. Deputy Director at Zentralund Hochschulbibliothek Luzern. Dani Tschirren studied History and Geography at the Universities of Berne and Zurich. During his employment at the Library and Archive of the ETH Zurich he completed an MAS in Library and Information Science. From 2001 until 2014 he was head of customer services and facility management at the University Library of Basel. Since 2015 he has been Deputy Director at the Central and University Library Lucerne.