2017 MSUL TS documentation project

Summary: The following is an archive of the project to evaluate and improve Technical Services procedures and policy documentation at MSU Libraries undertaken in 2017-2018. Included are the resources, tools, plans, presentations, and decisions that guided the project that resulted in our new Confluence page: https://msults.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/TSdoc/pages/67502228. See also: INSERT CHAPTER CITATION

Project overview

Before the project launched, the libraries’ main, public-facing Drupal website was the repository for Technical Services (TS) documentation. This aligned with the overall land-grant mission of the university, but it resulted in some logistical challenges, such as searching, which could not easily be focused in on TS content.

The documentation had been handed down through multiple editors and migrated across several intranet and wiki iterations. This understandably resulted in disjointed organization, duplicated pages, and outdated or conflicting information. It had also ballooned to a whopping 300 + pages. Finding information could be challenging and often required knowledge on what team performed what function – or sometimes used to perform it. The procedures had been maintained as well as could be expected, but had reached the point at which a concentrated, holistic assessment was necessary.

For context, in 2017, MSU Libraries Technical Services Division employed approximately 40 FTE, all of whom were based in the Main Library building. It is comprised of seven sub-units: Acquisitions, Catalog Maintenance, Cataloging & Metadata Services, Copy Cataloging, Metadata Management (authorities work), Catalog Services (system management of the integrated library system, or ILS), and Electronic Resources.

We launched the project believing that good documentation creates a better working environment. Just like other forms of workplace communication, documentation is a part of staff empowerment because it allows for equal access to information, reduces cognitive load (and, therefore, helps negates mistakes), and supports confident and independent decision making. Technical Services work is detailed and highly structured by its nature and necessarily complex to process the many resources that pass through the division. And we believe there is a direct line from good documentation to quality work.

Project leads & timeline

Autumn Faulkner - Asst. Head of Cataloging & Metadata Services and Emily Sanford - Serials Catalog Librarian were the primaries on the project. Autumn brought to the project an appreciation for good documentation as a cataloger and manager who often trains new staff. Emily has an additional assignment in the Libraries' User Experience Unit and brought to the project tools and methods learned in that role. Tim Kiser - Special Materials Cataloger later joined the project to assist.

The project began in 2017 and concluded with the launch of a Confluence site on May 15, 2018. While the bulk of the project is finished, we continue to iteratively examine and improve, as well as look for missing documentation.

Back to top 

Project Plan and Goals

Our goals for the project included:

• Improved information architecture for the overall site

• Increased findability/readability of procedures for users (both within and outside of the Tech Services division)

• Simplified process to create/write/edit content (interface, guidelines, templates, built-in infrastructure, and accessibility concerns)

• Future-proofing (accounting for future growth and developing tools for routine review)

• Identifying documentation gaps (especially in regards to one-person workflows)

Our project plan contained many steps which we tracked using a checklist:

Open

Back to top

Initial Assessment

• Google Survey to assess needs and opinions about current documentation

  • We used the Google Forms platform to deploy our survey: https://docs.google.com/forms

  • It is important to invest time in research on how to successfully deploy surveys. Protecting privacy, informed consent, and asking good questions are all important aspects to nail down for an effective survey. See: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/qualitative-surveys/

  • Our survey:

Open

Back to top

Step 4

• Substep a

• Substep b

• Substep c

Back to top