STRENGTHS by gabyion

VIEWS: 358 PAGES: 5

									                                                                Director’s Feedback
                                                             Directors Meeting (5/17/07)

            STRENGTHS                            WEAKNESSES                           OPPORTUNITIES                                THREATS
 Quality of staff                       Some of the staff                    Create more training                   Being swallowed up by BOR
 Responsiveness                          responsiveness; some never            opportunities or participation in      Loss of identity
 Organizational chart                    answer back                           more training                          Funding –budget cuts
 Accessibility of staff                 Need stronger construction           More responsive on a daily             Loss of significance in
 Good legislative support                support, more help with process       basis                                   community (libraries)
 Easy ―give me‖ grants and              Availability of staff --             Every director should have an          Can’t advance our budgetary
  good grants administration              sometimes we need answers             advisor (GPLS staff)                    needs because BOR doesn’t
 Forward-thinking philosophy             ASAP (under-staffing)                Economics of scale for                  agree
 Librarian–dense staffing at            State library not my advocate –       purchasing (i.e. downloadable          GPLS too unselfish w/ funds
  GPLS                                    too independent –GPLS tied by         audio, etc.)                            because libraries need funds
 Size and resources of state             BOR/State –can’t help                Legislature that listens and           Too much focus on one issue,
 PINES/Evergreen                        Attention to children’s               values us                               ignoring others
 Sharing of resources                    services/children’s services         BOR computer replacement               Political pressures--not in line
 Flexibility to adjust to changing       staff w/o attention to others         plan                                    with priorities
  needs                                   (example: PINNACLE email             Tuition assistance program             Sometimes GPLS hands are
 Flexibility on funding (grants)         to directors and children’s          Re-examine directors mtg- less          tied in legislative process
 Professional resources at state         services librarians)                  GPLS talk and more about               Salaries too low …turnover
  library                                Lack of clear standards for           public library issues – more           GPLS staff inadequately
 Willingness to embrace input            public libraries                      global and more local (most             trained in rules--no time or $$
  /ask for input (ex. R-PLAC,            Competing interest of various         learning happens at breaks)             for training
  etc.)                                   kinds of libraries (divides          Less structured time, more             Costs of technology going up
 Approachable                            resources)                            interaction                            Money, lack of
 Ability to attract good staff          Need help with                       Capital asset replacement on           State laws outdated
 Approachability with                    paraprofessional training esp.        cycle replacement                      People without vision
  legislatures                            those on desk                        Advertise libraries statewide –        Manpower, lack of--
 Meetings/communication                 Concentration of staff in ATL         David Baker                             understaffed
  opportunities                           area                                 Create taxing/millage rates for        Staff retention
 Close monitoring of legislative        When I call, everybody is gone        libraries                              Censorship
  process                                Turnover of staff                    Marketing versus PR                    Lack of unified front (library
 Excellent IT                           Location inconvenient (except        Genealogy database in Galileo-          community)
  availability/connectivity for           for Darro)                            - work on purchasing power             We are tiny speck at BOR
  libraries                              No scholarship money for             Vision for future-- fiber optics       Infrastructure –mistreated by
 Bridge between libraries and            library school                       PINES and PINES-like                    parent organizations (DOE,
  BellSouth(AT&T)/ Georgia               Would like more web meetings          projects-- include schools and          DTAE, BOR)
SWOT Activity, p. 1
                                                                Director’s Feedback
                                                             Directors Meeting (5/17/07)

  Public Web                             rather than face to face               universities (Milk the                Funding formula- what is the
 Sense of ownership (ex. Pines)         meetings                               innovation for all it’s worth--        goal?
 GPLS staff listen                     Staff overburdened with too            the ―Google of Georgia‖)              Community does not
 Collaboration with other groups        many responsibilities                 Reciprocal relationships with          understand true value of
  (contractors, RACL, etc.)             In crucible all of the time--          USG institutions--Technical            libraries
 Cont. Ed opportunities (Carl           can’t sit back and plan                consultants                           Bureaucracy-can’t internally
  Vinson)                               Inertia                               Courier service across public          shift
 Assumption of program costs at        No return on investment (ROI)          libraries and USG                     Shift in funding ownership
  state level (ex. cataloging thru       study from independent agency         New training person to assist in       from state to local
  OCLC, movie licensing, etc.)—         Inability to initiate budget           contracting Tech training             Lack of redundancy in staff –no
  equalizes services across state        requests independently                Develop borrowing agreements           backup
 Quality of pay                        Lack of advance planning – e.          among/with non-PINES                  Lack of funding
 Construction program                   g., about distribution of system       libraries                             Lack of quality librarians and
 PINES                                  services grant (SSG)                  Policy structure for PINES             paraprofessionals
 Collaboration                         Inequality of service (PINES           prohibitive to large libraries        Politics
 Infrastructure                         vs. non-PINES)                        Establishing independent              Perception that libraries are
 Pull us together statewide            Lack of clear understanding of         agency                                 dying institutions
 Stability with staff                   who’s responsible for what            Set own agenda rather than it         Perception that libraries are
 Knowledgeable /accessible             Need more building guidance            being set for us                       pushing porn
  staff                                 Lack of identity/ voice in state      Simplify funding formula              We should temper
 Staff approachable, caring,            funding (tiny part of BOR)            Better training opportunities          collaboration
  listen                                Lack of information to                PR opportunity with Evergreen         Expectation that libraries
 BOR home = best yet                    directors                             Professional development               should do more and more
 Training quality                      Development Staff not out             Cooperating with other                Getting outside our core
 Leveraging local funding with          working with libraries                 agencies; moving state agenda          mission
  state funds                           Not enough staff                       forward (literacy, education,         Doing too much for too many
 Presence at ACCG/GMA--                Response –staff doesn’t get            etc.)                                 Need to define scope of work
  gives credibility to local             back to me                            More online training                  Our unwillingness to do things
  libraries                             Personal contact with directors       More recognition as provider of        that win political points
 GPLS willing to talk with local        --need warm and fuzzy                  e- govt services we are unique        Don’t want the think tank
  funders/officials (need more of       No direction for future of             agency that provide services           concentrated in one place
  this--commissioners, trustees,         libraries (Balance between             free and equal to all age groups      Use of only public funds
  etc.                                   technology and books /basic           Opportunity to recognize role         Funding
 Branding excellent                     services focus on                      of libraries in economic              Rising level of stupidity
  publications, marketing, PR            Evergreen/Gates)                       development                           Frustration, feeling powerless
SWOT Activity, p. 2
                                                                Director’s Feedback
                                                             Directors Meeting (5/17/07)

 Publications w / data                  Need training and support             Evolution of the Information         Legislative craziness
  (authoritative/credible)                people for technology                  Revolution                           Politics (pork)
 Communication—listservs,               Not enough support for                More collaboration with other        Unrealistic exceptions – GPLS
  email keeping current                   librarianship as a profession          types of libraries                    has magic bullet
 Interaction with public libraries       (help us explain why                  Exploit our innovation               No accredited library school in
 Construction program                    professional librarians are           Keep user hooked once they            GA
 VRP / children’s services               important)                             leave school                         Anonymity with parent
 Draw on strength of other state        Knowing who does what                 Continue developing reputation        organization-- not watching out
  library agencies (focus beyond         Feel like send request into            as a leader nationally                for us
  GA)                                     black hole                            Leadership in state and outside      Diversity of GA libraries
 Leading library service                Lot of openings                        of state                             Victims of own success
 Setting expectations                   Not enough lead time when             Demonstrate that public library      Lack of ethnic diversity
 Librarians at all levels are            requesting information from            cooperation with other types of      Legal threats--USA PATRIOT
  respected                               directors                              institutions enhances education       Act, copyright, materials
 State library providing many           Legal information                     Exploit growth of state               challenges obscenity
  services that small libraries          Need more visits from GPLS             population                           Diminished public image of
  may have to struggle to fund            staff to libraries                    Collaboration of libraries            libraries
  (examples: OCLC, T-1 lines,            So wrapped up in surviving,            around the state to promote          Heavier responsibility/hiring
  filtering, web hosting,                 can’t develop vision for the           library service                      Security
  PINNACLE)                               future.                               Build on successes                   Changing audit requirements
 Ability to see bigger picture--        Short of staff                        Build volunteer support base         Threats to compensation- pay
  environmental scan, keeping on         Everyone being located in ATL         Recognition of libraries as           scale, retirement
  cutting edge of technology              (living and working there)             community centers                    Perception that Internet is
 Coordination of political              Lack of money                         Advisory committee for public         everything
  process with legislators               Lack of independence of state          libraries at BOR level               Illiteracy
 Training                                librarian                             Lots of new directors                Diminishing respect for library
 Coordination with Friends              BOR-- we have to comply with                                                 science degree
  statewide                               processes, etc.--red tape                                                   Georgia size and governmental
 Lack of huge physical                  Treated like stepchild of BOR                                                divisions in the state
  infrastructure ability to be            (nor full member)                                                           It staff training – retention
  nimble                                 State diverse – different needs                                             Distribution of state paid
 Ability to manage state funding        Physical size of state                                                       positions
  so that it is maximized for            Staff can’t get to southern part                                            Rising costs
  libraries                               of state
 IT infrastructure                      Don’t currently market what
SWOT Activity, p. 3
                                                                Director’s Feedback
                                                             Directors Meeting (5/17/07)

 Technology                              we do (public libraries)
 Gates                                  Need good PR campaign (e.g.
 GALILEO                                 Tech schools have billboards)
 Conduits to grass roots –              Need ROI study, value of
  potential                               services
 Cover the entire state                 Help sell our community
 Works on behalf of libraries at         development services
  national and other levels (ex.         Doesn’t help with local
  LSTA)--clearinghouse                    advocacy
 Dr. Veatch – visibility in             How directors meetings are
  legislature                             designed-- a lot talking at us
 BOR possible strength                  Needs to be more resource
 Staff-- critical number of staff,       sharing among the directors
  able to do more                        No follow thru on assigning
 Vision of staff --big                   consultants to systems
  picture/possibilities
 Going through this process
  (listening, accepting input,
  responding to needs)
 Communication
 Technology
 Access to GALILEO databases
 Strength in numbers
 Strive for equal services
 State that emphasizes/ requires
  MLS directors
 Standards
 State paid positions—salaries,
  benefits
 David S.
 Right people in key positions
 Construction program
 Technology infrastructure
 PINES
 Conduit to bigger pots of
SWOT Activity, p. 4
                                       Director’s Feedback
                                    Directors Meeting (5/17/07)

    money (LSTA, Gates, Mellon,
    etc.)
   David
   Responsive
   Top-notch staff
   New organizational chart
   Expertise of staff
   GPLS as unique organizational
    chart as part of BOR
   Innovative
   Gates grants
   Money at end of year
   Educated risk-taking
   Resource sharing
   Providing technology
   E-rate
   IT infrastructure
   Website
   Statewide programming




SWOT Activity, p. 5

								
To top