The ALIA National Policy Congress 2002: South Australia.

Report from the meeting of South Australian ALIA groups held 2 October, City West Campus of UNISA Library, 5:45pm.

Facilitator: Dr Alan Bundy

Present: Christine Cother (Information Science (SA)), Eleanor Whelan (Mentoring Group), Katherine Shaw (Convenor-ALIA SA), Kate Sinclair (Special Libraries), Kathy Sharrad (SA Library Technicians), Jacki Williams (SALT-observer), Jonathon Dyer (RAISS), Robert Elson (Acquisitions SA), Jenni Jeremy (Australian Serials Special Interest Group), Liz Walkley (ArCOM), Phillip Keane (Health Libaries).

Minutes: Kate Sinclair, Katherine Shaw

1. Nomination of representative to attend Canberra NPC

Self-nominations were received from Liz Walkley, Jonathon Dyer and Phillip Keane. After a process of voting facilitated by Alan Bundy, Phillip Keane was elected as the SA representative and will attend the Canberra NPC.

2. Information Agenda

What broad agreement is there on content and direction of an information agenda?
It was agreed the content of an information agenda should include information and how it is accessed in Australia. The point was raised that there are too many separate bodies which hold key resources who should be working together to show how they have been built and how the nation is using them. An agenda should take a holistic approach and be targeted at specific areas in need where achievements can be made and promoted. The example of Canada giving access to Medline was given to illustrate this point. It is important to show what strengths SA has at the moment and take them to the national body. The question of whether there should be a national and/or local agenda was raised. The question of where we, as a profession fit into other sectors as information professionals was also raised.

If an action plan is needed, how is it to be developed and implemented?
Bringing together peak bodies was agreed as a starting point - it was felt that the various professional associations and peak bodies talk more across each other and not in isolation. It was decided the top level of the association should liaise with federal bodies while in the meantime turning the association around to support the grass roots level (us!). In addition it was felt that it is not just ALIA's role to organise these groups or be seen as the 'head body' as they are one of the groups on par with the others. Likewise NLA-they provided the initiative and venue for the first peak body forum and it should be an event that is shared equally around the larger participants at regular intervals. It was agreed that the Library and Information services sector has a significant role in progressing an information agenda.

Primary issues for ALIA:

• ALIA should take a national role
• The agenda should be on a local and national level
• Collaboration-for example between NLA and ALIA
• Must ensure silos of profession convene on a regular basis
• Funds should be provided for a local agenda
• Flow of information between head office and SA-we need to be kept informed of Canberra activities

3. ALIA draft plan for 2003-2004

The group worked through the five strategic focus areas of the draft plan and raised the following issues:

Members First

All agreed that the concept of putting members first is important if ALIA is to move forward. Some of the major issues raised were:

• The potential future drop in membership due to the aging workforce and therefore the importance of recruitment, not simply retention. EW asked for more transparency about the membership figures, particularly in relation to fluctuation and declining membership. All agreed that recruitment is a key issue and should be addressed with a structured recruitment drive coordinated from a national level down to the local groups.
• The need to examine what ALIA offers members in comparison to other professional organisations. ALIA membership is not crucial in order to advance careers.
• The position of institutional members-what do they gain from ALIA membership given that this category of membership is a significant financial contribution to ALIA. What about institutional representation on a local and national level?

Responses to the proposed initiatives and critical success measures:

• It was suggested the measurements and targets (eg retention rate of 90 per cent) are unrealistic and will be very difficult to meet. 'Net growth in membership' is vague.
• The role of the local presence officer needs to be more clearly defined
• Recognition of rural and remote members is much harder in some states than others. SA has a more isolated and remote group of members than the eastern states.

Excellence

The name of this strategic focus area was questioned-is the title 'Excellence' meaningful or relevant to the issues involved? There was a general feeling that it is simply a superficial re-badging of CPD.

Responses to the proposed initiatives and critical success measures:

• It was noted that REAP is perhaps 'wishy washy' and turns the onus back on volunteers.
• What about the ALIA accreditation process for library schools?
• Audit of CPD program - the CPD program generally is weak and simply appears to generate a lot of paperwork. During discussion it was compared to the angst of doing your tax return! CPD members receive little communication regarding the program and no real evidence of tangible benefits or progression by participating.

Credibility

Again the name of this strategic focus area was questioned - is the title 'Credibility' meaningful or relevant to the issues involved? The areas of discussion appear to be issues of profile-raising and advocacy rather than professional credibility, which doesn't appear to be a major issue for the library profession.

• It was agreed that any strategic marketing plan would have to be developed nationally and implemented at all levels of the association. Local groups will need structure, support, guidelines and material such as info-kits or other publicity supplied by National Office in order to promote issues in a consolidated and unified fashion.

Adding value

Responses to the proposed initiatives and critical success measures:

• It was agreed that (j) doesn't really belong in this section but instead falls under members first.
• The terminology was also questioned. '..students and professional members' seems not to include library tecnicians/para-professionals, a significant sector of the membership.
• After discussion it was agreed that (k) is not particularly relevant to members. Most of us regard such offers as just 'more mail in the letterbox' and believe this is not a high priority for the association at this time.
• Some people required more explanation of (m). Which specific external training providers are being considered? Will they be national providers with branches in each major city, or based in the eastern states? A better model would be to fund groups so that they are able to provide high quality training locally.

Investment in the future

Responses to the proposed initiatives and critical success measures:
In response to (q) it was asked who would evaluate the Board of Directors and what processes will they follow?

Other issues raised in discussion:
Members generally do not present a positive, dynamic image of ALIA membership. The large, dominant libraries in Australia have relatively low membership amongst staff. Employers don't make ALIA membership a priority.

Most importantly, if ALIA fails to engage their volunteer base, how will we be able to successfully engage those members who aren't actively involved? The general feeling from tonight's meeting is that ALIA is failing those of us at the front line regarding basic issues of communication , finance and support. If the regional groups are not dynamic, positive and passionate about ALIA and what it can offer members, who will be?

General issues raised in discussion of the documentation were:
All the material overlaps and there is a significant amount of jargon and repetition. With such a huge amount of material to read, it was difficult for some of the ALIA SA group to properly engage with the material, let alone encourage involvement and response from their group membership. Perhaps a better way to engage membership would have been to send a simple survey with basic questions such as 'what do you think are the main issues facing ALIA?'

Is it possible for ALIA to properly accomplish all of these outcomes and strategic goals? (We doubt it)

Is it possible for the National Policy Congress to cover all of these issues in one day? (We doubt it)

4. Progress since 2001 NPC

Most strategy from the 2001 NPC has not yet been implemented. The feeling is that the current strategic focus areas are too ambitious and 'we have bitten off more than we can chew', particularly after the ALIA restructure. We need to go back to basics. What are the absolute priorities? Lets get real and focus on doing not discussing!

Alan Bundy closed the meeting - thanks to Alan for facilitating, Kathy for organising the meeting and Philip for agreeing to represent SA in Canberra. It was agreed that members could forward any further concerns directly to Philip.