[Web4lib] But can libraries afford failure? [was The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate" ]

[Andrew Hankinson]

You raise a great point!

One way around this that 'big businesses' and other process-driven  
organizations (i.e. University IT depts.) get around this is to  
create a separate R&D department.  R&D is often very expensive  
because of its high rate of 'failure' (where 'failure' is measured by  
the movement of projects in the R&D department to the organization at  
large), but it also provides a convenient level of separation and  
stability in the production side of things for administration.

Another approach might be the Google approach, which might be thought  
of as "Distributed R&D," whereby they give their employees 20% of  
their paid time for pet projects.  Since we all work with  
intelligent, educated people, they invariably have ideas on how to  
improve their own work and possibly the work of others around them.   
This 20% time gives them an opportunity to relieve themselves of  
their day-to-day workload and work on projects that interest them,  
making for happier and more productive people in their 80% of  
'institution time'.  (It's also easier to 'hide' your R&D in people's  
salaries!)

Either way, I'm of the opinion that 'innovation' is harder to  
accomplish without a sandbox of sorts, where new ideas can be played  
with and tried without affecting the stability of 'the process'.  The  
best ideas will usually make it out of this sandbox and into  
production, the bad ones will not.  This also reduces the amount of  
chaos and disorder that bureaucrats are so adverse to.

Andrew

On 6-Jun-07, at 2:12 PM, Knight, James wrote:

> /* my $0.02
>
> Per Tim's and Andy's comments below, a few questions/comments:
>
> Is failure, no matter how humane or inexpensive, an option for  
> libraries
> (their staff, directors and technologists) that are still  
> struggling to
> carve out an identity and achieve relevance in the information age?
>
> I once proposed to a group of librarians that they adopt a certain  
> cheap
> and easy to deploy piece of technology, thus reducing their "cost of
> failure" (should the initial deployment not take within their
> constituency). At that point, I was reminded by one director that the
> library's reputation was at stake, and that failure of this sort could
> jeopardize said same with the institution's users and administration.
> Failure has consequences beyond improving one's chances for success.
>
> Can innovation take place in a risk- (i.e., failure) averse  
> environment?
> Libraries are (historically) process driven institutions. Process and
> innovation are difficult to balance in any business. Innovation also
> creates chaos; not every institution (especially those with heavy  
> handed
> bureaucracies) tolerates disorder and lack of control in its day to  
> day
> operation.
>
> Are there other possible reasons libraries have not been the  
> incubators
> of technological innovation?
>
> It's not just technology either. Look at the funding issues (requiring
> some financial innovation) and debate raised by Steve Coffman several
> years ago, and how few libraries have managed to expand beyond the
> current tax supported model that keeps so many public libraries afloat
> (or not).
>
> The panel might, IMHO, want to consider these questions at its
> discussion this summer.
>
> my $0.02 */
>
> -jk [who wonders if this discussion is being carried on elsewhere]
>
>  --------------------------------------------
> James Knight, MLIS
> Product Specialist
> Wolters Kluwer Health - Medical Research
>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 12:53:44 -0400
> From: "Havens,Andy" <havensa at oclc.org>
> Subject: RE: [Web4lib] "The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate" at
> 	ALAthis	month
> To: "Tim Spalding" <tim at librarything.com>,	"web4lib"
> 	<web4lib at lists.webjunction.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	
> <BEFAD900A34FA54AA723C1CF9DBB063AC4DAA8 at OAEXCH4SERVER.oa.oclc.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
>
> What Tim said.
>
> One of the best presentations I ever heard was given by A.G.  
> Lafley, CEO
> of Proctor & Gamble. When asked the secret of P&G's success, he  
> replied
> with one word: failure. He then went on to explain that in his  
> industry,
> each success requires hundreds if not thousands of failures in  
> order to
> identify and, in many cases, invent suitable products for its various
> industries. He went on to say that their goal at P&G was to, "Fail
> often, as inexpensively and humanely as possible, while tracking and
> learning from each failure."
>
> The Beginner's Mind writ large.
>
>
> - A
> Andy Havens
> OCLC: Manager, Branding and Creative Services
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Tim Spalding
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 8:09 PM
> To: web4lib
> Subject: Re: [Web4lib] "The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate" at
> ALAthis month
>
> RE: "How do you separate effective innovation from "innovation for
> innovation's sake"? It's one thing to be innovative to be trendy, and
> quite another thing to be innovative in a way that improves a  
> library's
> services."
>
> But this is true in every single field of human endeavor in which
> innovation happens! Innovation in the software industry, for  
> example, is
> sometimes for the good and sometimes not. What distinguishes libraries
> from some other fields are differing attitudes toward the  
> possibility of
> failure. In Silicon Alley, having burned through millions of VC  
> money in
> a failure is a resume plus, not a minus! Or maybe I should say "risks
> leading to failure," since libraries are okay with gradual failures.
> That, and finely tuned mechanisms for rewarding good innovation and
> killing bad. But maybe that was your point.
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/