记得5年前,一位老师曾问“知不知道那个博士学位最高级?”众大惑“博士学位不是一样的吗?”后来才知哲学博士的确是高一畴的。只可惜,我的思维限制,只能远观不可亵玩焉--哲学,愈加深远了。现在接触了情报信息科学,突然发觉一片广阔的天地。情报,在现在的社会中地位愈来愈加重要了,可是其重要性似乎还没有得到足够广泛人群的重视,甚至不少学科、研究点设置,一些专项基金或学者设置都没有图书或情报这一科。也因此,图书馆员的地位也相应不高,被称为“难堪的教辅一职”,相对于国外甚至台湾(图书馆员与公务员同等待遇)都大大不如。这种连锁反应必然造成现在诸多图书馆不断强调服务质量,却怎么也很难得到改善的原因之一吧。
人民网一篇网友建言,应该重视图书情报学科(information science),甚至还提议,未来的科研,在立题的时候,必须是由科学专业的教授和图书馆员(Librarian)共同完成。而不是仅仅由科学专业的教授自己完成。 我也期望这一天早些到来吧~
《网友建言:长江学者中应该有图书馆专业人才》
另外在Cybrarian的blog上看到对Jonas Holmstroumlm的文章《Managing a Paradigm Shift – Aligning anagement, Privacy Policy, Technology and Standards》的分析--从用户(user)到客户(client)的介绍和分析,觉得和最近调研的企业文化总结出的“先进的企业管理方法逐步进入非盈利性质的高校图书馆”很有默契。
Abstract. It is argued that we are experiencing a paradigm shift from a user perspective to a client perspective in library and information science. The paradigm shift is brought about by recent changes in scholarly publishing, which have enabled end-users to search for and retrieve information by themselves. Libraries are increasingly providing services that are more and more personalized. The implications of the paradigm shift for management, privacy policy, integration of services, and standards are discussed. It is suggested that libraries are increasingly considering customer relationship management and that privacy policy should be split up in to personal and professional privacy. Current systems should be developed to support successive searching behaviour. Finally the need for an Open Services Initiative to solve the appropriate service problem is discussed.
文中主要介绍了以下变化:
○Changes in the Behaviour of End-users:由这些变化引发的图书馆相应对策:
Self-sufficient End-users.
Perceived Skills vs. Observed Skills.
Librarians do it Better, Faster and Cheaper.
○Libraries React
Moving Up the Value Ladder: Librarians Get Personal.
My Library: Personalizing the Library.
Reference Services: The Librarian Left the Building.
○ What It All Adds Up To
· From a User Paradigm to a Client Paradigm.The System, User, and Client Paradigms.
· New Management Thinking: from ERM to CRM
· New Policy: Personal and Professional Privacy
· Divided They Stand: the Short-run and the Long-run
· New Standards Needed: an Open Services Initiative
Comments