Wednesday, October 3, 2007

Uncontrolled Vocabulary #15 - Your tax dollars at work

Uncontrolled Vocabulary #15 is now available for download. Here's a direct link to the mp3.

You can subscribe to the show via the podcast feed (now available at the iTunes Music Store): http://recordings.talkshoe.com/rss38665.xml

On the call:

Greg Schwartz, Louisville Free Public Library
Laura Carscaddon, University of Arizona
Ryan Deschamps, Halifax Public Library
Peter McCracken, Serials Solutions
Michael Sauers, Nebraska Library Commission

Links to the show topics:

1. Prisons to Restore Purged Religious Books (New York Times)

2. Harrison library charges fine for late mom's overdue book (Lower Hudson Online)
Sigh (Library Garden)

3. creating a flat library and the culture of maybe (walking paper)

4. If Tech Support is Broken, What is the Solution? (PC World)
Hire a librarian to do your computer work (travelinlibrarian on Flickr)

5. Lawsuit Against Virgin Mobile and Creative Commons – FAQ (Creative Commons)

6. College Students’ Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources (OCLC)
Better Search: Libraries or Engines? (SearchEngineWatch.com)

7. Laptop With a Mission Widens Its Audience (New York Times)

3 comments:

aaron said...

Thanks for discussing this, everybody. I'll definitely use your comments to develop and refine the ideas in my post.

Initially, I'm a bit surprised that people on the show weren't a bit more "rah-rah!" for flat org structures. This might speak to just how different my situation is (especially having never working in a huge library). I'm particularly interested in the positive comments about the division of labor, something I always associate with alienation from work.

More to come!

Connie said...

As usual a great show, guys! I had small bandwidth so wasn't able to participate, but was actually listening along live.

Cheers!
Connie

Ryan Deschamps said...

Hey Aaron -- re: division of labor --

Lots of hits always on "silos" mentality and the sort, but good organizational design usually allows for at least some development of expertise (where it's needed).

I guess my caveat is just that "flat" for "flat's sakes" is not the way to go. "Hierarchical" just because "that's the way it's always been" is also no good. The point, more broadly, is that you gotta look at a) where your org is now, b) where you want to be, and then develop the organization that works best to make b) happen.

As came from the comments (and from the little I know about you myself), "flat" for "flat's sakes" is not your style. Still, I got a little of that impression from your article, so felt the need to comment that way.