Flexible staff: implications of the drive for flexibility and changing skills attributes

1. Flexible staff: implications of the drive for flexibility and changing skills attributes Graham Walton Assistant Director, Information Management Research Institute and Faculty Librarian (Health, Social Work and Education), University of Northumbria Fourth World Conference on Continuing Professional Education for the Library and Information Professions: an IFLA Preconference, Chester, Vermont, 15th - 17th August 2001

2. Focus of presentation on ‘Flexible staff….’ • Background to United Kingdom eLib programme and HyLife project • Literature on flexibility • Methodology to explore flexibility • Flexibility and academic staff/ organisational structures/ users/ librarians • Model informing flexibility and librarians

3. United Kingdom higher education eLib programme • Publication of 1993 Follett report • Phases I and II : 1994 -1998 • Phase III: 1998 - 2000 • 5 Hybrid library projects (including HyLife) and four CLUMPS projects

4. Reasons why flexibility has become more important • Rapid technological change • Customer expectation • Increasing globalisation with loss of sense of place • Decreasing unit of resource • Shorter product life cycles

5. Flexibility within the organisations • ‘The truly flexible organisation is in constant flux with no essential shape’(Harvard Business Review, 1999) • ‘Flexibility is about being able to bend without breaking’(Scarnatti, 1999) • ‘Flexible organisations must be able to reconfigure assets and structures to accomplish necessary internal and external transformation’ (Wright and Snell, 1998)

6. Flexibility within structures • ‘Organisations need to balance the stable and fluid states that exist simultaneously’ (Beach, 2000) • ‘Vertical structures are slow in developing and implementing decisions and less facilitative of innovation’ ( Hitt etal, 1998) • ‘In order to improve flexibility there is a need to flatten structures and focus on cross-functional integration and employee participation’ (Lau, 1996) • ‘Loose coupling is crucial to balance the need for strong interdependence among functions with an open responsiveness to environmental changes’ (Lei, 1996)

7. Flexibility and management roles • ‘Having management with right mental models is a condition of success in flexibility’ (Anell, 2000) • Vision and entrepreneurship • Managers need to build effective relationships between different stakeholders • Ability to conceptualise and reconceptualise different andpossibly contradictory information

8. Flexibility and staff development • ‘If skills and knowledge are to be present in the firm then the workforce is the key factor’(Lau, 1996) • ‘Multiskilled workforce should be cultivated and not treated as a replaceable parts or costs to be controlled’ (Wright and Snell, 1998) • Staff development should focus on skills that help develop flexibility (mental abilities, adaptability to change)

9. Negative aspects of flexibility • ‘If no structure there needs to be agreed, stable rules that bind it together’(Mayrhofer, 1997) • ‘There are strengths that are lost when an organisation has extraordinary agility’(Harvard Business Review, 1999) • ‘Flexibility is detrimental to the workforce and may lead to prejudice especially against women’(Goulding and Kerslake, 1998)

10. Flexibility and organisational structures • Structures need to change owing to 24/7, home working, more demanding student body • Traditional departmental boundaries would blur (computing, library, academic, marketing, administration) • More partnership, collaboration, convergence and multi-disciplinary working • Barriers are pace of change and threats to traditional roles

11. 1. Inflexible in times of rapid change • Service in crisis with:- • Change fatigue and personal stress • Unsatisfied user group and unresponsive staff • Internal barriers to change/ work is not user-focused and innovation perceived as a threat • IT rather than educational need driving change • Piecemeal rather than strategic developments • 2. Flexible in times of rapid change • Service meeting the needs of the institution: • Focus on developing users’ skills • Conflict perceived as positive and therefore managed • Staff cope with uncertainty • Ongoing training ethos for LIS and academic staff • Flatter management structures and strategic managers • Multi-disciplinary working seizing unexpected opportunities • Increased motivation & job satisfaction but overload danger • Fear of ‘dumbing down’ with fewer experts • Fear of being taken over by other ‘experts’ Low Speed of Change High • 3. Inflexible in stable times • Rigid professional/non-professional divide • Lack innovation/service promotion • Elitism and fear of change • Innovation perceived as a threat • Hierarchical management structures and complacency • Compartmentalisation of work • Service matches user needs • 4. Flexible in stable times • Frustration • Unfulfilled potential • Low morale • Cultural lag • Delivery of excellent personal services eg SDI • Services being developed ahead of user needs Low High Table 1 Flexibility in LIS

12. 1. Inflexible in times of rapid change • Service in crisis with:- • Change fatigue and personal stress • Unsatisfied user group and unresponsive staff • Internal barriers to change/ work is not user-focused and innovation perceived as a threat • IT rather than educational need driving change • Piecemeal rather than strategic developments

13. 2. Flexible in times of rapid change • Service meeting the needs of the institution: • Focus on developing users’ skills • Conflict perceived as positive and therefore managed • Staff cope with uncertainty • Ongoing training ethos for LIS and academic staff • Flatter management structures and strategic managers • Multi-disciplinary working seizing unexpected opportunities • Increased motivation & job satisfaction but overload danger • Fear of ‘dumbing down’ with fewer experts • Fear of being taken over by other ‘experts’

14. 3. Inflexible in stable times • Rigid professional/non-professional divide • Lack innovation/service promotion • Elitism and fear of change • Innovation perceived as a threat • Hierarchical management structures and complacency • Compartmentalisation of work • Service matches user needs

15. 4.Flexible in stable times • Frustration • Unfulfilled potential • Low morale • Cultural lag • Delivery of excellent personal services eg SDI • Services being developed ahead of user needs

16. 1. Inflexible in times of rapid change • Service in crisis with:- • Change fatigue and personal stress • Unsatisfied user group and unresponsive staff • Internal barriers to change/ work is not user-focused and innovation perceived as a threat • IT rather than educational need driving change • Piecemeal rather than strategic developments • 2. Flexible in times of rapid change • Service meeting the needs of the institution: • Focus on developing users’ skills • Conflict perceived as positive and therefore managed • Staff cope with uncertainty • Ongoing training ethos for LIS and academic staff • Flatter management structures and strategic managers • Multi-disciplinary working seizing unexpected opportunities • Increased motivation & job satisfaction but overload danger • Fear of ‘dumbing down’ with fewer experts • Fear of being taken over by other ‘experts’ Low Speed of Change High • 3. Inflexible in stable times • Rigid professional/non-professional divide • Lack innovation/service promotion • Elitism and fear of change • Innovation perceived as a threat • Hierarchical management structures and complacency • Compartmentalisation of work • Service matches user needs • 4. Flexible in stable times • Frustration • Unfulfilled potential • Low morale • Cultural lag • Delivery of excellent personal services eg SDI • Services being developed ahead of user needs Low High Table 1 Flexibility in LIS

17. 4.Flexible in stable times • Frustration • Unfulfilled potential • Low morale • Cultural lag • Delivery of excellent personal services eg SDI • Services being developed ahead of user needs

18. Strategic Flexibility A set of capabilities used to respond to various demands and opportunities existing in a dynamic and uncertain competitive environment It involves coping with uncertainty and the accompanying risks

19. Strategic reorientation Capacity to learn Organizational slack Strategic Flexibility Strategic Flexibility Strategic Flexibility Strategic flexibility

20. Corporate Governance and “Strategic Flexibility” Organization’s strategic flexibility is its ability to respond to various demands from dynamic competitive environments Strategic flexibility depends jointly on the inherent flexibility of resources available to the firm and on the abilities of managers and their incentives to develop effective restructuring strategies in the short and long run.

21. “Flexibility of Resources” • Product differentiation • Strategic Business Units (SBUs) • Portfolio of patents • Information technology • Modular production and flexible technology • Financial resources (“free cash flow”) • Flexible labour force, etc.

22. “Flexibility of Management” • Strategic experience • Broad decision-making horizon • Flexible organisational hierarchy • “Stakeholder legitimacy” • Entrepreneurial orientation and risk-taking • Incentives to make “frame-breaking” decisions

23. Corporate Governance and ‘Strategic Flexibility’ • Resource and strategy roles of governance • Boards as a “knowledge pool” • Board interlocks and organisational legitimacy • Network support • From monitoring to corporate venturing and innovation

24. “Strategic Flexibility”: Resources • Diversified products • Investment in new technology • Conglomerate structure • Large size

25. Corporate Governance has contributed to “strategic flexibility” by: • Providing strategic expertise • Facilitating access to financial resources • Ensuring the “legitimacy” of a (risky) recovery response • Creating “right” incentives for managers

26. “Strategic Flexibility”: Governance • Institutional (strategic) investors • Large and diverse boards • Board “interlocks” outside the industry • Leadership change • Changes in capital structure • Diverse shareholder base