[PADG:1149] Re: PARS--why it works the way it does

["Steve Dalton" <dalton@xxxxxxxxx>]

Colleagues:

This is a very helpful synopsis of the history of PARS discussion groups.
Thank you, Lorraine, for taking the time to prepare it.

I am in favor of investigating the need for change, but I would also
recommend moving ahead cautiously.  Lorraine explained "why it works the way
it does."  I would like to add that -- at least where programs,
pre-conferences, and institutes are concerned -- it does work the way it is.

I serve as the PARS liaison to the ALCTS Program Committee, and I can assure
you that PARS is often lauded by that committee for both the quality and the
quantity of its programs.  Our discussion group system may not be perfect,
but it has a wonderful track record for program development.  Let's be
careful.

Steve

---------------
Steve Dalton
Director of Field Service
Northeast Document Conservation Center
100 Brickstone Square
Andover, MA  01810-1494
(978) 470-1010 - phone
(978) 475-6021 - fax
dalton@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.nedcc.org


----- Original Message -----
From: Lorraine Olley <l-olley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <padg@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 4:48 PM
Subject: [PADG:1146] PARS--why it works the way it does


> At Midwinter, there was discussion at both the Preservation Administration
> and PARS discussion groups concerning the perennial problem of scheduling
> conflicts among discussion groups.  Specifically, it was suggested that
> there be only 2 discussion groups scheduled at Annual, on a rotating
> basis.  As one of many individuals involved in putting the current
> structure in place (along with Bob DeCandido, Bob Harriman, Janet Gertz
and
> many other organization wonks), I think that some background on why things
> are the way they are will aid in determining what changes, if any, are
> beneficial to PARS.
>
> It's my recollection that Bob DeCandido, the principal architect of the
> current arrangement, once observed that, "ALA is a beast whose heart beats
> twice a year."  Those of us who date our involvement back to membership in
> PLMS and/or RLMS remember the frustration of working through the set
> procedures of a very large organization.  For example, if a great idea for
> a program came up in a discussion group on a Midwinter Sunday night but
the
> related committee had already met Sunday morning, then it was too late to
> pass the idea up the line for fuller development and approval at that
> conference.  Bad timimg created sometimes a 2+ year lag between a great
> idea and its fruition in a program or preconference.
>
> The current structure is a channel by which ideas or concerns from
> discussion groups--the seedbed of the Section's activities--can sprout and
> mature to ALCTS-level approval at just one conference.  This is why the
> discussion groups are scheduled as early in conference as possible.  Each
> discussion group is linked to a committee, which is where the idea really
> enters the formal process of development and approval.  For example, PADG
> talks about cafe services in libraries at its session on Saturday morning;
> a couple of people decide a program would be a good idea; the outline of a
> program is submitted to the PARS Management Committee at its Monday
morning
> meeting; submitted by the Committee chair to PARS Executive Committee in
> the late morning; approved and referred to the ALCTS Conference Planning
> committee; and voila, in 3 days of conference at least 6 months have been
> shaved off the process!
>
> The current structure, especially having the committees all meet at one
> time, has also greatly broadens participation opportunities for PARS
> membership, because it is now virtually impossible for one person to serve
> on two standing committees.  This new way of working has been adopted by
> ALCTS as a model for all divisions.
>
> Those of you who attended PARS DG know my feelings on changing this
> structure, so I will not give my opinions here.  I do hope that there is
> some discussion on this list of options for change.
>
> At the PARS DG, it also became apparent there is some confusion about
> discussion groups--how they function, how the leadership is chosen.  I
> recommend looking at the appropriate sections in the ALCTS Manual
> http://www.ala.org/alcts/you/manual/index.html, where things are pretty
> clearly spelled out.  Two points that I want to highlight are
> that:  discussion group chairs are elected by the group at Annual, rather
> than being appointed by the Section, and; discussion groups are not to
> present programs, since programs rarely leave time for discussion.  It's a
> slippery slope from asking someone to briefly outline a topic in order to
> start a discussion, to giving a very formal and time-consuming
> presentation, but it's much more stimulating to have the time to talk--and
> then to send the idea for a program up to the appropriate committee.
>
> Back in the dim past, when we worked out the merger of PLMS and RLMS, we
> had developed a PARS manual and an organization chart.  The draft manual
is
> at http://www.indiana.edu/~libpres/PARS/home.html.  I encourage anyone
else
> who might have documents to post them.  There was great interest
> specifically in the chart, which doesn't seem to be linked
> anymore.  However, the relationship between each discussion group and
> committee is spelled out in the manual.
>
> With apologies for such a long posting, I am
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________
>
> Lorraine Olley
> Head, Preservation Department
> Northwestern University Library
> 1935 Sheridan Road
> Evanston, IL 60208
> USA
> 847-491-4672 v
> 847-491-8306 f
> l-olley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>