Re: Staff performance: checkin rates -- Joanna Tousley-Escalante Stephen D. Clark 19 Oct 1999 08:40 UTC
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Staff performance: checkin rates -- Mary Niederlander Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 15:25:39 +0200 From: Joanna Tousley-Escalante <J.Tousley@IAEA.ORG> In a similar exercise our cataloguers had to do major timing exercise in order to establish norms and targets for each individual for a month. After timing each component for several days, averages were computed. Staff were rightly concerned about how such efforts would account for interruptions - staff from Circulation arriving with an urgent request that MUST be done right then, telephones, bad headaches, et al - and these were accounted for in the number of total hours used to compute the final goals. After calculating the times, we did not multiply unit times by the total number of hours expected to be worked each work, but rather by a factor of 6 PRODUCTIVE' work hours per day. Everyone agreed it was fair. But staff were astounded at the resulting target goals, and at first felt they could never achieve them, even though they did the timings and determined the units of time. But the reality is that most months they achieve and surpass these goals, and our cataloguing backlog has been wiped out to bargain! We do not require an explanation if they drop below the goals, but except when accounting for absences that just has not happened. I understand and sympathize with the exercise [which is itself quite time-consuming] and the fears that this type of action can generate in staff. But I also know that in my current environment it has ended up being a positive event. Staff now see what is expected, have taken "ownership" of the incoming work and proudly process the material effectively. I believe that a similar exercise in the serials unit will be forthcoming in order to see the same achievements there. One of the really good side benefits is that staff now feel more in control of their work. They don't feel the total weight of material waiting to be catalogued and they no longer consider interruptions as work-stoppages, rather as the expected variations in the day. Work is more organized as it arrives into the cataloguing area which is another plus. Backups are quick to take actions when someone is out in order to keep the work balanced [by that I mean not too much descriptive work in relation to classification, etc.] Serials processing, to me, is the most labor-intensive staff devouring activity that we do in the Library. It is ripe for establishing norms of this sort in order to improve efficiencies wherever possible. We still divide the work by alphabet [3 staff], in spite of the fact that I feel dividing the work by function or format of work would probably be more efficient. This is something that time tests can help determine. But right now all staff are doing all of the following tasks: checking in on our local system; printing out routing slips; sorting by collection or outgoing mail; stamping; printing claims; handling unsolicited material, duplicates, etc. The only step that is done by just one staff is opening mail and sorting. I send this flying in the face of opposite opinions, by what I've read so far. But in truth, I believe that this can be made to be a positive event and a way to improve an area of work that is basically considered to be totally mind-numbing. Cheers! Joanna Tousley-Escalante * Head, TSU * VIC Library - IAEA * Vienna, Austria * j.tousley@iaea.org * 431 2600-22624