-------- 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