Restrictive IT Policies and Library 2.0
Putting together my presentation for LITA Forum and another presentation I’m doing at the end of November, I started to think again about restrictive IT policies regarding desktops, firewalls, and filters and how such policies effect Library 2.0 type endeavors.
At UH we have (my opinion) a very restrictive and controlling set of IT policies regarding desktop computers. When I first came no librarian or staff person could install anything on their machine without getting making a request to Systems that had typically had to have their supervisors approval. Within the last six months this has changed slightly, librarians can request a “Power User” account that allows them to install software. However, they must also gain their supervisor’s approval for such an account. The addition of the Power User policy is a good one, but I’m not really sure if it solves all the problems that restrictive IT policies create in a Library 2.0 world.
Why…
- To work effectively in a Library 2.0 world, library staff need the ability to experiment and try things. In fact they need to be encouraged to do so. Restrictive IT policies prevent this from happening. Not only because staff can download and test new software but because they create an environment of mistrust and fear.
- In a Library 2.0 world, technology is an integral part of every library staff member’s and librarian’s job. Restrictive IT policies often perpetuate the idea that technology is exclusively the domain of Systems.
- Additionally, if you want to create an EXPECTATION that library staff will experiment and try new things. You need to give them the ability to do this in advance not wait until they show interest.
- I also feel sometimes that restrictive IT policies create an environment where there is no need for users to take personal responsibility for their use of technology nor feel any sense of personal investment.
- Library users also are affected by restrictive IT policies. Many libraries limit the tasks that users can perform, the software available, and the sites user can visit on public computers. Often this keeps library users from utilizing new technologies and tools that will meet their needs.
You may be saying to yourself, that I don’t understand the difficulties of trying to keep systems up and running given todays security challenges. But the truth is I’ve done that as part of my job before (and it was maddening and frustrating). So I understand why restrictive IT policies exist all too well. The problem is that often libraries are letting security and stability issues indirectly drive services rather than user needs. To me this is a bad thing. But unfettered access is not a reasonable solution either. So some middle ground needs to be found. To do this systems, web services, and public services need to collaborate more closely to determine the needs of library users and library staff and pro actively work to meet these needs.
To learn new things and bring ideas into the organization, the staff need to be able to try new things. The same staff have a responsibility, however, not to create work for others.
So, if you download something that toasts your hard disk, you had better be prepared to reformat and restore it yourself. If you can’t do that, well, that’s a skill you need to develop as part of your learning process.
I work in a ColdFusion developer group, and of course we have dev machines to experiment on. That’s a good use for outdated computers by the way — set them in a corner and let the staff have at it.
With things like Ghost and data backed up to a network drive, restoring a computer isn’t as big of a deal as it used to be. From my perspective part of library staff’s jobs should to have some basic computer literacy; and part of this is knowing how to keep your computer safe from things like viruses. How else can we help library users effectively and teach them how to make good computing decision (a role many public libraries currently are taking on)?
Karen, thanks for this post. I (very fortunately) don’t have to worry about restrictive IT policies but I know people in those environments. And I know from their stories that if I were in one of those situations, I wouldn’t do hardly any of the interesting work that I get to do. Another aspect of the strict IT policies is that they continue to foster the idea that computers are easy to break. I hack-hack-hack at my computers until I get them to do what I want them to do. Yet I know many people who are scared they’ll mess up something beyond repair. After a little prodding, they’ll often try something out, but that’s only because we can encourage the idea that they won’t kill their computer and any problem they cause can be fixed. A restrictive policy isn’t exactly going to help that argument. Thanks for the interesting post!
I’m the Sys Admin for MCDPL. I have for years tried for that happy medium that keeps pcs on the floor for patrons & staff (not in my office for a re-install) and allowing everyone to do what they need & or want. You are quite correct that this is a maddening trial of nerves at best. I currently have four locations to keep up and have found that M$ Shared Comp Toolkit along with my own mix of security works faily well.
Let me explain what our staff and patrons can do.
1st – staff.
Circulation computers are pretty well just standard pcs running XP and a profile for all circ staff set to just user.
2nd – other staff
these profiles are power users
3rd – patron
2 profiles —
patron (internet accessible)
This profile uses the SCT and allows — Scanning, saving files (d:\documents that gets deleted and recreated at login) burning to cd, saving to usb, Card readers, or – UGHH! — floppies. They have the choice of IE or Firefox, MS Office or OpenOffice .org, Publisher or Scribus, along with a variety of open-source apps.
Games! (non-interent)
Any and all open-source educational and just fun games for kids.
I have tried very hard to please everyone, and so far I think we have done ok. I see a few Linux boxes on the floor in the future too.
Librarians are in a rather unique position when it comes to IT. Arguably more tech savvy than other members of the organisation, yet often given the same IT rights as their colleagues in other departments, it’s not surprising that many try to take technology into their own hands. And, it’s no longer just librarians feeling the frustration of not being able to take advantage of tech developments thanks to restrictive IT policies. The social networking ‘explosion’ with the likes of Facebook and YouTube has meant that attempted DIY IT is no longer just the preserve of the tech savvy, but the average masses. Much of this maverick activity can help to improve productivity. For example RSS readers give end users instant access to breaking news, enabling better informed decision making. Rather than simply opting for the ‘zero tolerance’ route going, why doesn’t IT capitalise on the tech enthusiasm within the company to help improve organisational performance? Wouldn’t it be better to talk to those in touch with end user needs and tech developments, i.e. librarians and knowledge management professionals, to understand where best to focus the organisation’s IT budget. This approach would see increased user adoption, better employee satisfaction and greater productivity as staff are much more likely to use the tools they want to, to improve their effectiveness. IT needs to wake up and start talking to its ‘customers’ rather than imposing draconian measures on the workforce, or the organisation will simply stagnate and those keen to innovate will move to other firms with a more progressive approach.