CHANGE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESSFUL

IMPLEMENTATION OF A LIBRARY 2.0 A CASE STUDY IN

ECUADOR
D. Sucozhañay1, L. Sigüenza-Guzman2, C. Zhimnay3, D. Cattrysse4, M.
Euwema5, K. De Witte5
1
Faculty of Economics, University of Cuenca / Centre for Organisation and Personnel
Psychology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (BELGIUM)
2
Faculty of Engineering, University of Cuenca / Centre for Industrial Management,
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (BELGIUM)
3
ACORDES, University of Cuenca (ECUADOR)
4
Centre for Industrial Management, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (BELGIUM)
5
Centre for Organisation and Personnel Psychology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
(BELGIUM)
dolores.sucozhanay@ucuenca.edu.ec, lorena.siguenzaguzman@cib.kuleuven.be,
acordes@ucuenca.edu.ec, dirk.cattrysse@cib.kuleuven.be,
martin.euwema@psy.kuleuven.be, karel.dewitte@psy.kuleuven.be

Abstract
Shrinking funds, the development of new technologies and the upcoming customer demands, make
urgent the need for change and innovation in libraries especially in higher education. Because of this
challenging situation, libraries should find alternative ways to deliver their services. One of the options
is the use of the Library 2.0 model. This model is a revolutionary concept that encourages a constant
change due, among other things, to the use of technological tools. This includes online services such
as SDI (Selective Dissemination of Information), forums, social networks, electronic newsletters,
enhanced OPAC (Online Public Access Catalog), virtual reference, etc. In Ecuador, the University of
Cuenca is currently executing the project “Institutional change to strengthen research and education”
(2007-2012). This project is being developed in the collaboration of the Institutional University
Cooperation Program of the Flemish Inter-university Council. One of the main goals of this project is to
have the Regional Documentation Centre “Juan Bautista Vazquez” - CDRJBV leaning towards a
Library 2.0 system.
Based on an analysis related to the CDRJBV's situation, several changes were planned. In the
technological area, the focus was on: 1) the strengthening and modernization of the technological
infrastructure, 2) the development of a new Web Site, 3) the improvement and expansion of digital
databases, 4) the implementation of new services through the Library 2.0 philosophy, and 5) the
training of library staff and users. In the organizational and policy area, the proposed changes were: 1)
the adequacy of organizational structure, 2) the optimization of internal processes, 3) the improvement
of interpersonal relationships, 4) the positioning of the Centre both internally and externally, and 5) the
update of regulations.
After 3 years of project implementation, CDRJBV has obtained new physical and digital services that
follow the Library 2.0 philosophy: the new Web Site has implemented all the new services planned
and a modern technological infrastructure has enabled quick, direct and friendly access. Regarding
the organizational part, the results are reflected in the adaptation and adoption of new library policies
and procedures, the formation of the "Library Council" that supports and legitimizes the change
process within the University. It is also important to note that the library staff has become aware of the
"need to change", resulting in the emergence of new organizational and technological practices.
However, up to now this process has taken too much time and the results have been only partially
achieved. Despite of the many troubles, important lessons should be learned out of this process, such
as: 1) an evolution process towards a Library 2.0 system should be seen as an integral process,
where technological and organizational components are managed simultaneously; 2) the stakeholders
of the process must be involved from the earliest stages of planning to increase their overall
cooperation; 3) the library staff needs to acquire and master new skills and knowledge in order to
provide these new services. In addition, the technological tools that have been implemented have
been one of the biggest supports during the deployment and execution stage; although their optimal

Proceedings of INTED2011 Conference. ISBN:978-84-614-7423-3

7-9 March 2011, Valencia, Spain. 001051
and comprehensive development is limited by the policies and processes and not by the technological
constraints.
Keywords: change management, higher education, library 2.0, academic libraries.

1 INTRODUCTION
Shrinking funds, new technologies and the upcoming customers’ demands, make urgent the need for
change and innovation in libraries, especially in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). The Internet
emergence and the ICT progress have changed the way people search for information. Furthermore,
the pressure to change also comes from within the institutions; such as the expansion and
diversification of student and staff population [1]. This challenging situation has forced librarians to
modify the methodologies previously used to address information and knowledge creation.
The Library 2.0 model is one of the alternative ways libraries can use to deliver their services. This
model is a revolutionary concept that encourages a constant change due, among other things, to the
use of technological tools. This includes online services, such as Selective Dissemination of
Information (SDI), forums, social networks, electronic newsletters, enhanced Online Public Access
Catalog (OPAC), virtual reference, etc. The new philosophy leads us to rethink not only technological
issues, but also the organizational issues of libraries. The human component is the fundamental factor
of an organization and it must necessarily be in line with technological developments. However, also in
Latin America, the human component is the Achilles' heel of services, although there have been many
efforts to train them [2]. On the other hand, the organizational structure of the library should be a
platform where the services of Library 2.0 model can be delivered agilely and efficiently.
The University of Cuenca is a public institute that was founded in 1867. It is one of the most
prestigious Universities in Ecuador. In 2009, it was ranked as Category A according to CONEA’s
evaluation (National Council for Accreditation of Higher Education - Ecuador). Currently, the student
population is about 14,000 students in total. The administrative staff is around 298 persons and the
academic staff around 905 professors. The University has 12 faculties and offers 48 careers
distributed over 3 campuses.
The University of Cuenca is executing the project “Institutional change to strengthen research and
education” - Transversal Project (2007-2012) which is being developed along with the collaboration of
the Council of Flemish Universities-Institutional University Cooperation (VLIR-IUC). One of the main
goals of this project is to have the library of the University of Cuenca, called “Regional Documentation
Centre Juan Bautista Vazquez” (CDRJBV), evolving towards a “Library 2.0 model”, which implies
performing technological and organizational changes.
The case study draws upon the experience of change in the CDRJVB developed from 2007 till 2010.
The data for this case study has been obtained through official and unofficial documents such as:
institutional plans, institutional regulations, strategic plans, change plans, meeting reports, reports of
completed changes, university newsletters and semi-structured interviews with key informants. In total
ten interviews have been conducted and around 50 documents have been analyzed. The analysis of
the data has been conducted by Software ATLAS.ti. First, the material was read carefully, then it was
coded in order to obtain the history reconstruction and the lessons learned from the processes.
Through this case study, the paper presents the experiences acquired through the application of
change management strategies during the implementation of the Library 2.0 model. The next section
presents the situation of libraries in Ecuador; section 3 summarizes the concept behind the Library 2.0
philosophy, and the organizational change in libraries; section 4 discusses the actions that were taken
during the organizational and technological changes in the case study. Finally, section 5 draws the
conclusions and guidelines for future change processes.

2 LIBRARIES SITUATION IN ECUADOR

This section focuses on presenting a general description of the academic libraries’ situation in
Ecuador. According to the CONEA’s evaluation, the libraries situation is described based on three
main aspects: space, collection and virtual library.
Space: the essential infrastructure for consultation and study. At the national level, it has been
assessed that “there are acceptable space conditions in much of the HEIs.” For instance, the study

001052
notes that the libraries of 15 universities (22%) are developed under international standards, 7 of
which are public, 6 are self-financed and 2 are co-financed [3].
Collection: oriented to assess the institutional bibliography. It is counted according to the number of
titles by author, discarding copies and theses. Based on the study, the national complete collection of
68 universities evaluated is 1’464,218, giving a ratio of 3.2 titles per student. Unfortunately it shows a
decrease on the ratio when compared to a study performed in 1989, where there was an estimation of
6 titles per student; which is far from countries like USA with 75-100 and Canada with 75 titles per
student [4].
Virtual library: set from the number of digital databases that universities are subscribed by contract.
The four digital databases which HEIs are able to subscribe through SENACYT have been taken as a
referent of satisfactory performance. According to data, 57.7% of public and 66.7% of co-financed
universities provide access to literature through virtual means. However, 69.7% of auto-financed
universities do not, breaking the myth that private universities are one step further in technology [3].
Unfortunately, this evaluation does not analyze the organizational situation of libraries. Information
related to structure, staff, training, etc. are very scarce. In addition, there are no studies available on
these topics, showing a lack of research on academic libraries in Ecuador. In general, Ecuadorian
libraries are organized in different ways; there are special libraries located in every faculty or area of
knowledge. On the other hand, there are general libraries which complement the collection of special
libraries in order to offer an integral collection. Moreover, the academic libraries provide their services
to both internal and external users.
In the CONEA’s evaluation, the transition from manual to automated systems is stressed and should
be performed in several academic libraries. However, there are no indicators or analysis related to the
current situation of the digital libraries even less their evolution to Library 2.0. Most studies about
Library 2.0 implementation have been done primarily in Europe and North-America. Up to now, no
Ecuadorian studies have been published in this area. In general, case studies from other countries
show that Library 2.0 is still at an initial stage [5].
In this study, the Web Portal’s of 11 Ecuadorian academic libraries have been analyzed. The
universities selected are situated as Category A according to CONEA’s evaluation. The analysis
shows the low percentage (36%) of Universities that implement a part of the Library 2.0 model. If
within to this analysis, universities that implement only one extra service (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, etc.),
the result will drop to only 18%.

Figure 1: Library 2.0 in Ecuador

3 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

3.1 Change Management Strategies

Organizations have always had to adapt themselves to new situations defined by context; that is why
change is not a strange issue for organizations. There is plenty of literature regarding organizational
change. However, reaching a successful organizational change is still a complex issue. Libraries could
be considered as a complex open social system where management of change is an essential
element of successful organizational change [6, 7].
To achieve a successful process of change, Cummings and Worley [6] state that managers of change
have to deal with two major sets of contingencies that can affect the process. First, there are the

001053
contingencies related to readiness to change, capability to change, cultural context, capabilities of the
change agents. And second, the contingencies related to the target of change that includes the
organizational issue that the intervention is intended to resolve and the level of organization system at
which the intervention is expected to have a primary impact.
For this case study, we will focus on the second one, specifically on the organizational issues.
Cummings and Worley [6] note four interrelated issues: a) strategic issues; b) technological and
structural issues; c) human resources issues (goals, rewards, people´s careers, etc.) and d) human
process issues (e.g. communication, leadership, interaction, decision making, etc.). Management
strategies have to interrelate and integrate these organizational issues with each other to achieve high
levels of effectiveness and must define appropriate methods to the organizational issues identified in
the diagnosis.
In addition, for this case study an interested concept is the degree of change. It is understood by
means of first-order change and second-order change concepts. First-order change is instrumental,
incremental, continuous and linear; in which there are no fundamental changes in the assumptions
members have regarding the going-on of the organization [8, 9]. Structural and procedural changes
are first-order changes [9]. Creating a sub-unit within a university to carry out a responsibility such as
service learning is a good example of fist-order change [8]. Second-order change is transformational
and irreversible; multidimensional, multilevel, discontinuous, radical; it involves changing the theory of
an action or underlying assumptions and values of an organization [8, 9]. An example of this kind of
change would be to alter the reward structure for a faculty to focus more on research rather than on
teaching. Second-order change has more resistance forces from both internal and external
environment.
Despite the development of this theme, organizations included libraries where change is attempted
usually fail in their efforts (66%) or achieve only marginal effects [18]. This takes us to consider that
change management still needs research, and this case study could provide some lessons.

3.2 Library 2.0

Trying to describe Library 2.0 without the mentioning of the Web 2.0 is almost impossible. Web 2.0
was first conceptualized through a conference brainstorming session between O'Reilly and MediaLive
International [10]. They noted that companies had survived the collapse thanks to innovation,
collaboration, and interaction on their Web pages. O’Really [10], in his paper also states the concept
of Web 2.0: <<Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0
applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering
software as a continually-updated service that gets better as the more people use it, consuming and
remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and
services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of
participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences>>.
Many libraries around the world have incorporated several Web 2.0 tools. It has constituted a
meaningful and substantive change in the libraries [11]. Web 2.0 applications have changed the ways
on how libraries provide access to their collections. In this way, Library 2.0 is a consequence of using
Web 2.0. However, Library 2.0 is more than the use of Web 2.0; it is a revolutionary concept that
encourages a constant change due, among other things, to the use of technological tools.
According to Casey & Savastinuk [12], Library 2.0 model is a new way to serve and interact with the
customers because it is a user-centered philosophy. It is mainly based on the desire of changing and
trying something new, the desire of constantly evaluating new services and finally, the willingness of
looking outside the bonds to find solutions which can be technological or not [5].
Many authors agree that Library 2.0 is a model for library service that encourages a constant change,
promoting the user’s participation in the creation of physical and virtual services. It also attempts to
reach new users and serve better current ones through improved customer-driven offerings. At the
same time Library 2.0 is not only related to technology; but it is related to reevaluate the services in
order to make sure that it’s satisfying the user needs. However, they also agree that Web 2.0 has
played a fundamental role during the deployment of this philosophy. Web 2.0 and ICT in general have
given the possibility to create new services that were not possible to offer before.
Through Library 2.0, it is possible to reach a group of people that were not easily reached through
physical services, because libraries are always constrained by space and money and cannot carry
every wanted and desired item. [12]. Library 2.0 includes online services such as SDI (Selective

001054
Dissemination of Information), forums, electronic newsletters, enhanced OPAC (Online Public Access
Catalog), virtual reference, synchronous messaging and streaming media, blogs, wikis, social
networks, tagging, RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feeds, and mashups, etc.

4 ORGANIZATIONAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE: A CASE STUDY OF

“CDRJBV”
The CDRJBV is considered one of the most modern and biggest libraries in Ecuador. Its collection
consists of about 250,000 books (i.e. 18 titles per student which is far from the national ratio), digital
databases, and some multimedia contents. The library is operated by 20 full time staff distributed in
three campuses (Central, Paraiso and Yanuncay) and is daily visited by an average of 1,200 students.
Before 2004, each faculty of the University of Cuenca had their own library. They depended
administratively and financially by each faculty. Their staff consisted mainly of a head and between
one and three assistants each. In November 2004, authorities decided the formation of a single library
called “Regional Documentation Centre Juan Bautista Vazquez,” which consists of a central library
located in the main campus and two branch libraries: one in the campus Paraiso and one in the
campus Yanuncay.
This merger implied, besides unification of personnel, a unique automated information system,
passing from a closed stack system to an open one, Internet service, thesis digitalization, etc. Three
new roles were created: a Head of Library and two representatives of the branches libraries. After
unification, the library was structured with a rotational system task; an ICT expert was incorporated
and a library’s head was also positioned. This brief outline shows basically how work was performed
since 2004 to 2007.
In 2007 when the Transversal Project began, the library improvement became a priority and several
activities were focused on to achieve this goal. In order to describe this process properly, we will
divide it into two main milestones which were carried out by external experts in two different studies
(KULeuven, Belgium).

4.1 First moment of change

The first stage is delimited from March 2007 until March 2009. It started by a diagnosis of the situation
of the library, which was developed by two experts of KULeuven during March 2007. They analyzed
secondary information such as reports, regulation, plans and several interviews with key informants.
According to the “Report on Audit of Library Facilities at University of Cuenca, Ecuador, 16-30 March
2007,” their main conclusions were:
Library organization, they found a weakly link between the central library and the branch libraries.
Lack of bibliometric data about the use of the library is also established.
Structural problems, the poor knowledge of the English language and the geographical structure of UC
with its three campuses are not helpful in establishing strong links between their libraries.
Paper collection, it is clearly well used but, in most subject fields, the collections are insufficient and
certainly rather outdated, as there is also a lack of English books. A unique catalogue of the library
collections did not exist; there wasn’t any unification of the libraries’ catalogues.
Electronic collections, CDRJBV has access to an interesting package of e-journals, however, the
access given to these packages is not friendly and users don’t have enough training for the use of
these packages.
Infrastructure, it is rather good. There are an important number of computers for consultation of the
catalogue and a large number of heavily used PC’s with Internet access, but in the branch libraries the
situation is not the same. The Internet access needs a better bandwidth urgently. There is a clear
need for a unique (university-wide) general portal to catalogue and e-journals. There is no dedicated
budget for library infrastructure and security of the collection is fine.
The library staff, they found that the staff seems to be very motivated, and there are clear efforts for
upgrading their knowledge and skills. In spite of this, there is a lack of knowledge about the
possibilities of the virtual library. The number of members is very small (15 in Central library, 4 in
Paraiso and 2 in Yanuncay).

001055
Products and Services, they remark the very generous opening hours of the libraries. The university
mandated since 2004 the electronic deposition of all theses. This is a big advantage towards the
application of the electronic library. It would be quite useful if some staff members could specialize in
(digital) reference services, such as alerting, SDI, Blogs, RSS, search strategies, document delivery.
The report of this diagnosis was presented at a workshop and then was delivered it to the authorities
of the university and the library. In addition to this document, the experts had also presented several
recommendations such as: 1) libraries should develop a common strategy for a strong supportive role
in teaching and research. 2) CDRJBV should have an overall responsibility for all branch libraries and
involve all library staff. 3) CDRJBV should improve and manage the access of e-library. 4) CDRJBV
should be responsible for the establishment of a central catalog for all collections included in the small
research units. 5) A fixed budget per year should be allocated to CDRJBV and it could be used for
realizing the strategic plan of the university library. 6) CDRJBV should update their books’ collection.
7) Internet bandwidth should be substantially improved, PC's should be upgraded, and also additional
computers should be acquired. 8) An upgrading of the knowledge and skills of the staff is fully needed.
In November 2007, a member of the library team was incorporated into the Transversal project, who
was the ICT responsible inside of the library but not the head of the library. This person along with the
library staff committee performed individual visits to libraries from the main universities in the country
(January 2008), later on, the same person performed several visits to libraries of universities in
Belgium and Spain (March 2008). These visits were crucial during the process of change since they
expanded knowledge and chances of development for the library [13]. For example the person
reported that several libraries worked with MARC format; technological changes must be
accompanied by organizational changes; the importance of a leadership, the commitment and team
work are essential; the necessity of a strategic plan with a philosophy based on pro-activity; the
involvement of the library with users by means of new services, and finally the importance of an
organizational structure (departments) that enables it.
Having these inputs, a first project of change is raised (February 2008) called “Project for
technological improvement” which besides including technological improvements, it also covers staff
and users training. This project was actively performed by people from the ICT area of the library, with
the assistance of the head and other staff members. Although this project was not fully performed due
to lack of leadership [14], it was the beginning of the technological improvement and change process.
Important advances on purchasing and installation of technological equipment were done as well as
network improvements and the increment in bibliographic material. All of these activities were possible
thanks to the budget assigned through the Transversal project during three years (2007-2009) [13].
As a consequence of this investment, it was possible to: 1) improve the Internet access on the library
through the increment of computers for the three libraries (Central, Paraiso and Yanuncay); 2) build a
training room in the Central library with 20 computers and multimedia equipment; 3) improve the
library network (bandwidth) by means of buying networking equipment; 4) implement a unique web
site for the library [15]; 5) install closed-circuit security in the Central library; 6) acquire new servers
and storage equipment [16].
Additional to this improvement, there are also other important milestones: the design of the Web portal
of the University Library was made in June 2008 and; implemented in November 2008. In July 2008,
the contacts to change the format ECLAC to MARC 21 (MAchine-Readable Cataloging) were initiated.
The first approach to the ABCD system was done through the 3rd World Congress on ISIS (14-16
September 2008, Brazil) and two Informatics school graduates developed their thesis based on the
implementation and adequacy of ABCD for CDRJBV.
In the first phase, the lack of ICT staff is evidenced. This is mainly due to the time-consuming
installation and maintenance of equipment, making difficult to develop new ideas and innovations. On
the other hand, the organizational aspect during this period was mainly focused on the elaboration of
the library regulation and a departmentalization proposal (June - August 2008). Regarding to the
regulation, one of the interviewed stated that “the first proposal was performed in order to update and
modernize current rules [17]”. In August 2008, a “Proposal of Departmentalization” was raised. This
document was performed by some members of the staff together with the head of the CDRJBV.
However, this proposal again was not operationalized.
At the end of the period between March 2007 and March 2009 we can conclude that the work was
focused on: 1) deeply studying the situation of the CDJBV and looking for feedback from local and
international universities, and 2) continuing with the technological improvement. However,

001056
organizational outputs were low. Currently, we have different proposals regarding rules and
departmentalization, which haven’t been approved and implemented respectively.

4.2 Second stage: The emphasis in organizational

After several conversations among the members of the Transversal Project, the need to retake efforts
to boost the integral change in the library was evidenced. In this way, it is raised as strategy that a
Flemish expert visits again the university and along with a support local team (consisting of an
organizational consultant, a member of the library team and also member of the Transversal project, a
thesis student of the University of Cuenca and an intern of KULeuven) can "Formulate
recommendations for organizational change in the University Library in order to support better
research and education at the University of Cuenca.”
In March 2009, this visit was done and it lasted for a week. By means of meetings with the staff an
update of the diagnostic was performed, having as a conclusion that in 2009 the situation in the library
has not changed much since 2007 due to " an absolute lack of communication and implementation of
this strategy" [18]. A highlighted point was the leadership. The perception of the library staff was that
“The past few years, they have heard several announcements of change but they haven’t seen much
of this in reality, which they attribute to a weak and passive leadership in the library” [18]. However,
the expert also acknowledged that there were positive changes happening during this period of time:
investments made in infrastructure (computers, computer classroom and security), bandwidth
increased, migration of library records into MARC21 standard starting soon, functional improvements
like the new portal for e-resources, a more active role of the library in education, and finally most staff
with a positive attitude and open to change [18].
In addition a document containing the mission and vision of the University Library, an inventory of
steps needed to reach the new goals (on short term, 6 months; on longer term, 2 year) and a draft for
a new organization chart were proposed and discussed with staff members (Report of visit March 30 -
April 3, 2009). Another important result is the conformation of a Library Council, which had its first
meeting with the Flemish expert and started having regular meetings since then.
After this visit, the team developed a proposal to be applied in the next months. In this proposal it is
raised to achieve: 1) the adequacy of organizational structure, 2) the optimization of internal
processes, 3) the improvement of interpersonal relationships, 4) the positioning of the Centre both
internally and externally clients, 5) the update of regulations [19]. The activities and results achieved
by implementing this planning are:
Adequacy of organizational structure and update of regulations. A Library Council is formed and it is
integrated mainly by teachers representing the technical areas, social and health, with the objective of
supporting and legitimating the change process in the library. This Council, during its first meetings
updated and internally approved a new library regulation to be legalized, which was approved by the
University Council in June 2010. The Library Council now is finally formed by the Vice-Rector, the
library’s head, one academic coordinator, one researcher, coordinators of the branch libraries and one
student delegate. The Library Council elaborated the library strategic map which was done under the
review of the University Planning Council [19]. Other subject reviewed by the Council was the
Administrative and Financial Autonomy, for which it was raised that “a basic precondition is that the
definition, by the head of the University, of a new administrative structure for the Documentation
Centre that fulfills the criteria of administrative and financial autonomy for its functioning [29]”.
Positioning of the Centre both internally and externally. It started with a diagnosis of an image of the
library done by professors, administrative staff and students. Based on this report should be possible
to identify mechanisms of positioning; however, currently there is no systematic planning for it.
Designing products and services user-oriented. It started with the implementation of a new library
system called ABCD - Automation of Libraries and Documentation Centers (from its name in Spanish)
which is promoted and coordinated by BIREME, with the support of VLIR and the collaboration of
many people from different institutions and countries [20]. At the same time, the format ECLAC is
changed to MARC 21. Those changes allowed for the addition of an OPAC much more friendly and
agile for the user. They also allowed the librarians to have more flexible software for processing
information. Additional to this change, several trainings of MARC21 and the library system were done.
The Web Portal is improved through a change of platform and software. It allows for the possibility of
adding services such as Selective Dissemination of Information, forums, electronic newsletters, blogs

001057
and virtual reference, surveys, etc. Finally, tools for social networks such as Facebook, Twitter,
synchronous messaging (chat software) and RSS feeds are also incorporated.
Optimization of internal processes. A study of internal and among campuses processes was
performed, obtaining data from observations, interviews, polls and validation meetings. One of the
conclusions was that the staff “does not have a culture of work for processing”. Starting from these
inputs a manual of functions was started, where both the head of the library and the library council
were involved. One of the interviewed person said that “there should be a higher participation of the
librarians, since they can provide the best information [21]”.
Improvement of interpersonal relationships. A workshop of “Team work and motivation” with the
members of the library was done; meetings of monitoring of the change process and coaching to the
head of the library.
By the end of 2009 the head of the library was changed by the Head of the ICT Department of Library.
This event is important as the two previous principals were from the library team; it means they have a
librarian background, in contrast with the new principal which has a technical-administrative
background. This situation generated unconformity in some members of the library, as they think the
head should have a librarianship education. Besides, it is seen that the new leadership style is
administrative, but there is no real leadership to guide a process of change of this nature [21].
Regarding the organizational change, the results are reflected in the adaptation and adoption of new
library policies and procedures and the formation of the "Library Council". It is also important to note
that the library staff has become aware of a "need to change,” resulting in the emergence of new
organizational and technological practices [19]. However, it exists the perception that there are no big
changes in the organizational theme; for example, an interviewed person said “...the change has been
technological, to some extent organizational, but we still have needs (...) we are advancing step by
step, as the main change has been in the technological equipment and in the change of the system of
the library” [14]
After 3 years of project implementation, CDRJBV has obtained new physical and digital services that
follow the Library 2.0 philosophy; the new Web Site has implemented all the new services planned; a
modern technological infrastructure has enabled quick, direct and friendly access.

5 CONCLUSIONS
By means of analysis of this case study, some important conclusions were obtained to the change
management of the libraries in order to become a library 2.0.
Regarding to the strategic issues
To pass from a traditional library to a library 2.0 implies that several changes of second order need to
be adequately performed. It is not possible to reach this goal just in implementation and improvement
of technologies levels but it is also necessary to work with the people who form the library and to
generate changes in their underlying assumptions and values. It means that an evolution process
towards a Library 2.0 should be seen as an integral process, where technological and organizational
components are managed simultaneously. This kind of process takes long, a lot of effort and
resources.
When talking about radical changes as the current case study, we can see the need of the vision to be
elaborated collectively and that plays the role of guiding the process of change. However, there is not
enough time invested to elaborate and to empower this vision; this is seen when analyzing the
interviews in which none of the interviewed is able to arise a concrete vision of what is intended with
the change, having general expression as “a global change”, “being a modern library”, etc.
Change management strategies have to involve the internal and external stakeholders and must also
be involved from the earliest stages of planning to increase the cooperation. As Well [23] set “the
change process would be as inclusive as possible”. By this case we have identified three key
elements: The first is the premise that it is not a new idea that stakeholders must be involved actively
in the processes of change. The second is related with the information they can contribute and how
this information is used. An internal stakeholder when talking about the way the organic functional is
elaborated arises “I would want more people from the library to be involved to avoid it becomes
isolated, because at the end of the day we are work there and can tell which function is able to be

001058
performed” [21] . Finally, philosophy of Library 2.0 seeks to reach users, and it does not expect them
to come to it, doing imperative an active participation of the involved people.

Regarding to technological and structural issues

The development of new services as those raised by Library 2.0 implies to count with enough
resources and an adequate infrastructure to buy and implement suitable technologies. The CDRJBV
in this case had external resources coming from VLIR which allowed technological development and
thus implementing services such as described before. Expanding the theme about resources, an
interviewed person said “library has never had its own budget but used those of the faculties”
confirming the need of means to face a process of integral change as we have seen. The Web 2.0
tools are becoming increasingly key platforms for creating and sharing knowledge around the world.
But it also brings challenges for institutions, such as the need for constant innovation and
organizational change. Web 2.0 in general is now involved in almost all areas of life and libraries
should not be far to this change. Its mission is to be flexible and adjusted in order to satisfy the user
needs who demand and deserve new services.
Regarding to human resources issues
Changes in organizations are focused on people. It is impossible to think about a change where
members of an organization are not affected by a change. This makes us think on strategies thought
to work with the members of the library where a new vision and skills are developed to reach the
library 2.0. In the described experience, there is a gap between the implemented technology in the
library and the ideas, knowledge and skills of the staff, it means, we have a modern technology but
managed with traditional ideas. This makes us think about the processes of training; several
interviewed persons agree that many technologies and services are implemented without knowing
enough about the theory and philosophy behind them. For example, Facebook services are
implemented and it is not known that they are part of libraries 2.0 and not just a fashion. Additionally,
an issue from another interviewed is that the person in charge of the technological part has little
knowledge about librarianship and vice-versa, which makes technological developments with a limited
impact. Besides, in this case study we can see that as time passes the boost for a change and
motivation decreases. A strategy identified by the members themselves is to show results in a short
term, and these results remain related to the staff.
Regarding to human process issues
Leadership is a critical issue in the processes of change, which is confirmed again by this case study.
However the changes realized by the head of the library, several interviewed keep the perception that
there is no actual leadership. One of the quotes refer to leadership like “I don’t perceive ... as leader, a
leader boost always and gives support, (...) because a leader has to start talking, coordinating, asking,
investigating” [24], and another says “there is leadership in terms of formality, being at the head of a
process even when this does not reflect the expression of the set of actors, but being there because of
administrative causes” [25]. However, it is important to remark that besides this perceived lack of
leadership, technological improvements are done effectively, since this area is guided by people from
informatics. Additionally, in this case we can acknowledge the changes that were made motivated by
the lack of leadership in the library. Nevertheless, besides the change of director in December 2009,
the people interviewed in this study still perceive a lack of leadership, especially in the organizational
part.
As a final conclusion, retaking the four elements raised by Cummings and Worley, a change from a
traditional library to a Library 2.0 should manage the four elements. This case study shows a higher
emphasis put on strategical, technological and structural issues, but human resources and human
process issues are barely developed. In words of several interviewed people “the change has been in
the technological and in the organizational areas, but we still have some needs (…), I have worked
more with people from informatics on these issues than, I have done it with the librarians, because of
how the vision was given, then the strengthen of the proposal of change was mainly in the
technological part” [17].

REFERENCES
[1] Holm-Nielsen, L., Thorn, K., Brunner, J., Balán, J., (2005). Regional and International Challenges
to Higher Education in Latin America. Higher Education in Latin America. Washington D. C.

001059
[2] Sánchez Vignau, Bárbara. (2005) Diseño de indicadores de gestión y calidad para bibliotecas
universitarias. Curso-Taller. 27 de octubre/2005. Lima – Perú

[3] CONEA report 2009. “Evaluación de desempeño institucional de las Universidades y Escuelas
Politécnicas del Ecuador”.

[4] Fernández-Aballí, Isidro. (1989). Proyecto para el desarrollo de la red de bibliotecas

universitarias. Informe técnico. UNESCO

[5] García-Rivadulla, S. (2010). Actitud 2.0: usos de la web social en las bibliotecas universitarias
uruguayas.

[6] Cummings & Worley. (2005). Organizational Development & Change. Thomson Coorporation.
USA. 8va Ed

[7] Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review,
73 (2), 59 – 67.

[8] Kezar, A. (2001). Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st century: recent
research and conceptualizations: Jossey-Bass.

[9] Boyce, M. (2003). Organizational Learning is Essential to Achieving and Sustaining Change in
Higher Education. Innovative Higher Education, 28(2) 119-136.

[10] Oreilly, Tim. (2007) What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next
Generation of Software. Communications & Strategies, No. 1, p. 17. Available at SSRN:

[11] Maness, J. (2006). Library 2.0 theory: Web 2.0 and its implications for libraries. Webology, 3(2).

[12] Casey, M. E., & Savastinuk, L. C. (2006). Library 2.0: Service for the Next-Generation Library.
Library Journal, 131(14), 40.

[13] Interview 7. Staff member of CDRJBV. June 2010.

[14] Interview 1. Staff member of CDRJBV. August 2010.

[15] Annual Report Institutional Change Project 2007.

[16] Annual Report Institutional Change Project 2008.

[17] Interview 5. member of CDRJBV. September 2010.

[18] University of Cuenca Libraries. Report of visit March 30-April 3, 2009.

[19] Proyecto de seguimiento al Centro Documental Regional Juan Bautista Vázquez. April 2009.

[20] Virtual Health Library Model.

http://bvsmodelo.bvsalud.org/php/level.php?lang=en&component=27&item=13

[21] Interview 4. Staff member of CDRJBV. July 2010.

[22] Reporte de labores de la Dirección del CDRJBV correspondiente al año 2010

[23] Wells, Andrew (2007) "A prototype twenty-first century university library: A case study of change at
the University of New South Wales Library", Library Management, Vol. 28 Iss: 8/9, pp.450 - 459

[24] Interview 8. Library Council member of CDRJBV. December 2010.

[25] Interview 3. Staff member of CDRJBV. August 2010.

001060