Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Jake Wallis.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Lyn Hay.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Roy Crotty.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Mary Anne Kennan.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice. Interview with Huan Vo-Tran.

In 2005, Stephen Abram, vice president of Innovation at SirsiDynix, challenged library and information science (LIS) professionals to start becoming “librarian 2.0.” In the last few years, discussion and debate about the “core competencies” needed by librarian 2.0 have appeared in the “biblioblogosphere” (blogs written by LIS professionals). However, beyond these informal blog discussions few systematic and empirically based studies have taken place. A project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council fills this gap. The project identifies the key skills, knowledge, and attributes required by “librarian 2.0.” Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups. Eight themes emerged as being critical to “librarian 2.0”: technology, communication, teamwork, user focus, business savvy, evidence based practice, learning and education, and personal traits. Guided by these findings interviews with 36 LIS educators explored the current approaches used within contemporary LIS education to prepare graduates to become “librarian 2.0”. This video presents an example of ‘great practice’ in current LIS education as it strives to foster web 2.0 professionals.

Library and information science education 2.0 : guiding principles and models of best practice ALTC Fellowship Report

This ALTC Teaching Fellowship aimed to establish Guiding Principles for Library and Information Science Education 2.0. The aim was achieved by (i) identifying the current and anticipated skills and knowledge required by successful library and information science (LIS) professionals in the age of web 2.0 (and beyond), (ii) establishing the current state of LIS education in Australia in supporting the development of librarian 2.0, and in doing so, identify models of best practice. The fellowship has contributed to curriculum renewal in the LIS profession. It has helped to ensure that LIS education in Australia continues to meet the changing skills and knowledge requirements of the profession it supports. It has also provided a vehicle through which LIS professionals and LIS educators may find opportunities for greater collaboration and more open communication. This will help bridge the gap between LIS theory and practice and will foster more authentic engagement between LIS education and other parts of the LIS industry in the education of the next generation of professionals. Through this fellowship the LIS discipline has become a role model for other disciplines who will be facing similar issues in the coming years. Eighty-one members of the Australian LIS profession participated in a series of focus groups exploring the current and anticipated skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in the web 2.0 world and beyond. Whilst each focus group tended to draw on specific themes of interest to that particular group of people, there was a great deal of common ground. Eight key themes emerged: technology, learning and education, research or evidence-based practice, communication, collaboration and team work, user focus, business savvy and personal traits. It was acknowledged that the need for successful LIS professionals to possess transferable skills and interpersonal attributes was not new. It was noted however that the speed with which things are changing in the web 2.0 world was having a significant impact and that this faster pace is placing a new and unexpected emphasis on the transferable skills and knowledge. It was also acknowledged that all librarians need to possess these skills, knowledge and attributes and not just the one or two role models who lead the way. The most interesting finding however was that web 2.0, library 2.0 and librarian 2.0 represented a ‘watershed’ for the LIS profession. Almost all the focus groups spoke about how they are seeing and experiencing a culture change in the profession. Librarian 2.0 requires a ‘different mindset or attitude’. The Levels of Perspective model by Daniel Kim provides one lens by which to view this finding. The focus group findings suggest that we are witnessing a re-awaking of the Australian LIS profession as it begins to move towards the higher levels of Kim’s model (ie mental models, vision). Thirty-six LIS educators participated in telephone interviews aimed at exploring the current state of LIS education in supporting the development of librarian 2.0. Skills and knowledge of LIS professionals in a web 2.0 world that were identified and discussed by the LIS educators mirrored those highlighted in the focus group discussions with LIS professionals. Similarly it was noted that librarian 2.0 needed a focus less on skills and knowledge and more on attitude. However, whilst LIS professionals felt that there was a paradigm shift within the profession. LIS educators did not speak with one voice on this matter with quite a number of the educators suggesting that this might be ‘overstating it a bit’. This study provides evidence for “disparate viewpoints” (Hallam, 2007) between LIS educators and LIS professionals that can have a significant implications for the future of not just LIS professional education specifically but for the profession generally. Library and information science education 2.0: guiding principles and models of best practice 1 Inviting the LIS academics to discuss how their teaching and learning activities support the development of librarian 2.0 was a core part of the interviews conducted. The strategies used and the challenges faced by LIS educators in developing their teaching and learning approaches to support the formation of librarian 2.0 are identified and discussed. A core part of the fellowship was the identification of best practice examples on how LIS educators were developing librarian 2.0. Twelve best practice examples were identified. Each educator was recorded discussing his or her approach to teaching and learning. Videos of these interviews are available via the Fellowship blog at .The LIS educators involved in making the videos felt uncomfortable with the term ‘best practice’. Many acknowledged that there simply seeking to do the best by their students and that there was always room for improvement. For this reason these videos are offered as examples of “great practice”. The videos are a tool for other educators to use, regardless of discipline, in developing their teaching and learning approaches to supporting web 2.0 professionals. It has been argued that the main purpose of professional education is transformation (Dall’ Alba, 2009; Dall’Alba & Barnacle, 2007). As such professional education should focus not just on skills and knowledge acquisition but also on helping students to develop ways of being the professionals in question (ie LIS professionals, teachers, lawyers, engineers).The aim of this fellowship was to establish Guidelines for Library and Information Science Education 2.0 it has however become apparent that at this point in time it is not yet possible to fulfil this aim. The fellowship has clearly identified skills and knowledge needed by the LIS professional in web 2.0 world (and beyond). It has also identified examples of ‘great practice’ by LIS educators as they endeavour to develop LIS professionals who will be successful in a web 20 world. The fellowship however has also shown that the LIS profession is currently undergoing significant attitudinal and conceptual change. Consequently, before a philosophy of LIS education 2.0 can be expressed, the Australian LIS profession must first explore and articulate what it means to be an LIS professional in the 21st century (ie a world of web 2.0 and beyond). In short, the LIS profession in Australia must take stock not of “what we know and can do” but on “who we are becoming” (Dall’Alba, 2009, p 34).

Incremental entrepreneurship : best practice professionalization across generations

This chapter will introduce Australia’s Dennis family – a case of ‘incremental entrepreneurship’ in the business transition from the first to the second generation. Following the second generation’s formal involvement and ownership in the business, Dennis Family Corporation (DFC) undertook a major professionalization process to formalize the family business and ensure its continued success. The members of the second generation have successfully sustained the entrepreneurial spirit of their family business (albeit in a different style), adding value to the firm in an ‘incremental’ manner. Throughout the chapter there will be a strong emphasis on the family element of DFC and the roles that each family member has played. Bert Dennis, as the founder and incumbent leader of the firm, has witnessed major changes to the business he built from the ground up. His children, in particular his son Grant Dennis as the primary next generation issue champion, have seen the changes from another perspective – ensuring the business remains within the family into the second generation and beyond. The professionalization process was sparked by a commitment from the second generation to continue to ‘make a real go’ of the family business rather than simply liquidating and distributing the assets. The dedication of all the family members to this objective has ensured the success of this process, and ultimately, the longevity of the firm. Although DFC has become more ‘professional’, it has not lost its entrepreneurial character; rather, it has improved the ways in which entrepreneurialism is fostered and pursued in the company. In essence, this case outlines how the implementation of appropriate governance and management practices has allowed the Dennis family to overcome the challenges and maximize the opportunities associated with owning and operating a multigenerational family fi rm. From a theoretical perspective, this case uses the concepts of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) (Lumpkin and Dess 1996) and the resource- based view (RBV) (Habbershon and Williams 1999; Barney 1991; Wernerfelt 1984) to demonstrate how the fi rm has leveraged its familiness to foster an enduring spirit of entrepreneurship and to maintain a sustained competitive advantage.

Stop whining and make the best of it: a cross-national comparison of response to regional disadvantage in the wine industry

Our cross-national field study of wine entrepreneurship in the “wrong” places provides some redress to the focus of the “regional advantage” literature on places that have already won and on the firms that benefit from “clusters” and other centers of industry advantage. Regional “disadvantage” is at best a shadowy afterthought to this literature. By poking around in these shadows, we help to synthesize and extend the incipient yet burgeoning literature on entrepreneurial “resourcefulness” and we contribute to the developing body of insights and theory pertinent to the numerous but often ignored firms and startups that mostly need to worry about how they will compete at all now if they are ever to have of chance of “winning” in the future. The core of our findings suggests that understandable – though contested – processes of ingenuity underlie entrepreneurial responses to regional disadvantage. Because we study entrepreneurship that from many angles simply does not make sense, we are also able to proffer a novel perspective on entrepreneurial sensemaking.

Big, bigger, best? The impact of reforms on the not-for-profit sector in Queensland

Organisations within the not-for-profit sector provide services to individuals and groups that government and for-profit organisations cannot or will not consider. The not-for-profit sector has come to be a vibrant and rich agglomeration of services and programs that operate under a myriad of philosophical stances, service orientation, client groupings and operational capacities. In Australia these organisations and services are providing social support and service assistance to many people in the community; often targeting their assistance to the most difficult of clients. Initially, in undertaking this role, the not-for-profit sector received limited sponsorship from government. Over time governments assumed greater responsibility in the form of service grants to particular groups: ‘the worthy poor’. More recently, they have entered into contractual service agreements with the not-for-profit sector, which specify the nature of the outcomes to be achieved and, to a degree, the way in which the services will be provided. A consequence of this growing shift to a more marketised model of service contracting, often offered-up under the label of enhanced collaborative practice, has been increased competitiveness between agencies that had previously worked well together (Keast and Brown, 2006). Another trend emerging from the market approach is the entrance of for-profit providers. These larger organisations have higher levels of organisational capacity with considerable organisational slack to allow them to adopt new service roles. Shaped almost as ‘shadow governments’ they appear to be a strong preference for governments looking for greater accountability of outcomes and an easier way to control the interaction with the conventional not-for-profit sector. The question is will governments’ apparent preference for larger organisational arrangements lead to the demise of the vibrancy of the not-for-profit sector and impact on service provision to those people who fall outside of the remit of the new service providers? To address this issue, this paper uses information gleaned from a state-wide survey of not-for-profit organisations in Queensland, Australia which included organisational size, operational scope, funding arrangements and governance/management approaches. Supplementing this information is qualitative data derived from 17 focus groups and 120 interviews conducted over ten years of study of this sector. The findings contribute to greater understanding of the practice and theory of the future provision of social services.

When is a spinoff the best way to pursue a radical innovation? Insights from Shell technology ventures

The technology and innovation management literature offers somewhat conflicting evidence with regards to the formation of spinoff companies for radically new technologies. Sometimes spinoffs seem to be a very effective strategy—but not always. An obvious question emerges: under what conditions is a spinoff the best way to pursue a radical technology? This paper sheds light on this question by presenting case study evidence from spinoff firms within the Shell Technology Ventures portfolio. The data point to industry clockspeed as a potentially important variable in the decision to create a spinoff or not.

Stop whining and make the best of it : a cross-national comparison of responses to regional disadvantage in the wine industry

Our cross-national field study of wine entrepreneurship in the “wrong” places provides some redress to the focus of the “regional advantage” literature on places that have already won and on the firms that benefit from “clusters” and other centers of industry advantage. Regional “disadvantage” is at best a shadowy afterthought to this literature. By poking around in these shadows, we help to synthesize and extend the incipient yet burgeoning literature on entrepreneurial “resourcefulness” and we contribute to the developing body of insights and theory pertinent to the numerous but often ignored firms and startups that mostly need to worry about how they will compete at all now if they are ever to have of chance of “winning” in the future. The core of our findings suggests that understandable – though contested – processes of ingenuity underlie entrepreneurial responses to regional disadvantage. Because we study entrepreneurship that from many angles simply does not make sense, we are also able to proffer a novel perspective on entrepreneurial sensemaking.

Discovering the best feature extraction and selection algorithms for spontaneous facial expression recognition

Feature extraction and selection are critical processes in developing facial expression recognition (FER) systems. While many algorithms have been proposed for these processes, direct comparison between texture, geometry and their fusion, as well as between multiple selection algorithms has not been found for spontaneous FER. This paper addresses this issue by proposing a unified framework for a comparative study on the widely used texture (LBP, Gabor and SIFT) and geometric (FAP) features, using Adaboost, mRMR and SVM feature selection algorithms. Our experiments on the Feedtum and NVIE databases demonstrate the benefits of fusing geometric and texture features, where SIFT+FAP shows the best performance, while mRMR outperforms Adaboost and SVM. In terms of computational time, LBP and Gabor perform better than SIFT. The optimal combination of SIFT+FAP+mRMR also exhibits a state-of-the-art performance.

Shikumidukuri vs. one best (no) way! Project and Programme Management for Enterprise Innovation (P2M) : towards a new paradigm?

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the Japanese answer to the 90’s depression by (i). presenting a case study of the framework developed to address the new business challenges and value creation in complex, ambiguous and uncertain environment, i.e., Development of Project and Programme Management for Enterprise Innovation (P2M) and Project Management Association Japan (PMAJ) in Japan; and (ii). Exposing what in our view are the underlying theoretical bases supporting this framework and from this drawing some theoretical lessons learnt which could be helpful to the development of sound PM standards and PM competence model. This theoretical approach is assumed to be useful to transpose the Japanese experience to other analogical contexts and situations.

Best practice business community partnerships

In the last two years or so, the Prime Minister has made the development of a social coalition, involving business partnerships with the community, central to his Government’s vision of a fair and just Australian society. This is clearly a new and exciting era in thinking for government, business and community partnerships. However, there has been a tendency, particularly in the media reporting of these initiatives, especially the Prime Minister's Business Community Partnership awards held in 1999 and in July this year, to concentrate the agenda more on philanthropy and corporate donations, than on some of the many other ways that partnerships can develop...