Futuring, Strategic Planning and Shared

Awareness: An Ohio University Libraries'

Case Study
by David J. Staley, Scott Seaman and Eileen Theodore-Shusta
Available online 15 December 2011

A critical component of strategic planning

is creating a shared-awareness among
library staff of the potential societal,
political, economic and technological
changes that will influence how future
users will create and consume scholarly
materials, what will be expected of library
services, and how facilities will be used. The
ACRL Futuring scenarios were adapted at
the beginning of the Ohio University
Libraries strategic planning process to
identify such themes and concerns. Those
scenarios prompted a series of in-depth and
interactive group discussions, which
created a shared awareness of possible
library futures and guided Ohio University's
strategic thinking. Those interactive
exercises led by Professor David Staley, and
the subsequent discussions surrounding
the scenarios, represent a best practice for
other librarians and staff who are
attempting to understand the external
factors that shape society, higher education
and the future of libraries.
David J. Staley,
Department of History, The Ohio State University, 207 Dulles Hall,
230 W. 17th Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA
<staley.3@osu.edu>;
Scott Seaman,
Ohio University, Vernon R. Alden Library, 35 Park Place,
Athens, OH 45701 USA
<seaman@ohio.edu>;
Eileen Theodore-Shusta,
Ohio University, Vernon R. Alden Library, 35 Park Place,
Athens, OH 45701 USA
<theodore@ohio.edu>.

The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 38, Number 1, pages 15

INTRODUCTION
An important challenge for those libraries leading strategic planning
projects is to create a shared-awareness among staff an awareness of
the potential societal, political, economic and technological changes that
will influence how library users will create and will consume scholarly
materials, as well as, how users will drive those expectations for future
library services. Without that shared-awareness of larger external
trends, the strategic planning results will tend to focus inwardly
redefining internal library processesrather than outwardlystrategically changing services for the future. While readings about trends and
futures may be helpful for intellectualizing future circumstances, it is
interactive exercises that best galvanize group thoughts, concerns and
aspirations, and lead to more robust planning results.
In 2011, the Ohio University Libraries adapted an interactive exercise
originally developed by Professor David Staley and Kara J. Malenfant for
the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL).1 The ACRL
process articulated 26 future scenarios that described potential changes
in the areas of technology, education, scholarly communication and
society that could happen over the next 15 years. Each Ohio University
librarian and staff member carefully ranked each scenario for the
likelihood of it happening and the scale of its impact upon Ohio
University Libraries. Those scenarios ranked as highly likely and high
impact and spurred a series of in-depth and interactive group
discussions, which guided Ohio University's strategic planning team
and created a shared awareness of possible library futures. Those
interactive exercises led by Professor Staley, and the subsequent
discussions surrounding the scenarios, represent a best practice for
other librarians and staff who are attempting to understand the external
factors that shape society, higher education and the future of libraries.

FUTURES THINKING
The success or failure of any strategic plan is dependent upon its
environment, but the future state of any larger environment is
notoriously difficult to predict. The future obviously does not yet exist
except as a possibility, and it is not predictable because it has not yet been
formed. We can only create plausible scenarios that describe varying
degrees of probability to help guide the planning process.
An example, are the statements created by the Taiga Forum, an
association of associate and assistant librarians who seek to prepare
leaders for the future by creating an annual list of provocative
statements that force librarians to consider potential game-changing
situations that they may need to operate under. These statements
stimulated meaningful dialogue in scores of organizations and
energized the strategic planning process for many, claim Taiga.2
Such provocative statements have included:Within the next five

January 2012 1

years libraries will have undergone skills inventories and begun

addressing identified gaps. Successful libraries will have developed
rolling plans for staff reallocation, elimination, and retraining.
Unsuccessful libraries will have failed to root out resistance to change,
driving out their best and brightest.
And,Within the next five years libraries will be forced to acknowledge
that our boutique services have been collecting in the basement. To clean
house, libraries will implement planned abandonment.3
Taiga's statements have spawned plenty of commentary, a good
deal of it negative. Many who lampoon the statements, find them to
be outlandish, and outside the everyday realm of librarianship.
Perhaps they reflect an underlying belief that the scope and speed
of change represented by the statement will never occur, or at least,
not to the extent that they will impact libraries. Others express their
incredulity that anyone would want those visions of the future to
come true, especially since many of the statements seem to work
against the best interests of the library.4
One way to view provocative statements is as strategic stress
tests because they assess certain assumptions and values. The
statements may make librarians confront potentially unpleasant
choices that may be imposed from external sources. Such structured
scenarios seem to present a situation that is not a librarians' choice
forcing librarians to ask What would I do?

FUTURES THINKING

AND

STRATEGIC PLANNING

To be an effective strategic tool, and not simply a parlor game, scenarios

should be based upon some kind of evidence that the described situation
is tied to something that is currently happening in the external
environment, and then draw on its implications. Scenarios should not,
moreover, be viewed as a desired future or a preferred outcome, but rather
disinterested statements about the environment that we may need to
operate under and that we may have little control over. Indeed, the
purpose of an effective scenario is to ask the reader to contemplate its'
meaning, and if warranted, to work to ensure that the conditions
described do not occur. Scenarios should be viewed as an effort to describe
a future state of the system, in which those decisions will be carried out.
As librarians think about strategic plans for their organization, their
awareness of the larger environment and their understanding of potential
change in that environment are critical to improve decision-making skills.

As librarians think about strategic plans for their

organization, their awareness of the larger
environment and their understanding of potential
change in that environment are critical to improve
decision- making skills.

Because future environments cannot be predicted with any

certainty, strategic plans will often fall prey to what business consultant,
Michael Raynor, calls the strategy paradox. Strategic plans, says
Raynor, are executed under a set of external conditions that are
unpredictable. If the conditions assumed under the strategic plan
actually come to pass, then the strategy is implemented successfully. But
if those conditions were to be different than the ones assumed in the
strategic plan, then that plan is probably doomed to failure. Raynor
states:The future is a range of possible outcomes, not a specific set of
circumstances that will inevitably come to passMost strategies are
built on specific beliefs about the future. Unfortunately, the future is
deeply unpredictable. Worse, the requirements of breakthrough success
demand implementing strategy in ways that make it impossible to
adapt should the future not turn out as expected.5
Those specific beliefs about the future are assumptionsusually
unexamined assumptionsabout the future environment in which

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

strategic decisions will be implemented. When those underlying

assumptions about the larger environment do not come to pass,
strategies based on those assumptions are nearly certain to fail. When
organizations fail to test their beliefs about the future, they engage in
thoughtless strategic behavior, and they open themselves up to the
strategy paradox.
Raynor and other business strategists recommend that planners
consider multiple futures, and then test their strategic plans against
each of these possibilities. Rather than seeking a single strategy that is
optimal under a single scenario, decision-makers who test multiple
scenarios have the opportunity to implement a strategy that is more
robust, flexible and adaptable to external influences.

THE FUTURES THINKING PROCESS

If futuring and futures thinking involve intuiting multiple scenarios,
then there are a potentially limitless number of scenarios that one
could consider. Understanding which of those limitless possible
futures most likely to occurand are a worthwhile test against a
strategic planmight seem an impossible task.
Professor Staley has developed a tool for imagining, articulating,
estimating and ranking the likelihood of multiple futures by creating a
scenario space map to manage our perception about the future. A
scenario space map is based on expert judgment that charts the
perceptions of the futurenot a map of the future. The goal in a credible
futuring exercise, and in creating a scenario space map, is to inform
present-day planning by arranging and organizing potential futures.
A scenario space map is a coordinate plane that charts those large
numbers of scenarios. For each scenario, a group of experts are asked
two questions: first, to rank the probability of the scenario occurring
from unlikely to very likely; and second, to rank the impact that
the scenario will have on their core business from no impact to high
impact. It is important to recognize that experts are not ranking a
preference for a scenario, but they are making an objective
assessment, based upon expert knowledge, concerning the likelihood
of the scenario occurring. This is a Bayesian probability, based on
expert judgment, rather than a statistical probability.
The scenarios are then arranged in a scenario space map based upon
their location along two axes. Scenarios that are located in the upper
right quadrant of the scenario space are high probability/high impact,
and they will demand the attention of leaders who set strategy. If high
probability/high impact scenarios are judged to be very likely to occur
and are game-changing, then responsible leaders will have no choice
but to organize their strategies to align to that reality.
It is critical, however, not to ignore those scenarios that fall into the
upper left quadrant, which are high impact/low probability. That is
the region of strategic surprise, or I never saw it coming, which can
sideswipe the best of strategies. Because they are organized based on
expert judgment and perceptions about the future, the location of a
particular scenario can move within the scenario space. Thus, a
scenario that was at one time judged to be low probability may, as
conditions change, shift to the high-probability/high impact region.
As well as the reverse, a scenario once thought to be inevitable and
game-changing may, as time passes, move to the region of lowimpact/low-probability. (See Fig. 1.)

ACRL'S FUTURING SURVEY

A recent, well-known example of library futuring was implemented in
partnership between Professor Staley and the Association of College
and Research Libraries (ACRL). The partnership created scenarios that
described potential environments in the year 2025 in which libraries
and librarians would need to work. The goal of the exercise was for
librarians to think beyond the next budget cycle, to look beyond the
jarring Great Recession of 2008, and to consider what may occur on
the other side of the economic downturn. The idea of the scenario

Fig. 1
ACRL Futuring Projectresults from 400 ACRL
member director respondents.
From David J. Staley and Kara J. Malenfant,
Futures Thinking for Academic Librarians:
Higher Education in 2020 http://www.acrl.org/
futures, accessed October 11, 2011

space exercise was to identify potential scenarios so ACRL members

would begin thinking in new ways, begin challenging strategic loadbearing assumptions, and begin examining some of the underlying
beliefs about the future that undergirds their strategies.
The scenarios were built upon research conducted by ACRL staff
about the current environmental conditions, and then followed by an
implications assessment about those conditions. ACRL staff engaged in
months of environmental scanning, looking beyond the library and
the university for trends and signals in the external environment. The
environmental scan gathered information from a variety of media
sources: trade journals, magazines, newspapers, blogs and conference
presentations.
ACRL staff organized the gathered evidence into a number of themes,
which was leavened by the expert judgment of library practitioners. The
evidence was then arranged into a number of interpretive stories or
short scenarios about potential future external environments. About 40
such scenarios were developed; these were subsequently pared down to
26 stories of two-hundred words about possible futures. Titles for the
scenarios included possible futures such as A College Degree for Every
Citizen, Breaking the Textbook Monopoly, Everyone is a Nontraditional student, and This Class is Brought to You by.....6
ACRL library directors (n = 400) were asked to judge the
likelihood and impact of each scenario. Additionally, the survey
group was asked to judge the speed at which the scenario is occurring
(this was represented by the size of the numberthe larger the
number, the faster the change) and if the scenario reflects a threat or
opportunity for libraries (this was represented by color). The results
were input into a scenario space map. (See Fig. 2.)
The library directors judged 9 of the 26 scenarios to be both high
impact and high probability (those located in the upper right
quadrant of the scenario space map.) Of those nine, four were judged
to exhibit fast change:
Increasing Threat of Cyberwar, Cybercrime and Cyberterrorism:
College/university and library IT systems are the targets of hackers,
criminals, and rogue states, disrupting operations for days and weeks

Fig. 2
Results from 69 Ohio University librarian and staff
respondents (For interpretation of the references
to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred
to the web version of this article)

at a time. Campus IT professionals seek to protect student

records/financial data while at the same time divulging personal
viewing habits in compliance with new government regulations.
Librarians struggle to maintain patron privacy and face increasing
scrutiny and criticism as they seek to preserve online intellectual
freedom in this climate.
Meet the New Freshman Class:
With laptops in their hands since the age of 18-months old, students
who are privileged socially and economically are completely fluent in
digital media. For many others, the digital divide, parental unemployment, and the disruption of moving about during the foreclosure crisis of
their formative years, means they never became tech savvy. Remedial
computer and information literacy classes are now de rigueur
Right Here with Me:
Students talk through homework with their handheld devices,
which issue alerts when passing a bookstore with material they need
to cite. Scanning the title page, this information is instantly embedded
in proper citation style with an added endnote. Checking in on
location-based services, students locate study team members and
hold impromptu meetings without the need for study rooms. Their
devices have whiteboards and can share notes with absent members.
Scholarship Stultifies:
The systems that reward faculty members continue to favor
conventionally published research. At the same time, standard
dissemination channelsespecially the university pressimplode.
While many academic libraries actively host and support online
journals, monographs, and other digital scholarly products, their
stature is not great; collegial culture continues to value tradition over
anything perceived as risky.
The ACRL report concluded that since the library directors found
these 4 scenarios to be of high probability/high impact, and they
reflect a rapid change in the external environment, then these
scenarios should inform any library strategic plan.

OHIO UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

The Ohio University's main campus is situated on the northern edge of
the Appalachian Mountains in Athens, Ohio. The rural, residential,

January 2012 3

campus is a state supported, 210-year old, Carnegie-doctoral-granting

institution that has an emphasis on liberal arts. In fall 2011, the Athens
campus enrollment reached nearly 21,000 students including 3600
FTE graduate students and 1500 international students. The main
library for Ohio University, the Vernon R. Alden Library, has been a
member of the Association of Research Libraries since 1996.
The state of Ohio's administration for higher education, like many
other institutions, is being re-shaped by financial, regulatory and
demographic forces. The financial crisis that began in 2008 has
exacerbated the decline in state financial support for higher
education, and analysis suggests that a continued decline is expected
throughout the next decade. The State of Ohio's funding formula, in
addition, is also changing in order to encourage scientific, technical,
engineering and mathematics (STEM) programs, and higher education's financial reimbursement is now based upon quality metrics
such as time-to-degree, course completion, graduation and placement
data, rather than its earlier reimbursements for simple course
enrollment. Third, demographic data predicts a 10% decline in Ohio
high-school graduates over the next decade. Such a decline will have a
disproportionate impact upon the Athens campus because 90% of
Ohio University's freshmen and nearly half of its graduate students
traditionally come from within the State of Ohio.
Ohio University, as a consequence, has reduced its non-academic
overhead. It has implemented steps towards resource-centered
budgeting to offset reductions in state financial support; increased
STEM and professional course capacity through online and regional
campus instruction; and bolstered student success through quality
higher education and innovative services. The University has also
offset the decline in Ohio high-school graduates through marketing,
and its increased visibility as a rural, residential, liberal arts campus.

OHIO UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES: THE PLANNING PROCESS

As with many research libraries, Ohio University's tendency has been
to focus inwardly on technical processes and incremental changes
that were related to traditional practices. The previous strategic plan,
while credible for its time, focused on revising the acquisitions
funding formula; educating users about available services; implementing a campus-courier system; and installing compact shelving.
The current strategic plan was an ambitious undertaking. Its goal
was to educate librarians and staff to be aware of the external issues
that face the campus and higher education; to identify the influence
that such issues will have on the way that libraries will function in the
near future; and to build a shared awareness of how Ohio University
Libraries will respond to external issues. In devising the planning
process, therefore, the Libraries needed to find a method to educate
librarians and staff about the importance and the consequences from
the shifts underway in demographics, scholarly communication and
the University at large.

The current strategic plan was an ambitious

undertaking. Its goal was to educate librarians and
staff to be aware of the external issues that face the
campus and higher education; to identify the
influence that such issues will have on the way that
libraries will function in the near future; and to
build a shared awareness of how Ohio University
Libraries will respond to external issues.

The Libraries' senior leadership intent was to engage as many library

staff as possible in the educating and planning process. Even if staff were
not directly involved in the planning, they needed to be aware of the
larger environmental factors driving change. Moreover, it was critical

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

they understand and support the plan in order to implement it. As might
be expected, staff were at varying levels of awareness, especially
pertaining to the national climate for higher education and the
environment for academic libraries. The Libraries' department heads,
for example, had participated in a university-mandated environmental
scan. The scan required extensive readings and discussions about higher
education and about the future of libraries. Many librarians engaged in
the generous travel funding to participate in the numerous national
conferences, and classified staff were encouraged to attend regional
workshops and to participate in webinars.
In the hope of educating all staff, key readings were assigned that
were intended to raise the understanding of the changing environment for higher education and for Ohio University; the changes in
scholarly communication; and even the changes in the future of
academic libraries. Recommendations included local reports such as
The Ohio University Strategic Enrollment Plan and the Ohio University
Libraries' Environmental Scan that were prepared for a University
strategic planning endeavor. Other suggested readings were the Value
of Academic Libraries: Full Report and the Online Computer Library
Center's (OCLC) Research Libraries, Risk and Systemic Change. 7
Additionally, key campus leaders in research, undergraduate education and enrollment management were invited to speak to the library
staff to share their vision of the future of the University, and to discuss
the assigned readings.

FUTURING

AND

OHIO UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES STRATEGIC

PLANNING

In the time prior to the formal planning, considerable resources were

invested in educating the librarians and the staff. Although the hours
that were devoted to discussing reports and articles, conference
attendance, travel expenditures and workshop registration could be
measured, it was not as clear what had actually been absorbed. So when
one of the authors of this article, Eileen Theodore-Shusta, attended the
presentation on the results of the Futures Thinking for Academic
Librarians: Higher Education in 2020 survey8 at the American Library
Association's Mid-Winter 2011 conference that was sponsored by ACRL,
the Libraries recognized an opportunity to frame their strategic planning
process. The Ohio University Libraries recognized the futuring process
could test staff readiness to engage in the planning process and bring
awareness of external forces impacting higher education and academic
libraries. The Libraries hoped to use this as a tool to transform the culture
of the staff from one internal operational focus to one of external
strategic thinking. Professor Staley was invited to present the Futures
Thinking for all Ohio University Libraries' Librarians and Staff. In
preparation for his presentation, staff read the future scenarios, ranking
their possible impact, and estimating their likelihood, bringing into
focus the assigned readings on higher education, library planning and
institutional-specific reports.
The ACRL Futures Thinking exercise reinforced the assigned
readings, and it encouraged librarians to then apply their knowledge
to actual future thinking. By reading the material before engaging in
the scenario space exercise, librarians were better able to judge
whether a scenario was likely or unlikely to occur, while
simultaneously it galvanized the literature and the conversations
that had already taken place.
Ohio University Libraries then conducted a survey that was similar to
the ACRL survey using the same 26 scenarios. As Fig. 2 indicates, the
cluster of results in the scenario space was similar to the ACRL study
results, and it was closely tracked to the national results. This similarity
suggested that Ohio University Libraries staff shared a similar awareness
of national trends in higher education, scholarly communication and its
potential impacts on both Ohio University and the University Libraries.
The immediate outcome of the exercise, therefore, suggested that
librarians and staff were prepared to engage in a strategic planning
exercise that was influenced by external environmental factors.

Librarians and staff had ranked each scenario and submitted their
individual responses to Staley who combined them into a single chart.
The grouped responses represented an extraordinary insight into the
concernsand fearsabout the future. The chart represented a
factual, non-threatening catalyst that could help librarians and staff
to confront their assumptions and fears about the future. Those topics
were clearly in the mind of everyone, and they were important to
Ohio University Libraries' future and critical to the planning process.
Either no one had thought to raise those issues, or they did not realize
that their concerns were shared by others. Perhaps, there had never
been a venue in which these issues could be discussed.
There were two possible, interrelated, futures that were ranked
high-impact and highly likely by the librarians and staff. First was
the Increasing Threat of Cyberwar, Cybercrime and Cyberterrorism.
Evidence of that scenario was seen by the increased number of attacks
on the campus network that resulted in ever more secure systems and
increasingly restricted access to networked information. The second
was a scenario titled, Out-of-Business:
As information companies come to dominate the marketproviding superior tools
and services for students and facultythe academic library is less visible and less
necessary. With only a small user base remaining, colleges and universities
outsource many of the remaining functions, as they did with meal service and
bookstores earlier. In an era of endless abundance, the curation skills of librarians
are still valuable, and they are employed at these companies.

Staley led a lengthy discussion with librarians and staff that focused
on those two scenarios. That cyberterrorism would be such a concern in
bucolic Athens, Ohio, was a surprise to the Libraries' Dean. As the
discussion unfolded, however, librarians began to articulate how they
had witnessed how security concerns impeded the open flow of free
information. It was easy to imagine a future where networks were so
secure that information was only available to an authorized few. One of
librarianship's fundamental valuesopen access to all informationwas
being placed under a considerable amount of stress.
That scenario also provoked a discussion about decisions that must
be made in the present, which had been spurred on by the potential
changes in the external environment. An immediate need arose to
collaborate with the Office of Information Technology; to face the
political realities that affect Libraries; and to recognize the need to
change how the Libraries do business.
There were also notable divergences from the ACRL survey. Ohio
University librarians and staff perceived the Out-of-Business scenario
to be more likely to occur, and it had a greater potential impact than
what was indicated by the ACRL study. The librarians and staff were
naturally concerned about the scenario's implications, and they had
expressed their alarm at the elements of the scenario that they had
already witnessed in today's environment. The current economic crisis
had caused university-wide staff reductionssometimes in favor of
outsourcing. That library functions might be eliminated in favor of a
more efficient or less expensive off-campus alternative seemed more
likely to occur than it had a few years ago. Beyond the concern for the
future, discussions arose around the implications of the Out-ofBusiness scenario that focused on the value that Ohio University
Libraries adds by assisting students, the costs to the institution, the loss
of local control when it is given to larger information companies, and the
need to change how services are delivered.
Thus by using a potential scenario that dates 15 years into the future,
the Libraries were able to create a common framework to discuss real
strategic initiatives that involve the present work environment.

CONCLUSION
Out of the 26 reviewed, Ohio University respondents were most affected
by the Cyber-terrorism and the Out-of-Business scenarios. Taken

together, they both represented a rather bleak view of the future by

marginalizing the core values of librarianship and the important roles of
librarians. More than one Ohio University librarian privately shared with
their Dean that this is not a future they want to participate in.
The purpose of the exercise, though, was to articulate a future
vision, so we could discuss and learn. It became clear to many
thoughtful participants that practices most at risk could not be
addressed by more efficient back-room processes; more comfortable
public furniture; or better metadata. The exercise did prove to be a
catalyst for important conversations by librarians and staff who
confronted their assumptions and their fears about higher education;
the mission of academic libraries and our collective future; and helped
refocused the inward-looking culture of the library to be more
outward looking.
The scenario space exercise also proved to be a catalytic by
introducing a broader perspective about the external environment in
which academic libraries function. Important topics such as the
changes in scholarly publishing, information technology, privatization, network security, the aging baby boomers and commercialization were discussed at length from the perspective of the usernot
the Libraries. Transforming research libraries is really about transforming the research library staff. The futuring process challenged the
Ohio University Libraries staff to think beyond the walls of the
building to consider the much larger external environment and,
through discussions, move towards a shared vision of the future.

Transforming research libraries is really about

transforming the research library staff.

Acknowledgement: The authors would like to thank Kate Mason

for her careful reading and comments on this paper.

NOTES

AND

REFERENCES

1. David J. Staley & Kara J. Malenfant, Futures Thinking for Academic

Librarians: Higher Education in 2020" http://www.acrl.org/futures,
accessed October 11, 2011.
2. Taiga Forum, Brief History of Taiga," http://www.taiga-forum.org/
taiga-history accessed September 11, 2011.
3 . Tai g a Forum, 2011 Provocative Statements," http://
taigaforumprovocativestatements.blogspot.com/, accessed August
24, 2011.
4. See, for example, Roy Tennant, The Taiga Forum Provocative
Statements, Library Journal, March 12, 2009 http://blog.libraryjournal.com/tennantdigitallibraries/2009/03/12/the-taiga-forumprovocative-statements/, accessed September 11, 2011; Eleanor
Mitchell and Sarah Barbara Watstein, Taiga and Darien: Relevance
for Reference and Instructional Services for Libraries in the Digital
Age, Reference Services Review 37 (2009): 253- 259.
5. Michael E. Raynor, The Strategy Paradox: Why Committing to Success
Leads to Failure, New York, Random House, 2007.
6. A full description of each of the twenty-six scenarios can be found at
http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/issues/value/futures2025.
pdf,
7. Association of College and Research Libraries, Value of Academic
Libraries Report http://www.acrl.ala.org/value/, accessed August 24,
2011;
Online Computer Library Center Research Libraries, Risk and Systemic
Change, http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2010/
2010.03.pdf, accessed August 24, 2011.

January 2012 5