The use of Web 2.0 technology for professional development in Australian Information Associations

Author: Natalie Lund

Introduction    

“Virtual communities emerged from a surprising intersection of humanity and technology” (Rheingold, n.d.), and since their conception have proliferated within cyberspace to such an extent that it is no longer possible to ignore the myriad of opportunities they offer. Although the platform they emerged on is actually not that old, already the technology underpinning it has undergone dynamic changes, including its evolution to Web 2.0. The Internet now spans across all devices, while Web 2.0 applications make the most of this platform to harness collective intelligence (O’Reilly, 2007, p.19; Wusteman, 2009, p.171). Marketing departments have picked up the terminology and applied it everywhere for example Government 2.0 by Objective Corporation Limited (2009). Even official sources in Australia are using the terms such as Library 2.0 by the National Library Australia (2007) and again Government 2.0 with the Department of Finance and Deregulation (2009. Web 2.0 applications in particular can provide online community members with more interactive tools enabling easier creation, dissemination and exchange of information.  The information management industry in Australia should be utilising Web 2.0 applications to enhance professional development opportunities. 

This paper considers an outsider’s view of the professional development opportunities within the four main information management associations in Australia; Australian Librarian and Information Association (ALIA), Records Management Association of Australasia (RMAA), Australian Society of Archivists (ASA) & Australian Computer Society (ACS). It discusses some of the technology in use while outlining Web 2.0 options for professional development. Recent research is discussed providing evidence of success in other industries and explains why the information profession needs to lead by example and be instigators rather than followers or enablers for other professional industries.   

Recent research

There has been some recent research in the area of using Web 2.0 tools for professional development. Local research from Crease, Crib & Spicer (2008) indicates that the Australian librarian profession has mixed feelings regarding using Web 2.0 tools for professional development.  63% of respondents in their survey did not use any social networking sites for private or professional purposes (Crease, Crib & Spicer, 2008, p.3) while only 33% considered social networking site use as inappropriate for the workplace (Crease, Crib & Spicer, 2008, p.4). On the other hand in New Zealand, Cranefield & Yoong (2008) using an educational industry context has a different story where participants interacted via a range of online tools such as instant messaging, Twitter and Podcasts. The result was a “rich environment [sic] of collaboration, discussions and networking seen as comprising of multiple engagement spaces” (Cranefield & Yoong, 2008, p.263). The engagement spaces promoted individual development of personal professional knowledge by engaging them in repeated crossings between ‘the spaces’ as part of an ongoing process of reinterpretation, reconstruction and personalisation of meaning to suit the different requirements of each communication context (Cranefield & Yoong, 2008, p.264).  

In support Cheung & Lee’s (2009, p.291) research indicates that sustainability of online communities for professional development requires a “sense of belonging” and “similarity of [sic] member’s values”. Additionally recent research into Virtual Research Environments (VRE) suggests that VREs can be utilised to “facilitate individual and organisational professional development and problem-solving” (Sonnenwald, Lassi, Olson & Ponti, 2009, p.198). Wusteman (2009, p.171) acknowledges Web 2.0 influence on information exchange and its benefits to academic research in particular if Web 2.0 ingenuity and functionality is adopted. These papers signify the emergence of research into Web 2.0 tools for professional development opportunities, while conversely highlighting the need for information professional associations and their related academic fields to promote, enhance and develop these opportunities for members and future members of their respective associations. 

Policies & Programs

In the 2008 Boyer Lectures (as cited by Hallam, 2009, p.1) “Rupert Murdoch argued that in the future, successful workers will be those who embrace a lifelong of learning, those who don’t will be left behind”. Hallam (2009, p.21) further indicates that ALIA’s policy statement encourages lifelong learning in the form of professional development that reinforces Murdoch’s statement. Likewise the ACS has policies that encourage its members to be lifelong learners; “Professionals have an obligation to themselves and the [sic] Information Communication Technology (ICT) community to sustain their skills and knowledge through ongoing professional development (ACS, 2004b)”. In particular “the ACS believes that professionalism means having relevant experience to use with formally assessed qualifications” (ACS, 2001). The RMAA and ASA also encourage lifelong learning with active professional development programs.

As discussed by Mayman, Allee, Blumenthal and Arbor (2009, p.9) “Web 2.0 technologies are not technically difficult to implement and administer, [sic] therefore in-depth computer skills training is not generally needed”. For that reason it is surprising that the associations themselves do not necessarily utilise this technology for professional development despite the policies and programs they develop. ACS webpage has links to a few social networking sites and considers that its members should remain abreast of any technological advancement by encouraging direct tagging and linking (Connect with us on http://www.acs.org.au/). This point highlights the biggest central difference between information technology management (ITM) and information management (IM), where IM is focused on the information or informational content rather than the technology used to manage it.

Professional Development 2.0

Library 2.0 is all about servicing the libraries clients using Web 2.0 tools and as Lewis (2009, p.1) states “libraries are adapting them to suit their user’s needs”. For example the Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service introduced LibraryThing, a social software product that has enabled extra functionality within the public catalogue interface and Blogs on their website for clients to comment on library activities and services (Lewis, 2009, p.2), yet only recently have ALIA and RMAA joined Twitter for announcements to its members. On an RMAA forum Andy (2008) stated “Facebook is an interesting place and component of Web 2.0 – I suggest all RMAA members interested in lifelong education and professional development get onto Facebook”. Yet two years on Facebook is still considered a social networking site with emphasis placed on networking, rather than a useful tool for professional development opportunities.

 Mayman’s et al (2009) indicated that individual professional development opportunities were a byproduct of introducing Web 2.0 tools designed to increase communication and marketing of public health in the United States. Conversely Cotter, Lewis and Wood (2008, p.10) infer that Australian health librarians have the additional issue of workplaces banning or blocking social networking sites such as Facebook and Blogger. This intensifies the need for the IM associations to develop policies akin to the ACS policy for both Internet use and access for its members “to enhance their job performance [sic] responsibly” (ACS, 2004a) and establish this as a requirement within the information management industry. Establishing a policy is not the only answer; active participation within the membership utilising Web 2.0 tools is paramount. In this way associations can identify which Web 2.0 tools to advocate for as well as those that boost positive impact for professional development opportunities within any workplace.

 In addition to developing and advocating policies, the information profession in Australia needs to consider traditional barriers that hinder the growth and utilisation of Web 2.0 tools for professional development. Some of these barriers include the specialisation of associations such as RMAA and ASA with the separation of records continuum into records management and archival management respectively. ALIA previously known as the Librarian Association of Australia (LAA) has a core traditional membership based on librarianship, with their current professional development courses geared towards enhancing the librarian element of the information profession (Qualifications and Careers, n.d.). The ACS is focused on established core technical competencies and mutual recognition with affiliated international partner associations. These factors together conclude that individually the associations focus on their traditional core membership to progress that element of the information profession further. Collaboration appears to be an afterthought, however ALIA, RMAA & ASA as information manager type associations in the past have shown some collaboration such as the ASA/RMAA Joint Committee (Caldwell, 2003). Even so collaboration is only on specific topics that may or may not include professional development and where there is collaboration, a separation exists between information management and information technology management.   

Technology

Publishing papers in official or industry recognised journals is one avenue of disseminating peer-reviewed personal professional knowledge. There is research in place that suggests “online communities function [sic] similarly like peer-review professional bodies” (Hew, 2009, p.439). For example Hew’s (2009) research focused on the members perceived professional development opportunities in an online community. Although a majority of the members were based in the United States, Hew’s paper provided evidence of the general acceptability of online communities for professional development opportunities. The evidence used was based on listserv statistical results and as Hew (2009, p.442) suggests “the use of listserv technology is conductive to helping members participate in the discussions”.  Listserv technology is not new, and to a certain extent is similar to a traditional mailing list (Wikipedia, n.d) where broadcasts or updates are sent to all recipients simultaneously. Coincidently twitter and other Web 2.0 tools utilise the foundation of listserv technology to send its updates to followers or members.

ALIA uses listserv technology extensively across a variety of topics of interest for its members. Additionally RMAA has some separated forums however ASA core membership is with archivists, and it can be perceived that due to the lack of listserv forums technology is not a strong point. On the contrary ACS also lacked listserv forums however Web 2.0 social media such as Facebook and LinkedIn was in their place. Listservs’ can be an expensive option when high numbers are involved, and associations may not have the resources to administer or pay for a dedicated server for the service. For example on Thompson’s Blog (Thompson, 2010) he discusses the difficulty in moving 70 listserv lists to a new service provider and considers that in “the modern Internet age, ‘mailing list’ means ‘email marketing newsletter’, not ‘discussion list’ “, something associations should consider when exploring similar service options. Listserv often works hand-in-hand with bulletin or message boards however these boards are often based on Web 1.0 technology yet after pursuing the official websites of ALIA, RMAA, ASA & ACS there was no hint of a bulletin board in use. It is interesting to note that ALIA & RMAA use Listserv technology, a Web 1.0 tool, whereas the ACS use Web 2.0 tools and the ASA uses neither, therefore having the largest gap to overcome in utilising Web 2.0 tools for professional development.   

Although each association has a core focus ALIA, RMAA & ASA encourage cross-development through some membership discounts at conferences and events. Still, being a professional is expensive mostly due to the geographical distances of its members within Australia and in RMAA’s case New Zealand and the Pacific. For example individual annual membership for RMAA is $235 and ASA is $300 yet the discount on offer at an upcoming RMAA breakfast seminar (RMAA, 2010) in Perth is $21 for RMAA members and $7 for ASA members. Putting comments on the discount offered aside, what is missing is the use of Web 2.0 technology to allow distant members to participate.  3D and virtual world technology can have a significant cost in hardware and wetware such as installing suitable graphic cards and ensuring network capabilities including reliable broadband access are compatible, something members may not be able to afford on top of their association fees. Primarily investigations conclude that even utilising existing options such as Second Life can be cost prohibitive to associations who wish to hire or establish a permanent structure for such events (Aroche & Brown, 2009, p.20).

A simple solution to reduce costs is to share it. It is theoretically feasible for RMAA, ASA & ALIA to share the rent for a permanent structure in a virtual world. Collectively it can be used to hold events and conferences with discounts for regional and/or overseas members to encourage live participation. As with purchasing services from a third party vendor risks are involved, as the wrong choice could lead to valuable money been wasted and sent overseas. Alternatively, a local solution may lie in the use of ACS members’ skills and expertise to create, design and manage a virtual world suitable for Australia’s vast geographical distances and conditions for use by local associations affiliated with the information profession. Furthermore the development of a professional virtual world site which is not a social or gaming site has merit and therefore with appropriate polices can be excluded from any workplace black ban site lists.

It is clear that each association has some work to do towards utilising and/or promoting Web 2.0 tools for professional development.  Creese et al (2008, p.13) simply stated “the best use for social networking software is to give an alternative avenue for communication under an existing relationship, not to cultivated a new one”. For ALIA & RMAA the listserv forums are a prime example of an existing relationship for developing an alternative avenue for communication.  Recent research indicates that online communities and Web 2.0 tools are becoming increasingly popular for professional development in other industries even to the extent that the information profession is providing guidance and assistance to propitiate these. ALIA, RMAA, ASA & ACS all have a part to play in the development of professionalism and professionals in their similar but respective industries. Each association must consider their future membership activities, building on established relationships to ensure that Web 2.0 tools are part of a collaborative effort. Within Australia industry collaboration and cross-professional development will strengthen as a whole the information profession while ensuring it remains relevant to Australians now and in the future.

 

Bibliography – Conference Paper: the use of Web 2.0 technology for professional development in Australian Information Associations

 Abel Usoro, C. Camison, D. Palacios, F. Garrigos and C. Devece. (2009). Connectivity and Knowledge Management in Virtual Organisations: Networking and Developing Interactive Communications. International Journal of Information Management, 29(6), 504-507. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from Science Direct Database.

 Adolphus, M. (2009). Using The Web To Tech Information Literacy. Online, 33(4), 20-26. Retrieved March 22, 2010 from ProQuest Database.

 Andy. (2008, December 18). Facebook. Message Posted to RMAA Forum electronic mailing list, archived at http://forums.rmaa.com.au/showthread.php?t=862&page=2

 Arbor, A. Blumenthal, J. Mayman, G. and Allee, N. (2009, August 31 – September 4). Public health 2.0: collaborative partnerships for integrating social technologies into the practice community. Paper presented at the 2009 Positioning the Profession: the Tenth International Congress on Medical Librarianship, Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:179802

 Ark Group Australia. (2010). Library 2.0 Masterclass [Brochure]. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from http://www.arkgroupaustralia.com.au/dl1/D0018_Libraries2.pdf 

 Aroche, B & Brown, H. (2009, January 21). A Second Life for Information Literacy. Paper presented at the 2009 ALIA information online, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from Google Scholar

 Australian Computer Society. (2001). Policy for Professionalism in ICT. Retrieved April 17, 2010, from https://www.acs.org.au/index.cfm?action=list&groID=policy

 Australian Computer Society. (2004a). Internet Use. Retrieved April 17, 2010, from https://www.acs.org.au/index.cfm?action=list&groID=policy

 Australian Computer Society. (2004b). Practicing Computer Professional (PCP) Policy – [Member Consultation, Draft]. Retrieved April 17, 2010, from https://www.acs.org.au/index.cfm?action=list&groID=policy

 Australian Library and Information Association. (n.d.). Qualifications and Careers. Retrieved April 15, 2010, from http://www.alia.org.au/education/qualifications/careers/

 Bulletin board system. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2010, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_board_system

 Burnett, G. and Buerkle, H. (2004). Information Exchange in Virtual Communities: A Comparative Study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 9(2). Retrieved March 14, 2010, from Google Scholar.

 Caldwell, J. (2003). ASA information paper for ASA/RMAA joint committee. Retrieved April 23, 2010, from http://www.archivists.org.au/events/ARES2003/ARES%20Background%20Paper%20App%201.pdf

 Calypso, A. (2007). Real Life-Online. Black Enterprise, 37(10), 60. Retrieved March 22, 2010, from ProQuest Database.

 Campbell, M. and Uys, P. (2007). Identifying success factors of ICT in developing a learning community: Case study Charles Sturt University. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 24(1), 17-26. Retrieved March 29, 2010, from Gartner Database

 Carley, K., Opsahl, T. and Panzarasa, P. (2009). Patterns and Dynamics of Users’ Behaviour and Interaction: Netowrk Analysis of an Online Community. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(5), 911-932. Retrieved March 18, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Cheung, C. and Lee, M. (2009). Understanding the sustainability of a virtual community: model development and empirical test. Journal of Information Science, 35(3), 279-298. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from LISA database.

 Chu, K. (2009). A study of member’s helping behaviors in online community. Internet Research, 19(3), 279-292. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Clemmensen, T. (2005). Community knowledge in an emerging online professional community: the case of Sigchi.dk. Knowledge and Process Management, 12(1), 43-53. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from ProQuest Database.

 Cotter, L. Lewis, S. & Wood, G. (2008). Web 2.0 and Australian Health Librarians. HLA NEWS, 2008 (March), 1, 9-11 Retrieved March 30, from, Google Scholar.

 Cranefield, J. and Yoong, P. (2009). Embedding personal professional knowledge in a complex online community environment. Online Information Review, 33(2), 257-275. Retrieved March 14, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Creese, J. Cribb, J and Spicer, J. (2008, February 1-2). Social Networking: never mind the student, what about us? Use of Social Networking Softwares for professional networking and development for library staff. Paper presented at the 2008 Beyond The Hype: Web 2.0 Symposium, Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:124191

 Department of Finance and Deregulation. (2009). Engage: Getting on with Government 2.0. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/gov20taskforcereport/doc/Government20TaskforceReport.pdf

 Engage your friends (n.d.). Retrieved April 6, 2010, from http://www.blogger.com/tour_con.g

 Gorman, G. (2009). Editorial. Professional community networks: Has f2f gone the way of Morse code?. Online Information Review, 33(1), 5-6. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Hallam, G. (2009, January 22). The strategic and operational dimensions of staff training and professional development for information professionals: What neXus2 has revealed. Paper presented at the 2009 ALIA information online, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from Google Scholar.

 Hew, K. F. (2009). Determinants of success for online communities: An analysis of three communities in terms of members’ perceived professional development. Behavior & Information Technology, 28(5), 433-445. Retrieved March 14, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Jennings, E. (2009). Virtual CPD: Professional development at a distance. Impact: Journal of the Career Development Group, 12(1), 7-9. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from Google Scholar.

 Lewis, L. (2009, January 22). Thinking outside the library sphere. Paper presented at the 2009 ALIA information online, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from Google Scholar

 Matzat, U. (2009). Disciplinary differences in the use of internet discussion groups: differential communication needs or trust problems? Journal of Information Science, 35(5), 613-631. Retrieved March 29, 2010, from LISTA Database.

 National Library Australia. (2007). Web 2.0 and its potential for the library community [Electronic Brochure]. Retrieved April 15, 2010, from http://www.nla.gov.au/initiatives/meetings/web2hm.html

 O’Reilly, T. (2007). What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. Communications & Strategies, 65(1), 17-37. Retrieved March 14, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Objective Corporation Limited. (2009). Solutions – State Government [Electronic Brochure]. Retrieved April 15, 2010, from http://www.objective.com/industry-solutions/financial-services

 Porter, C. (November 2004). A Typology of Virtual Communities: A Multi-Disciplinary Foundation for Future Research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10(1), Article 3. Retrieved March 13, 2010, from Google Scholar.

 Records Management Association of Australasia. (2010). IAM 2010: Access across the generations Perth Breakfast seminar: What’s the goss on Web2 social media technologies? [brochure]. RMAA: Author

 Rheingold, H. (n.d.). A Slice of Life in my Virtual Community. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://www.cs.indiana.edu/docproject/bdgti/bdgtto_18.html

 Shurville, S. & Brown, H. (2009, January 22). Developing collaborative competence in the librarians of the future. Paper presented at the 2009 ALIA information online, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from Google Scholar.

 Sidorko, P. (2009). Virtually there, almost: educational and informational possibilities in virtual worlds. Library Management, 30(6/7), 404. Retrieved March 22, 2010, from ProQuest Database.

 Sohn, J. (2007). 12 ways to use Facebook professionally. Web Worker Daily, 24 June 2007. Retrieved April, 15, 2010, from http://webworkerdaily.com/2007/07/24/12-ways-to-use-facebookprofessionally/

 Tang, F. (2009). Second Life Complements the Internet for Reference Librarians. Georgia Library Quarterly, 46(4), 10-16. Retrieved March 22, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Thompson, A. (2010, February 1). Listserv to Mailman Part 1.0: Overview [Blog]. Retrieved April 17, 2010, from http://blog.anthonyrthompson.com/2010/02/listserv-to-mailman-overview/

 Toral, S. Martinez-Torres, R. Varrero, F. and Cortes, F. (2009). An empirical study of the driving forces behind online communities. Internet Research, 19(4), 378-392. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from LISA Database.

 Wasko, M. and Faraj, S. (2000). “It is what one does”: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2-3), 155-173. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from Science Direct Database.

 Weaver, B. (2007). YouTube, me Jane: Library 2.0 – why it’s all about ‘me’. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/eserv/UQ:13780/bw_lib2.pdf

 What is Second Life? [Motion picture]. Retrieved March 22, 2010, from http://secondlife.com/whatis/

 Wusteman, J. (2009). Editorial. Virtual research environments: Issues and Opportunities for Librarians. Library Hi Tech, 27(2), 169-173. Retrieved March 14, 2010, from LISA Database.

Creative Commons License
The use of Web 2.0 technology for professional development in Australia Information Associations by Natalie Lund is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 Australia License.