Quality Team Meeting
In attendance: Barbara O’Neill, Crystal Knapp, Michele Burke, Emily Papagni
Phone conference, December 6, 2006, 1:00pm.

Nominations of excellent transcripts

• Request for nominations went out. We have not yet received feedback, but Emily has been asked how to access the Buzz, so there is some activity and getting more people to look at the buzz is a positive result
• Emily will send out a reminder to the list
• We have found some great transcripts and are tracking the ones we like. Crystal is keeping a short list of those emailed since last meeting. If we do not receive nominations, then we will wait until the deadline is closer and submit our formal nominations with written descriptions of why we think certain transcripts are outstanding
• We plan to award the winner(s) and do not plan to say anything about the runners-up. We will keep a back pocket of good transcripts (note: at some point may consider developing a scoring rubric)

Transcripts mentioned in emails from us…discussion of characteristics we like

• We are considering whether to honor more than one kind of transcript, perhaps long and short, because they involve different skills
• Janeanne from Western (spent a fair amount of time, long, detailed interaction and this is the third mentioned from her).
• Robin from PCC (relates well to patrons, does a good job with very young patrons, though she works in an academic environment)
• A couple of transcripts mentioned
  *) 1983407 (ID to look at from Barbara…using print…asks clarifying questions)
  *) 1867019 (Journal of organometalics)
  *) 2007705 (librarian does a nice job keeping the tone warm but professional when the patron asks for medical advice)
  
• How shall we honor the best transcript(s)?
  *) Announce in OLA L-net session (but we do not have a session)
  *) Caleb will do something for preconference, but may not have the opportunity to make an announcement
  *) May be appropriate to announce a number of ways: on the listserv, on the blog, a poster or plaque at the L-net booth, laminate the transcript and use as a talking point for librarians that come into the booth, create a handout, present the award at the L-net summit in May or June in Bend
  
• Team still likes the idea of having a quarterly award (even if we do not receive any nominations)
• Emily encourages all of us to attend the L-net summit in Bend (date to be determined)

Looking at horrible transcripts works because it emphasizes desirable characteristics and how to recognize a good transcript. How might we expose others to more transcripts?

• Worth reminding people to read their own transcripts so they catch and report problems
• Perhaps try to organize something where new/volunteers are encouraged to read transcripts
• Expectation of providing service that someone reads the transcripts (perhaps the person who reads the emails). Good to leave it up to the individual library to organize according to what works for them
• Team will send a reminder email and encourage libraries to review and report. The email should include technical how-to’s (which folders have what and how to access and review) what happens based on the resolution code (e.g., if coded as ‘lost call’ it ends up in the closed folder). Perhaps remind to put into follow-up status. Reminder that reviewing transcripts from your patrons is an expectation of service. Encourage L-net librarians to report problems as well as to report good work from Oregon librarians and Cooperative and Backup librarians who often deserve a pat on the back)
• Emily to type up something next week

Curriculum topic shelved until next meeting
Next meeting: Thursday, Jan. 11, 2007 at 2:00pm