Steering a Future Through Scenarios: Into theAcademic Library of the Futureby Steve O’Connor and Lai-chong AuAvailable online 9 December 2008

Scenario planning as a strategic tool forfuture planning was explored. The case

study showed how the Hong KongPolytechnic University Library applied the

process to draw up its preferred future, andillustrated the importance of involving allstakeholders in every stage for the shared

future to be acceptable to all.

Steve O’Connor is University Librarian,Pao Yue-kong Library,

Hong Kong Polytechnic University,Hung Hum, Kowloon, Hong Kong<steve.oconnor@polyu.edu.hk>;

Lai-chong Au is the Assistant Librarian,Planning Section of the Pao Yue-kong Library

of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University,Hung Hum, Kowloon, Hong Kong.

The Journal of Academic Librarianship, Volume 35, Number 1, pages 57–64

INTRODUCTIONThe Future Isn’t What It Used to be!

The recent past has changed academic libraries ra-dically over the past 10 years. The conception of a digitallibrary has become a reality, or at least partially so. Theold realities of purpose and mission are jaded and tired.The old assurances of simple formulaic statements ofpurpose do not resonate in the present let alone thefuture. As the famous futurist Marshall McLuhan oncesaid: “Most of our assumptions have outlived theiruselessness.” He also remarked: “Our Age of Anxiety is,in great part, the result of trying to do today’s job withyesterday’s tools and yesterday’s concepts”.1 Both ofthese insights lead us to an understanding at least of thedifficulties which we face today in libraries generally,and academic libraries in particular. To move forward isnot to immediately abandon our previous assumptionsof purpose and mission but to begin adopting newmindsets. To understand the path to our future is mademore difficult as our concepts of the present are oftennot transportable into that future.

In trying to understand the future our profession hasproducedmany reports seeking to analyse the present andexpecting, through this, to be able to see our future. Thisapproach is not all misdirected. The OCLC report on“Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources” isfactually well researched but does not pretend to changeoutlooks, only to record changes in the landscape. “Trendstoward increased information self-service and seamless-ness are clearly evident…. Libraries’mindshare in this self-service e-resource environment is also clear: behindnewerentrants. Libraries’ continued importance as a trustedinformation provider is evident and, overall, users havepositive, if outdated, views of the “Library”. Our collectivechallenge is where to “invest more, invest less, invent newand invert old, communicate more and market better.”2

The question is how to do what the report concludes. Thisis where new techniques are necessary; this is where weneed to be disconnected from the present and itsconceptual baggage; this is where marketing needs totake a back seat to new understandings and newconcepts.

Literature ReviewFor the future library to survive and proper, the

continuous alignment of its strategic direction with the

January 2009 57

demands of the environment is vital, especially when thespeed of changes is rapid, and the scope, extensive.However, changes that are unpredictable and complex innature can sometimes be too threatening. In the face ofuncertainty, psychological attachment to, and thedefense of what are bound to change can be dangerous.When library managers underestimate the impact of theemerging trends on their traditional roles and values,they are not positioning their library and themselves tocapitalize on changes. On the other hand, if the threat ofchange is overestimated, yet one’s ability’s to shape thefuture is underestimated, one might still be locked intoinaction in decision making.3 Coping patterns of “bol-stering failing strategy, procrastination and buck-pas-sing” are identified as the typical signs of avoidancebehaviors in responses to threatening change.4 As notedby Pierre Wack, inertia and failure to decide is oftenrooted in “the inability to see an emergent novel realityby being locked inside obsolete assumptions”.5

To free one from obsolete assumptions and over-come decision inertia and perceptual blind spots, a newplanning tool called “scenario planning” emerged in the1960’s. It was initially applied by the US governmentduring the cold war for geopolitical and military ana-lysis. In the 70’s Royal Dutch Shell pioneered its use inthe corporate sector and successfully prepared thecompany for the oil crisis in 1973.6 Since then, scenarioplanning has been widely applied in both public andprivate sectors for product innovation, organizationalre-engineering, public policy analysis, city planning,crime prevention, and NGO services.7 Numerous arti-cles in management journals have been published re-cording how creative decision makers embrace it as atool to stimulate organizational learning8, to changeorganization culture9, and to challenge deeply heldbeliefs.10 A consultancy firm registered TAIDA (Tracking,Analysing, Imaging, Deciding, Acting) as its trademarkand the name of the framework used in “hundreds ofscenario planning projects for public and privatebusiness and organizations.”11 By systematically iden-tifying and analyzing the inter-relationship betweenthe critical driving forces in the external and internalenvironment, leveraging the different perspectives of awide spectrum of stake holders and experts, and ima-gining different possibilities and corresponding strate-gies, managers are better prepared for action as thefuture unfolds.

“To free one from obsolete assumptionsand overcome decision inertia and

perceptual blind spots, a new planningtool called “scenario planning” emerged

in the 1960’s.”

The American Library Association published a hand-book on the scenario planning process to provide tipson writing the scenario plots for libraries.12 Informa-

58 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

tion professionals in special libraries are encouraged toapply scenario planning not only for internal libraryplanning, but also to “help their leaders understand thatthey provide insight to the organization and that theydon’t just catalog and warehouse data”.13 Bell con-tended that the scenario approach could be applied toachieve sustainable development of the academic lib-raries.14 In order to preserve its traditional core values,the library is to take up new roles as a primary changeagent. To achieve this, library managers are challengedto adopt scenario planning as a strategic and learningtool to visualize alternative futures, that could beprobable, possible, and most importantly, preferred, afuture for them to realize. A matrix of scenarios,characterized as “failing”, “conventional”, “technocen-trist” and “transformational”, was drawn to illustratedifferent possibilities for the future library. Bell arguedthat “traditional strategic planning may now be tooconstrained to properly respond to crisis and opportu-nity”. This is echoed by Hannabus when he criticizedstrategic planning as too focused on the present as aplanning tool for a turbulent future.15 The top-down,criterion-based approach and bureaucratic inflexibilityinherent in traditional strategic planning does not helptoday’s librarians to identify contingent decisions forunexpected changes or paradigm shifts in the informa-tion explosion age. On the other hand, the scenariodevelopment process enables conventional mindsets,existing strategies and people’s competencies to bechecked against various alternative scenarios. In anutshell, the scenario approach enables managers “tofocus on opportunity-seeking planning rather thanoperations-driven planning”.16

Putting theories into practice, the Library of theUniversity of Technology, Sydney applied the scenarioplanning process to achieve a shared understandingabout its future direction.17 The University of New SouthWales Library, employed the scenario modeling techni-ques for organizational restructuring, staff develop-ment, space planning and client services.18 In UnitedStates, the structured and disciplined techniques indeveloping plausible scenario was employed at theLibraries of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, to dev-elop four possible futures to answer the question “Howmight the collection develop over the next 5 years?”19.In Denmark, different stakeholders participated inscenario workshops to engage into “strategic reflexiveconversation” on three public library developmentprojects.20 The following is a case study of how thescenario process is applied in an academic library inHong Kong.

“Scenario planning as a process isessentially about examining the range ofoptions which constantly are with each of

us and establishing stories about howthose differing options could possibly

come to pass.”

What is Scenario Planning?Scenario planning as a process is essentially about

examining the range of options which constantly arewith each of us and establishing stories about howthose differing options could possibly come to pass.Each of us have choices to make each and every dayabout theway inwhich we travel towork, and about theway we travel home. We can change those choiceswhenever we will to meet changed circumstances; orjust simply because we want to. Futurists such as BruceSterling offer perspectives on what might happen.“Futurism is an art of re-perception. It means recognis-ing that life will change, must change, and has changed,and it suggests how and why. It shows that oldperceptions have lost their validity, while new onesare possible”.21 This evidences that we all have choices,even libraries. We can choose to do something for or toour libraries or we can choose to do nothing. But if wechoose to do something there are always options.Sorting through these options will often reveal veryclear choices which can be made if the organisation isgoing to set it’s target destination which all its energiesare directed toward. We might call these scenarios.Scenarios are stories of what might happen. They areessays in possibilities.

Creating scenarios for the future is not science fictionbut rather the art of disconnecting oneself from thepresent in order to engage with a new future. This is notan easy task. “….the purpose of scenario planning is notto pinpoint future events but to highlight large-scaleforces that push the future in different directions. It’sabout making these forces visible, so that if theyhappen, the planner will at least recognize them. It’sabout helping make better decisions today.”22 One ofthe most important aspects to recognize that the futurewill happen sooner than any of us would imagine itwould. Planning for change invariably involves anoverestimation of the speed or the rate of change.There are many examples for libraries of this under-estimation of the rate of change. One of the mostnotable is the speed at which digital content hasbecome available over the Internet. It is scarcely10 years in which we have moved from no content tohuge trench of information being available in this way.Looking backwards makes the change seem smallindeed. Looking forward however is quite different.Even if the prediction is correct, the time frame ismostly over-estimated. The time frame seems to bemuch longer.

What Scenario Planning is Not!Strategic planning is the process of deciding the

actions which an organization or group of individualswill engage in during a period. It will also include theallocation of resources (sellers, staffing and so on) inorder to be able to achieve the goals set by the agreedactions. Too often the process of strategic planningsuccumbs to incrementalism. The plan is an extensionof the past; is an extension on the last document; is anupdate of an update. This new plan has no directionother than to continue the past, and a range of new

actions are added to the plan. In times of change suchthat we are traveling through, this can be disastrous inthat the organization does not get a future focus; it doesnot get a direction in which it is heading. The directionhere is a linear path from the past; it is an extension ofthe past rather than a considered new stretch of road. Itmay have a range of actions or even a huge range ofactions but there is no destination for the organization;just a continuation of past directions.

Another type of strategic planning has been identi-fied by Lugg and Fischer which they have termed task-based strategic planning.23 While valid for the ‘back-room’ operations, this is also not scenario planning,although it could conceivably be used in this environ-ment but in a different way to that which Lugg andFischer have envisaged.

The difficulty with strategic planning is that it doesnot allow a separation between the thinking and thedoing. The pressure is on to decide on the mission andthe objectives and then to move quickly onto theactions and resourcing. A lot of time needs to be allowedto just think about options, alternatives and to thinkthrough what could be possible. Scenario planning isthe process which allows this separation.

The most important part of any plan is the destina-tion; the destination of what and where the Library, asan organization, should be strategic planning as aprocess to accompany scenario planning can be thoughtof as back filling the destination with appropriateactions and resourcing.

Applying This Technique to Library SituationsThe Literature Review in this article refers to a

number of articles by O’Connor where this techniquehas been applied already. The technique works bestwhere an organisation is facing or is inducing asignificant change of direction. In these circumstances,the organisation is confronting the need to change theboundaries of its activities or how it defines its mission.Strategic planning, for the most part, is a process toorder the available resources to ensure an effectiveexecution of plans for the coming year or period.Scenario planning challenges and questions the baseson which the logic of the existing operations are based.It is a technique which enables participants in theprocess to grasp new and previously unexploredoptions. This technique has been applied successfullyin a number of different broad circumstances:

A Major University LibraryThis organisation had been very innovative in years

past but with a very long serving and stable staff whowere reluctant to consider yet alone embrace changedcircumstances. The average age of this 200 memberplus staff was more than 57 years old. The budget of thelibrary was not as strong as in previous years and wasunder prospective challenge. The library’s organisa-tional structure into subject libraries located within asingle physical building had been very innovative in itstime but now found it in a very different internet worldand lacking focus on a single strategic direction. Politicsbetween various sections of the library made it difficult

January 2009 59

to move the library’s purposes beyond a common graspof the glories of the past. The new library leadershipsought to examine new horizons and directions butfound only resistance. The scenario planning processcreated three things. Firstly, by embracing the univer-sity community in a very public dialogue, the librarystaff was drawn slightly out of defensive postures torecognise some need to change. It became clear that theuniversity community saw the library very differentlyto that of this well established staff and expressed theseviews strongly. Secondly, the scenario planning processdeveloped publicly (again) three viable scenarios for thefuture of the library. These futures were described notas futures which might be achieved but as differentfutures which had been realised in three years beyondthe present time. In this way these choices, to someextent, were stark choices which the university admin-istration and its library could choose to follow. Finally,by making this process very future-orientated and verypublic the community was empowered in a way inwhich it had never been engaged previously. Thisempowerment spoke loudly of the kind of digitalworld in which the library now found itself. It is clearthat the digital world enables the individual to changemuch in their environment. So, the engagement of thecommunity in making choices was, at once, risky in apolitical sense but powerful in that through the process,the community felt that it was able to influence thedirection of its library.

This Library embraced, at the end of this process, ascenario which was titled ‘The Learning Village’. Thisvery public articulation of a direction had been agreedto by the community and the administration. Libraryworking groups went about the tasks of defining whatthese changes would mean. They described the effectwhich these changes would have on the staff that wouldbe required to implement this new vision. The processhad achieved much but, as much as a shirt worn insideout gives the viewer a very different view of the wearer,so it was for the library staff that had their views of thelibrary turned inside out.

A Large Consortium OrganizationThis large consortium had a long and illustrious

history over many decades. It was held in the highest ofrespect. It was led very ably and effectively. It had astrong financial position but there were imminentpressures on the revenue flows into the organisationwhich was causing instability amongst the staff. Theviability of their positions was obvious to all. Themember organisations, and there were many in differ-ent library sectors, still felt very loyal to and comfor-table with the consortium. The scenario planningprocess here was to deal with members who werelibraries and who had intimate knowledge of thepressures within the publishing and informationindustry. The directors and CEO of the consortiumhowever recognized that the business of the consor-tium would not continue the way in which it hadsuccessfully over previous years. The range of businessofferings would have to alter; they would have todiversify; they would have modified and programs or

60 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

products would have to be developed even before thelibrary community may have expressed a need forthem. Some programs may have to disappear as well. Inthis environment, the leaders of this organisation weredealing with a community who were very knowledge-able in the same industry yet their focus as members ofthe organisation was different. They were primarilyfocused on their own individual operations and hadlittle time to focus on what could or indeed should beoffered to them from their partner which was theconsortium organisation.

In this situation, the directors engaged in the creationof a series of scenarios which described different futuresfor the organisation. These futures were debatedextensively internally and then were taken to themembers via a road show. The scenarios enabled theorganization to begin a conversation about what theorganisation would become if certain decisions weremade. These conversations also made it clear thatchoices had to be made; this was the imperative. If onescenario was chosen then the organisation would bealtered into a new existence with particular sets ofservice offerings and value to the members. If anotherscenario were chosen then it could be seenwhat type oforganisation would be realised in three to 5 years. Thepower to the directors of this organisation was not thatthey were consulting their members but that they wereconfronting the members with stark choices andpossibilities. The leadership of the organisation wasable to seriously engage the members in what might bein store for the member libraries as much as whatwould be the future of the Consortium. It was clear thatthe futures of the members and the consortiumorganisation were inextricably linked; but their futureswould be stronger for common purpose with sharpbusiness decisions. The business model was changingfrom what had been in existence for many years.Emerging business models needed to be understoodby the members and the consortium if both were tosurvive and indeed thrive.

A Library Situation in AsiaThe Hong Kong Polytechnic University is the largest

publicly-funded tertiary institution in Hong Kong interms of number of students, with 26,000 full-time andpart-time students (or 15,116 FTE) and an academic staffpopulation of 1128 FTE. It is an institution which isquickly evolving from one with a strong focus onexcellence in teaching to that with a dual purpose ofteaching and research. As such it is an institution intransition. This transition is in a higher education envi-ronment which is competitive within Hong Kong butincreasingly within the wider context of the fast dev-eloping Mainland Chinese institutions. Further institu-tional pressures are to improve its position in the globalrankings of institutions. These pressures create a varietyof opportunities anddifficulties for any library ordinarilybut more so when considering the changes which alllibraries are going through in the new digital environ-ment. The Polytechnic University Library was dealingwith this situation in three languages, English, Canto-nese and Putonghua. The situation in which this well

managed, staffed and resourced library was operatingwas complex. It needed to set new directions; it neededto determine its futurewith clarity; it needed to do all ofthis while bringing its user communities and senioruniversity academics along on the journey. The librarystaff would always be the key change agents.

The management of the Library understood the chal-lenges facing them and elected to engage in a scenarioplanning process for a number of reasons. Firstly, thelibrary wanted to engage the university community inchoosing the options and directions for the future. Manychanges were confronting the University was crucialthat the University Management understood the oppor-tunities focusing themwith regard to the positioning oftheir library.

Secondly, the Library had been well managed with along-standing management team. Early in 2007, theprevious Librarian retired after 34 successful years inthe position. Many of the staff had been with him formuch of this period.With a new Librarian in place it wasfelt important at one level to validate where the librarywas strategically but also to test the community and thewider environment as to where the library could be.

Thirdly, the scenario planning process was an ex-cellent opportunity to meet with the library’s commu-nity to present the issues which confronted the libraryand also to explore the pressures within the academicand student communities. It was hoped to gain a clearerunderstanding on both sides of what was desirable andwhat was achievable.

Fourthly, it was hoped that this process would in-volve all the library staff and create in this group ofnearly 160 persons understanding of the library’s posi-tion and the need to explore change. It was hoped toenlist all these people as agents of change as the processprogressed.

Hong Kong Polytechnic University Library ProcessThe Management Team in the Library established a

Scenario PlanningWorking Group (SPWG)who handledall aspects of the process. They initially worked them-selves through the process so that they more clearlyunderstood what they were about to embark on. Thisinvolved reading and conducting mock exercises onhow the process could and should be conducted. It wasdecided to involve every single member of the librarystaff in the under process. This was considered essentialso that each staff member would have been exposed tothe thinking about the future of their library. It wasfurther decided to involve as many of the Universityadministration, and the wider academic and studentcommunities. The workload would be significant but itwas believed that this investment in time and energywould be worthwhile. It has to be realised that no suchprocess had been conducted here before althoughthe library is very well positioned in terms of its qualityprocesses.

One of the first tasks for the SPWG was to investigatetrends in libraries, publishing and higher education.Reports were prepared on the findings. The results ofthese analyses were used as the backbone for the sub-sequent presentations serving to stimulate discussion

and input in the various Focus Groups. Focus groupswere initially established for the professional staffand then a number of sessions for all the general gradestaffs. It was considered important to conduct thegeneral grade sessions in Cantonese to enable staff tocommunicate and express themselves most naturally.The professional staff sessions and all other sessionswere all conducted in English. All output was translatedand presented in English.

There was significant debate as to how to best andefficiently ‘talk’ to the academic community. It waseventually decided to establish two expert groups. Thetwo groups were the Expert Academic ResearcherGroup and the other was the Expert Academic TeachingGroup. Notable staff from across the campus wereinvited to participate in these groups. This includedboth senior and high profile staff. The invitations werenot considered to be representative of the variousFaculties but a strong effort wasmade to involve as widea group as possible. Focus Groups were also conductedwith students, undergraduate and post-graduate. All inall, there were four of these serious. The Vice-Presidentsresponsible for these areas were also invited andattended. These Focus Groups happened over a numberof busy weeks for the library and the university. All ofthe input from each and every group was recorded andshared both with the group and also with the SPWG.The input data would eventually form a very importantcomponent to the process, validating a number of thekey directional decisions.

The ultimate step in the process was the actualScenario Construction Workshop. This was the impor-tant workshop to work through all the input data, toestablish or recognise trends and opportunities and toexplore probable or possible futures. The workshop wasaiming to create at least three different futures whichwould come to fruition in 2011. There was a specificdirection for the participant not toworry about practicalconcerns which might stand in the way of exploringthese options. The workshop was allowed the liberty ofexploring the ‘explored’ or the ‘too easily dismissed’options. The Workshop membership had some overlapwith the previous Focus Groups but, for the most part,was comprised of university staff new to the process.Not only did the workshop have Vice-Presidents andDeans attending but some of the newest, brightest andinnovative thinkers on campus. They were attracted notonly by their interest in the library but also in theircuriosity about the process.

Scenario ConstructionThe workshop was led by one of the authors of this

paper. The process will not be fully described here. Theoutcomes were three scenarios adjudged by theparticipants to represent their view of what the Librarymight develop into. Each scenario was different to theothers in nature or in purpose. They represented diffe-rent choices or destinations which the university andthe library had to choose between. They were clearchoices as to potential futures. The important reflectionon the resulting scenarios was that if they were to be

January 2009 61

achieved there was a lot of work to be done to achievethem.

“. . .the [Scenario Planning Working Group]decided to work on fleshing out the threescenarios into coherent descriptions in

words of what those futures might look like“The first was termed ‘The Learning Hub’”

The second scenario was termed“Mungabooreena ‘Meeting Place’”

“The third scenario was termed From“Wal-Mart” to “Stanley’”.

At this stage of the process, the SPWG decided towork on fleshing out the three scenarios into coherentdescriptions in words of what those futures might looklike. Each of the scenarios were prepared and writtenover an A4 page or more. They were edited and refinedby the SPWG. Each of the scenarios was given a title.

The first was termed ‘The Learning Hub’. This hadsome of the following characteristics:

• Books co-exist with digital resources

• Change of traditional library functions

• Place for entertainment and relaxation

• Informal discussion place with the spark of ideas

• Virtual Librarian

• Librarians still important with changed role

• Need more human touch

The second scenario was termed ‘Mungabooreena‘Meeting Place’’. This had some of the followingcharacteristics:

• Carbon-neutral library

• One big night club

• Wireless everywhere

• Everybody’s library

• More push for information

• Library teaches, university teaches

• Mungabooreena (Aboriginal for meeting place ofpeople and minds)

• A cultural/learning environment

• Meets whole person development

• Artistic sensibility

62 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

The third scenario was termed From ‘‘Wal-Mart’ to‘Stanley’’. Walmart is to a supermarket which sells every-thing a consumer might ever require while ‘Stanley’ is apeople’s market in Hong Kong where more specialisedand locally produced goods are available and prized. Thishad some of the following characteristics:

• Boutique ‘Libraries’ under the one roof

• Private and public

• Librarians as curators

• Library as a bookshop

• User-initiated purchase public spaces are integrated

• Organised thematically

• Changing the boundaries

• Serving user groups differently

The SPWG then debated as to how best to proceedfrom here. It had been planned to take all threescenarios out to as many departments and facultieswith whom meetings of academic staff could beorganized. It had been planned to draw comments onthe three scenarios and then to produce the finalscenario. After a great deal of discussion it was decidedto use the input gained from the various focus groupsand the Workshop in validating the shape of the DraftPreferred Library Scenario. This Draft Preferred LibraryScenario was constructed by the SPWG from all theinput available to it. This scenario is attached as anappendix to this article.

The Preferred Library Scenario was distributed to alldepartments, and Faculties. The University Librarian anddifferent library staff accompanied him to discuss witheach Faculty the impact of the scenario on the need andplanning outlooks for those academic units. These dis-cussions elicited much discussion, service opportunitiesand thoughts. It also revealed a very different side of thelibrary to the academic community. The process was avery positive experience.

“It became clear that there were nine keyelements which described the nature anddistinguishing features of the envisaged

future for the library. These features aroseout of the scenario.”

Characteristics of the Preferred Library ScenarioThe Preferred Scenario has a number of character-

istics which help define its strategic impact. It becameclear that therewere nine keyelementswhich describedthe nature and distinguishing features of the envisaged

future for the library. These features arose out of thescenario rather than creating it. These elements are:

Everywhere: Library resources and services availableanywhere and everywhere

Outreach: Outreach activities extended both in depthand breadth to the university community

Social Space: Create comfortable and dynamic spaceconducive to problem-based learning, discussion andinteraction between users

Digital Lives: Create ‘Facebook’ site for informationsearching and social exchanges

Sustainable: ‘Reduce, Reuse, Recycle’, Library as theleader in environmental-friendly movement

Research involvement: Close collaboration with re-searchers. Develop andmaintain an institutional repo-sitory preserving the University’s research output.

Avatar Librarians: Tri-lingual Librarians providing ins-tant help on library information and resources onscreens

Print value: Strong contribution to JURA (Joint Uni-versity Research Archive). Readily accessible to HongKong academics

Integral Contribution: The LEARNING HUB Librarymeets the University’s teaching, research and learn-ing needs.

The elements give a simple but sharp guide to thoseareas which require strategic policy formulation andaction. The element Everywhere, for instance, is verysuccessfully driving the Library’s insistence that theUniversity’s internet security systems for off-campusaccess to the library’s content resources be friendly foraccess and delivery. At this time, the access requires aclunky client to be installed before any access is pos-sible at all. Even then it does not allow seamless andfruitful access to the Library’s plentiful electronic con-tent and wide range of services. The high level scenariodirection has focused attention and action where it wasneeded.

Images into ActionsHaving realized Preferred Library Scenario, a word

image or images of the future library began to settle inthe minds of the University and Library. In order toachieve this future; in order to be able to translate theimages into actions, the strategic actions or plans had tobe articulated. The University Library was in effect nowestablishing its strategic plan. A retreat was organisedfor all the professional staff and all the supervisory staff.The images were being turned onto the path to reality.The aimwas to achieve this scenario as a target in threeyears time. The retreat itself generated five workinggroups who were charged with creating the actions andthe accountabilities. They drew inspiration for many ofthese actions from the voluminous material and input

which had been gained through the focus groups andother reactions from the library’s clients. The workinggroups focused on Learning and Teaching, ResearchEnhancement, Collection Re-design, Physical space, andCommunication and Promotion.

“Having realized Preferred Library Scenario,a word image or images of the future

library began to settle in the minds of theUniversity and Library.”

CONCLUSION

The best future for any academic library will always beachieved through good planning. Planning in times ofrapid social, cultural and technological change howeverneeds tougher tools and perspectives in order to allowfor greater degrees of success.

The future in this described process is not about whatthe future might or will be. It is about what it is! Threeyears away. In doing this the Preferred Scenario can beagreed to by a community, a University Administrationand delivered with well constructed strategic plans.

This process is enabling the Hong Kong PolytechnicUniversity Library to establish plans to deal with budgettargets for specific areas; collection re-design pro-files; building renovations; profiles and skill require-ments for the future staff; and technology deliverables.There are many others but the Preferred Library Scena-rio is not only an excellent marketing document butalso an ambitious but achievable University Library forthe Future!

APPENDIX A. SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

Supplementary data associated with this article can befound, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2008.11.001.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1.Marshall McLuhan, “Marshall McLuhan Quotes.” (February7, 2008). Available: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/marshall_mcluhan.html (accessed February 7,2008).

2. OCLC: Online Computer Library Center, “Perceptions of Lib-raries and Information Resources.” (2005) (April 23, 2008).Available: http://www.oclc.org/reports/2005perceptions.htm (accessed April 23, 2008).

3. Jonathan Star, “Growth scenarios: tools to resolve leaders’denial and paralysis.” Strategy & Leadership 35 (2007) (2),pp. 56–59.

4. George Wright, et al., “Scenario planning interventions inorganizations: An analysis of the causes of success andfailure.” Futures 40 (2008) (3), pp. 218–236.

5. Pierre Wack, “Scenarios: shooting the rapids.” HarvardBusiness Review 63 (1985) (6), pp. 139–150.

6. P. Cornelius, A. Van de Putte and M. Romani, “Threedecades of scenario planning in Shell.” California Manage-ment Review 48 (2005) (1), pp. 92–109.

7. Bill Weinstein, “Scenario planning: current state of the art.”Henley Manager Update 18 (2007) (3), pp. 1–8.

January 2009 63

8. Thomas J. Chermack, “Scenario planning: human resourcedevelopment’s strategic learning tool.” Advances in Devel-oping Human Resources 10 (2008) (2), pp. 129–146.

9. Russell F. Korte and Thomas J. Chermack, “Changing orga-nizational culture with scenario planning.” Futures 39(2007) (6), pp. 645–656.

10. Ron Bradfield, George Wright, George Burt, George Cairnsand Kees Van Der Heijden, “The origins and evolutionof scenario techniques in long range business planning.”Futures 37 (2005) (8), pp. 795–812.

11.Mats Lindgren and Hans Bandhold, “Scenario planning: thelink between future and strategy.” Macmillan. Palgrave,(2005).

12. Joan Giesecke, “Scenario planning for libraries.” AmericanLibrary Association, (1998).

13. Joe Willmore, “Scenario planning: creating strategy foruncertain times.” InformationOutlook5 (2001) (9), pp. 22–28.

14. Steven J. Bell, “Using the scenario approach for achiev-ing sustainable development in academic libraries.” (1999)(April 8, 2008). Available: http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlevents/bell99.pdf (accessed April 8, 2008).

15. Stuart Hannabuss, “Scenario planning for libraries.” LibraryManagement 22 (2001) (4/5), pp. 168–176.

16. Leanne Richards, John O’ Shea and Michael Connolly,

64 The Journal of Academic Librarianship

“Managing the concept of strategic change within a highereducation institution: the role of strategic and scenarioplanning techniques.” Strategic Change 13 (2004) (7), pp.345–359.

17. Steve O’Connor, Leonie Blair and Brenda McConchie,“Scenario planning for a library future.” Australian LibraryJournal 46 (1997) (2), pp. 186–194.

18. Andrew Wells, “A prototype twenty-first century universitylibrary.” Library Management 28 (2007) (8/9), pp. 450–459.

19. Joan Giesecke, “Scenario planning and collection develop-ment.” Journal of Library Administration 28 (1999) (1), pp. 81–92.

20.Michael Kristiansson, “Strategic reflexive conversation: anew theoretical-practice field within LIS.” InformationResearch 12 (2007) (4). Available: http://informationr.net/ir/12-4/colis/colis18.html (accessed April 23, 2008).

21. Diana Scearce and Katherine Fulton, "What IF? The art ofscenario thinking for nonprofits." Global Business Network,(2004). Available: http://www.gbn.com/ArticleDisplayServlet.srv?aid=32655 (accessed April 23, 2008).

22. Lawrence Wilkinson, “Scenarios: the future of the future.”Wired Magazine (1995) Special edition.

23. Rick Lugg, “I user: Task-based strategic planning: changinglibraries through workflow analysis.” Against the grain 16(2004) (5), pp. 84–86.