馆员合作研究中馆员多样性的考察与分析——基于南京农业大学图书馆的案例分析

Librarians’ Diversity in the Collaboration:A Case Study of Nanjing Agricultural University Library

[目的／意义]馆员多样性和团队合作是美国ClimateQUAL^TM组织氛围测评中的两个重要指标，但二者的关系还没有被详尽研究。本文利用近10年南京农业大学图书馆科研合作数据，深度分析馆员合作中所体现的馆员多样性，为进一步了解图书馆组织氛围的相关特征提供依据。[方法／过程]利用馆员及其年龄、职称、学历、学科背景、岗位等馆员属性信息，将这些馆员划分成不同的类别，计算辛普森指数（simpson）和熵值（entropy），并依此来测度科研合作中的馆员多样性，绘制合作结构图来显示科研合作的状态。[结果／结论]将馆员个体作为多样性计算中的类别，辛普森指数为0．994，熵值为0．6。按馆员年龄、职称、学历、学科背景、岗位等属性划分类别，辛普森指数处于0．82—0．997之间，熵值处于0．59—0．89之间，高辛普森指数和高熵值表明不同层次的馆员都参与了科学合作，但合作不是很集中。对一定合作强度所形成的网络结构的分析也发现，合作还处于相对比较松散的状态，没有形成固定的合作团队。高学历和高职称馆员是图书馆科研产出的重要力量，虽然馆员学科背景广泛，但图情学科背景仍是南京农业大学图书馆科研产出的重要因素。

[Purpose/significance ] Librarians＇ diversity and teamwork are two important scales of ClimateQUALTM. The relation between the two scales has not yet thoroughly investigated. The paper uses the collaboration in the publications of the librarians of Nanjing Agricultural University library during the past 10 years to analyze Librarians＇ diversity in their collaboration. This analysis will provide evidence for the promotion of organization climate in libraries. [Method/ process] The paper catalogs the librarians and their attributions such as age, professional titles, educational background, discipline background, position, etc. , and then calculates the Simpson index and Entropy to measure the diversity of librarians. It draws the collaboration network to demonstrate the state of collaboration. [ Result/conclusion] Using librarians as catalogues, Simpson index is 0. 994, and the entropy is 0. 6. Using the attributions of the librarians to catalog, the collaborators＇ Simpson indices are between 0. 82 and 0. 997, and entropies are between 0. 59 and 0. 89. The values of Simpson index are very high, while the entropy is relative low but is still larger than 0. 59. The higher diversity may indicate the collaborations have conducted within different catalogues of the librarians but have not yet focused. The paper constructs the collaborative network and analyzes the strong links. It is found that the collaboration is still relatively loose, and the strong team has not been formed. Librarians with high education and high title are the important power to improve to performance of scientific collaboration. Although the subject backgrounds of librarians is wide, the library and information science is still the important factor to promote the output of research.