Recap: AALL Leadership Academy

By Alyson Drake

Earlier this month, I was fortunate enough to attend the AALL Leadership Academy in Chicago, IL.  Librarians from all over the country attended; the only requirement for those applying for the Academy was that they were in the first ten years of their career in law librarianship.  On the agenda:  how to communicate with those with differing communication styles, how to have difficult conversations, and how to motivate those around you—all skills that can be helpful no matter what type of law librarian we are.

Here are the top five lessons that I walked away with:

  • Be Direct. Address issues in a way that guarantees it won’t come up again.  Make sure that you are defining what the real issue is.  When the solution doesn’t get the results you expect or you’re constantly addressing the same issue, you likely haven’t defined the real issue.  Practice CPR.  The first time you discuss an issue, talk about content—this is the single event that just happened.  The second time, talk about pattern—note that it has happened before, that you previously discussed it, and that you had agreed it wouldn’t happen again.  Should the problem continue, talk about relationship—that you cannot count on the person to keep his or her word.  In each of these discussions, explain the consequences to you, to the organization, to the other members of your team, but be concise, not longwinded.
  • Select your values and rank them. Are you most concerned with being authentic?  With being efficient?  Once you identify them, rank them.  You are always going to be faced with decisions where values conflict; if you don’t rank them ahead of time, you just get to choose which is most important to you at any given time.  This can cause a lack of clarity, because you can be inconsistent.
  • Ethical leadership is aligning your values (internal) with how you act (external). Make sure that what you say and how you said it and how you do it all match.
  • Most important rules of motivation: people do what they want to do and they won’t change unless there’s a benefit to them to do so. Motivation comes from within.  Make them think that they’ll succeed and they’ll try.  If they don’t think they’ll succeed, they won’t even give it a shot.  Fifty percent of people are disengaged or highly disengaged.  Being valued and being appreciated are the top motivators for employees—even more so than money.  When a manager focuses on an individual’s strengths, the chances of being actively disengaged is 1%. It’s exhausting to give it all at work; it’s discretionary energy!  So, to get it, you need to motivate and give feedback and encouragement.
  • Hold people responsible for their performance and actions. Be clear with your expectations and follow up.  Don’t reward a bad job by giving an individual less work or punish good workers by always giving them the hard jobs.  If someone doesn’t do something right, give it back to them and explain what the problem is, so they know how to fix it.  By allowing unmotivated workers to be mediocre, you are devaluing a good job.  Accountability is NOT negative.  In fact, holding people accountable is motivating.

Obviously, this is just a snippet of what was covered at the Leadership Academy.  I highly encourage you to apply in future, as one of the most motivating aspects of attending was being around a group of newer-to-the-profession librarians who all want to change the world and ensure that their libraries are collaborative, engaging places to work, teach, and learn.

adamsquote

It’s Time For Chicago!

Registration is now open for the 2016 AALL Annual Meeting and Conference in Chicago!  In addition to member-discounted pricing, deeply discounted registration rates are available for students and retirees. Nonmember conference registration packages also include a complimentary one-year AALL membership – by joining us in Chicago, you’ll be joining AALL as well!

The FCIL-SIS looks forward to welcoming all attendees to its 2016 Schaffer Grant for Foreign Law Librarians presentation, which will take place on Monday, July 18, from 4:30 p.m. until 5:30 p.m., in Hyatt-Columbus GH. This year’s recipient, Ms. Rheny Pulungan, is Liaison Support Librarian at the University of Melbourne’s Law School Library. As Liaison Support Librarian, she supplies reference services, teaches legal research workshops, and completes collection development projects. Ms. Pulungan holds a Ph.D and Masters degree in International Law from the University of Melbourne, and a Master of Information Studies in Librarianship from the University of Canberra. Previously, Ms. Pulungan received her Bachelor of Laws from Gadjah Mada University in Indonesia, and served as Law Faculty Lecturer at Bengkulu University, where she specialized in international law. Ms. Pulungan’s experience in both Indonesian and Australian law, as well as law librarianship, will be reflected in her presentation, which will treat comparatively access to legal information in both countries.

In addition to the Schaffer Grant presentation on July 18, the AALL Conference will feature the following FCIL-related programming:

Sunday, July 17th

4:00 p.m. – Asian Legal Information in English: Availability, Accessibility, and Quality Control

Tuesday, July 19

8:30 a.m. – Roman Law, Roman Order, and Restatements

11:00 a.m. – Vanishing Online? Legal and Policy Implications for Libraries of the EU’s “Right to be Forgotten”

The FCIL-SIS is also working with the American Society of International Law to co-sponsor a pre-conference workshop to be held on Saturday, July 16 at 9:30 a.m. ($50 additional registration fee applies.)  The workshop, which is entitled Two Sides to the United Nations: Working with Public and Private International Law at the UN, is designed to equip all law librarians with foundational knowledge of the United Nations and CISG (both of which have recent significant changes to their online databases), and to increase their fluency with the major U.N. and CISG documents, information, research resources, and strategies.

If you are presenting on an FCIL-related topic in Chicago and would like your program to be featured on DipLawMatic Dialogues, or if you are interested in blogging about the conference programs listed above, please contact blog administrators Susan Gualtier (susan.gualtier@law.lsu.edu) or Loren Turner (lturner@law.ufl.edu). We look forward to seeing you in Chicago this summer!

chicago-1363029814bzq

CAFLL-WestPac Recap: BIT by BIT: Researching Chinese Bilateral Investment Treaties

By: Barbara Swatt Engstrom

China Africa News

Introduction:

Seattle University Law Professor Won Kidane is originally from Ethiopia and has a strong background in China-Africa investment relations.  In 2012, he published China-Africa Dispute Settlement: The Law, Culture and Economics of Arbitration, which evaluated existing mechanisms of dispute resolution in China-Africa economic relations.  In subsequent years, he focused on a particular institution for international investment dispute resolution: the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).  In particular, he explored whether ICSID is an appropriate forum to handle the investment disputes stemming from an enormous increase in investment in Africa by China.  In analyzing the ICSID legitimacy debate, he created a framework to assess the suitability of ICSID arbitration for China–Africa investment dispute arbitration.  The outcome of this research project was his article: The China-Africa Factor in the Contemporary ICSID Legitimacy Debate.

As he was working on the project, Professor Kidane decided to delve more deeply into the bilateral treaties that provide the basis for the investment regime he was questioning.  He asked me to research and analyze all bilateral investment treaties (BITs) between China and African countries.

Background on Chinese BITs:

In order to do the analysis part of the project, I needed to get myself up to speed with BITs, generally, and Chinese BITs, in particular.  While BITs vary depending on the negotiating partners, countries use model BITs as starting points.  Historically, there are three generations of Chinese model BITs.  China’s first generation BITs (starting with its BIT with Sweden in 1982) are generally considered to be conservative.  They accord Most Favored Nation (MFN) status but not National Treatment (NT).  The availability of compensation for expropriation was recognized, but the legality of the expropriation was determined by local courts.  China’s second generation of BITs followed China’s accession to the ICSID convention in 1990.  In some of these BITs, the availability of investor access to ICSID arbitration was included but was often limited to the determination of the amount of compensation for expropriation.  The third and current model made both substantive and procedural changes. One of the most important substantive changes was the addition of National Treatment protection. The most important procedural change was unqualified access to international arbitration, including ICSID arbitration.

Research Strategies:

Once I had a very general understanding of Chinese BITs, I was able to much more effectively research and analyze the China Africa BITs for this project.  My main tips for researching BITs are as follows:

1) Start with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) International Investment Agreements Navigator.  This database will give you a fairly comprehensive idea of what is generally available.  It has information on signatory and ratification dates and provides many full text treaties.

2) Use Target Countries’ International Trade Ministries. The English language page of China’s Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) has a database of Chinese BITs.  They had the full text of several BITs that were not available via the International Investment Agreements Navigator.

3) Use Print Materials for Older BITs. One of the very best English books for any project involving Chinese BITs is Gallagher and Shan’s Chinese Investment Treaties.  In addition to having great analysis, there are reprints of several BITs in the Appendix.  This was the only place to find the Seychelles –China BIT.  Another very useful print resource, especially for older BITs, is the looseleaf set: Investment, Promotion and Protection Treaties.  This is where I found the China-Mali BIT. Research guides can also be very helpful in pointing you to print sources, as can running searches in the Google Books database.

4) Advanced & Deep Web Searching. Searching Google for BITs can often lead to frustration for a couple of reasons: 1) A basic Google search only crawls the very top layers of websites.  It won’t find anything buried.  The solution is to go directly to the target website and use their search tool to go deeper. 2) BIT is a generic term.  Although the titles vary, BITs generally have the terms “promotion and protection of investments” in them somewhere. It will help if you have model treaty language that you can track.  I also like to use the site search in Google. The advance Google search: Tanzania promotion protection investment site:mofcom.gov.cn brought up the Tanzania-China BIT which was not available in the MOFCOM Bilateral Investment Treaty database.

5) Contact Experts. While attending the ASIL conference in Washington, D.C., I stopped by the Law Library of Congress and met with several of their country specialists.  One of the China specialists found the China-Sierra Leone BIT tucked away in the AsianLII database – a place it had not occurred to me to look.

Additional Resources:

CAFLL-WestPac Recap: Continuing Education for Law Librarians and Demand-Driven Service Innovation in China

By Alex X. Zhang

CAFLLThis blog post highlights a panel discussion on two major and long-standing issues: continuing education for law librarians and demand-driven service innovation in law libraries. Both issues are important and deserve close attention in the law librarianship and legal information field. Michael Chiorazzi, Dean and Professor of Law at the Daniel Cracchiolo Law Library, University of Arizona Rogers College of Law, shared his insights on continuing education for law librarians. More specifically, he critiqued major formats and platforms that deliver continuing education content to users such as webinars, continuing education classes through colleges, workshops, networking events, etc. He emphasized the value of individual scholarship in continuing education and advocated for more sabbaticals for law librarians, claiming “they refresh and invigorate one’s enthusiasm for the profession.” He also shared his experience with managing the Law Library Fellowship program offered through the University of Arizona’s School of Information and experience teaching undergraduates legal research classes at the University of Arizona, which is the only law school in the United States that offers an undergraduate law degree. Continuing education is important in all professions and, needless to say, is necessary and essential for law librarians. Unfortunately, there has not been much discussion on what works and what does not work for the law librarians. Dean Chiorazzi’s talk challenged us to think more in depth of the topic, or in his own words, “how do we know what we need to know?”

Dr. Liu Ming, Associate Director of the Law Library of Renmin University of China, tackled an equally important problem in the law librarianship field, which is demand-driven service innovation in China. Dr. Liu Ming took a new angle and introduced us a new perspective looking at the issue that has otherwise been extensively discussed. She employed KANO theory to examine the user demands in Chinese Law Libraries and how Law Libraries in China have tried to meet user needs in three different levels. The KANO model was first introduced by Professor Noriaki Kano of Tokyo Rika University. The model was based on the valid assumption that customer needs are constantly changing and the question becomes how to meet patron’s ever-changing demands. Dr. Liu summarized demands of Chinese law library patrons under three levels: basic needs, performance and excitement demands. She argued that currently, most Chinese academic law libraries meet the basic needs of library patron, but need to further enhance the user satisfaction and promote the law libraries’ status as a legal information center as opposed to a place to collect and house books.