An Information Seeking and Using Process Model in the Workplace: a Constructivist Approach
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
An information seeking and using process model in the workplace: a constructivist approach Author: Wai-yi, Bonnie Cheuk Source: Asian Libraries 7, no. 12 (1998): p. 375 ISSN: 1017-6748 Number: 115725063 Copyright: Copyright MCB UP Limited (MCB) 1998
Bonnie Cheuk Wai-yi: Nanyang Technological University, Singapore ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The author would like to thank Brenda Dervin, Mark Hepworth and Roderick Cave for their comments on the draft of this paper. Introduction The research question addressed in this paper is: "what kind of process do people in the workplace go through in order to seek and use information effectively?" Answers to this question led to the development of an information seeking and using process model in the workplace, which is presented here. It is a non- linear model with the flexibility to be applied in different workplace situations. The findings highlight the unpredictable and individualistic nature of information seeking and use; they indicate the need to develop models to systematise uncertainty and allow for prediction. The model has implications for information literacy education, information systems design and information management in the workplace. To address the research question, the author conducted an in-depth case study of auditors. Eight auditors were interviewed to find out their experience in seeking and using information to complete "audit assignments". Auditors were chosen because they are "knowledge workers" who need to collect, use and evaluate a huge amount of data/figures/evidence/information to complete their work. This paper presents part of the findings from a research project that also investigates other information-intensive professionals working in the South East Asian region, such as engineers and architects. Having the competence to use information effectively (i.e. information literacy) has been suggested by business gurus as essential to increase organisational competitiveness and profitability (Drucker, 1994; Grainger, 1994; Senge, 1994). However, most research on information literacy has focused on the academic and educational environment (Bjorner, 1991; Breivik and Gee, 1989; Bruce, 1996; Irving, 1986; Kirk, 1986; Kuhlthau, 1993; Rader, 1990). There has been limited research on how practitioners use information effectively at work (Leckie et al., 1996). Researchers who have focused on the workplace have looked mainly into specific areas such as the use and choice of information channels and sources (Bystrom and Jarvelin, 1994; Tiamiyu, 1992), system design (Rouse and Rouse, 1984) and product innovation (Court, 1997). In the academic environment, information literacy is commonly defined as "the ability to access, use and evaluate information from a variety of sources" (ALA, 1989). A literature review of the field of information and library science shows that no formal definition of information literacy has been derived from the workplace. Bruce's research, which focused on higher educators, could be considered as an attempt to study the workplace, even though it is restricted to an academic and research environment. She identified seven aspects of information literacy (Bruce, 1996, 1997). These have been adopted as the generic definition of information literacy in this paper. According to her definition, information literacy is: - (1) the use of information technology; - (2) the use of information sources; - (3) executing a process; - (4) controlling information for retrieval; - (5) gaining knowledge; - (6) extending knowledge; and - (7) gaining wisdom (Bruce 1996). However, in this research only one of the seven aspects of information literacy - executing a process - is studied in detail. Information literacy process models In the past decade various information literacy process models (also referred to as "information seeking and using process models") have been developed to serve different purposes. They all stressed that, to use information effectively (i.e. to be information literate), there is a need to execute successfully an information search and use process. These models are referred to by a number of different names. Examples in the educational and library environment include: information problem-solving model (Eisenberg and Berkowitz, 1990); information skills model (Irving, 1986; Marland, 1981); information seeking process model (Kuhlthau, 1993); information metacourse (Bjorner, 1991); model of information process for PhD history students (Cole, 1997); owns library research heuristic model (Ury et al., 1997). Examples in the workplace and general environment include: information seeking process model (Wilson, 1981); behavioural model for information retrieval system design (Ellis, 1989); sense-making approach to information seeking (Dervin, 1983, 1992); information seeking model in the workplace (Leckie et al., 1996). This research into the information literacy process in the workplace is essential because: - (1) Limited research on information literacy has been conducted in non-academic workplaces. Studies of scientists and engineers (Gralewska-Vickery, 1976; King et al., 1994; Pinelli et al., 1991) emphasised research and development tasks rather than practical tasks. There have also been calls to study other professions such as clergy, accountants, administrators (Leckie et al., 1996). - (2) Much existing research on information literacy is prescriptive and focused on soliciting experts' views (Doyle, 1994), although some user-oriented studies have appeared in the past 15-20 years (Bruce, 1996; Dervin and Nilan, 1986; Doyle, 1996; Kemp, 1990; Todd, 1996). - (3) Many information literacy process models use a behavioural approach to identify stages of the process (Doyle, 1992; Eisenberg and Berkowitz, 1990). They aim at using observable behaviour and information skills to identify stages of information seeking and use. A constructivist approach to information literacy research, which focuses on people's cognitive structures when seeking and using information, has appeared (Cole, 1997; Dervin, 1992; Kuhlthau, 1993) but has yet to be fully developed. This paper develops an information literacy process model (referred to as "information seeking and using process model in the workplace") by: - (1) studying how auditors seek and use information to complete their practical audit assignments; - (2) using information users' perspectives (i.e. auditors as information users); and - (3) adopting a "constructivist" approach to study information literacy in the workplace. Using a constructive approach to derive an information literacy process model Although correlations have been drawn between demographic factors (such as occupation, educational level) and people's choice of information sources (Chen and Hernon, 1982), little research has been done to explain the correlation. One of the reasons, as pointed out by Kuhlthau (1993, p. 9), is that "an information search is a learning process in which choices along the way are dependent on personal constructs rather than on one universal predictable search for everyone". To study the information seeking and using process of auditors, the author chose a constructivist approach. In this study information is not seen as something "objective" or "external" to information users, nor does it have the same meaning for all people. In different situations auditors referred to information as data, facts, opinions, reports, comments, etc. and they applied different information skills and behaviour to obtain the "information" they needed. If information lacks an objective definition applicable in all situations, this implies that different people are seeking and using different objects. This poses a problem for a model of the information seeking and using process in the workplace. To solve this paradox, Dervin's sense-making assumptions were adopted. Dervin suggested that people are able to construct a temporary ordered reality when they perceive that they are facing a situation in a particular time and space, and this reality will guide their behaviour (Dervin, 1994). However, in another time and space, when this same person perceives that he is in a different situation, he will behave differently. Dervin suggested a situation - gap - help sense-making triangle as a metaphor of the process of information seeking and use. This tri7, no. 12 (1998): p. 375angle starts with Belkin's ASK theory (Belkin, 1980; Belkin et al., 1982a,b). When people perceive that they are facing a certain situation in which, because of their limited knowledge, they cannot complete or achieve their tasks, Dervin calls this "a gap" (Dervin, 1992). People cannot easily express what they do not know and what they need to answer their queries. To "muddle through" the uncertainty, they need to develop appropriate strategies and get help, i.e. get answers to the questions. If we accept that when people perceive situations in similar ways, they think, behave and apply strategies in similar ways, then the traditional behavioural models of information seeking (which focus on different stages in people's information seeking behaviour, regardless of the situations people perceive they are in) have to give way to an alternative approach that focuses on information users' perceived situations at a particular time and place. Therefore, the author decided not to use static criteria such as types of information sources used and types of information behaviour (e.g. location and access information, organising information, synthesising information) to identify stages of information seeking and use in the workplace. Instead, the author investigated the different situations that auditors perceived they were in, and used them as a guide to identify a dynamic information seeking and using process in the workplace. Thus it is possible to make predictions by correlating how auditors perceived their particular situation, their information behaviour, choice of information sources, etc. Auditors' work roles and tasks Using the assumptions and hypothesis discussed above, the author studied auditors working in Singapore. When auditors receive an audit assignment, their job is "...to ensure that internal controls in the company are in place and adequate, and that established company policies are being followed, and no frauds are taking place". The questions they have in mind are: "What could go wrong with the audited entities? Is the company management doing a good job?" Research methodology Since information seeking and use could be an ongoing process throughout a person's life, in this study the scope was limited from the time when auditors received an audit assignment to the time when they completed this particular task. The constructive process of how they seek and use information, and the situations they perceived they were facing during the process, were the focus of this study. Qualitative research methods were used, and an information user's perspective rather than an information professional's perspective was adopted. The primary data collection methodology was in-depth interviews with eight auditors. The aim was to encourage them to share real-life descriptions of how they complete audit assignments. Although the exact wording of the questions depended on the flow of each interview, the main questions aimed at asking participants: - (1) What questions flash through your mind in the course of completing an assignment? - (2) What strategies do you use to get answers to your questions? Why? - (3) What problems do you have in getting answers? - (4) How does each answer help (or not help) you to move on to complete the audit assignment? These questions were informed by Dervin's (1983) Micro-Moment Time-Line Interview, which she suggested in applying the sense-making approach for studying people. The 90-minute interviews were conducted using a highly unstructured format. Participants were encouraged to talk about their work in no specific order. The researcher noted the main stages they went through to complete their work. This was used as a guide to follow-up questions on the situations, gaps and help in each stage of their work. The interview dialogues were recorded, transcribed and analysed using the qualitative data analysis software package NUDIST. The researcher first read each transcript and singled out all situations that auditors faced in different stages of their work. The order of the situations was then reorganised according to sequence of occurrence. The researcher read in detail the situations auditors face from the beginning to the end of a job. The interviewees' critically different ways of perceiving situations (which implies having critically different types of questions in mind) were used to identify different stages of information seeking and use. Any stage ended when the critical questions which participants had at the beginning of that stage were satisfactorily answered. During the data collection and analysis process, the researcher had to remain open and avoid analysing data based on prior understanding of the subject, to ensure the trustworthiness of the outcome. An information seeking and use process model The dynamic information seeking and using process model presented here consists of seven critically different situations that auditors perceived they experienced in seeking and using information: - (1) task initiating situation; - (2) focus formulating situation; - (3) idea assuming situation; - (4) idea rejecting situation; - (5) idea confirming situation; - (6) idea finalising situation; - (7) passing on idea situation. From the data gathered it could be seen that auditors moved from one situation to another in multidirectional ways. There was no specific sequential order for auditors to move from one situation to another. The reason, as explained by the auditors, "depended on the situation"; decisions were made on a case-by-case basis. The following section provides an example of an information seeking and using process. It is an exceptionally smooth five-stage process, consisting of the seven critically different perceived situations. Stage 1: Task initiating situation. Stage 2: Focus formulating situation. Stage 3: Ideas forming situations. Stage 3.1 Ideas assuming situation. Stage 3.2 Ideas confirming situation. Stage 3.3 Ideas rejecting situation. Stage 4: Ideas finalising situation. Stage 5: Passing on ideas situation. Stage 1: task initiating situation In stage 1 an audit assignment was assigned to an auditor. Auditors perceived that they were in the "task initiation situation"; they were starting a new assignment. They were informed which entity was to be audited. They recognised that their role was to make sure that no fraud had been taking place in the audited entities, and that established company policies were being followed. They recognised that the final product of this assignment was to produce an audit report giving their comments on the management of this entity and suggesting areas for improvement. This situation was preparatory to the later information seeking and use process. Stage 2: focus formulating situation Once audit assignments were handed over to the auditors, they, using categories identified in previous sense-making research (Dervin, 1983), all perceived the situation as having "ability to deal with" the job. They were in a "focus formulating situation" where they needed to decide which specific business area to examine in detail. Three main questions came to mind (or the gaps they perceived they needed to fill): - (1) What is the nature of this client's business? - (2) What is the overall market condition of this client's business? - (3) Which area of the business or accounts should I focus on? These questions were broad and general; there was no specific answer. To find the answers, auditors had little difficulty in getting the information they needed, especially when some essential information (financial statements, company information) was provided by managers and their clients. However, auditors mentioned use of a variety of general information sources (libraries, newspapers, the Internet, talking to colleagues). They also stressed the advantage of having industry and market knowledge at this stage. This stage ended when their questions were answered. That is, auditors had a rough idea of the client's business and were able to decide which special business area of the audited entity to examine. At the end of this stage they wrote an audit planning memorandum, including the objective and focus of the audit, what information they needed to gather, whom they would talk to, as well as setting the deadline. This provided a flexible guideline for them in the field. As pointed out by one auditor: "the management reports are not complete. They do not tell you the full picture - it's hard to put the picture of the whole operation together. But we do know that we can sort this out when we go down to the field." Stage 3: ideas forming situation There were several possibilities for the auditors at this stage: "ideas assuming situation", "ideas confirming situation" and "ideas rejecting situation". In each of these their questions changed. Substage 1: ideas assuming situation. When auditors perceived that they were in an "ideas assuming situation", they began to collect information in the focus area, aiming to build up an idea of how the business was managed in that particular area. For example, auditors may have decided to focus on collection activities; at this stage they tried to come up with an idea (or comment) on whether the audited entity had done enough collection activities. The question (or gaps) they had in mind was: how good is the client's internal control in this focus area (e.g. in collection activities)? Auditors had to build up an idea of how well the audited entity was doing by getting information from people. They talked to those in charge of accounts, accounts assistance, and if they had any problems, they proceeded to more senior staff. Characteristics noted at this stage included: - (1) if the auditor was not familiar with the audit entity, the choice of whom to talk to from a group of accountants was based on trial and error; - (2) past experience helped a great deal in deciding which information source to use or whom to talk to; - (3) auditors accepted what people told them first and confirmed it later; at this stage they were information takers, and evaluation of the quality of information was relatively less critical. Auditors moved away from the situation when they had formed an idea of how well the client was doing in the focus area. In this example they moved to the following substage. Substage 2: ideas confirming situation. When auditors perceived that they were in an "ideas confirming situation", they realised that they could not stop there. They sought third party confirmation so that the risk of concluding with a wrong idea or comment was minimal. They perceived the situation as "moving", and they had the "ability to deal with" it. Their questions changed from open-ended to closed as follows: - (1) this client seems to be doing very well in this area, am I right?; or - (2) this client seems to be doing very badly in this area, am I right? To confirm the idea, auditors: - (1) looked for the same piece of information from another information source; - (2) looked for printed documents rather than verbal data; - (3) used specific and original sources whenever possible; - (4) looked for a senior and authoritative information source. At this stage auditors had to evaluate information critically by: - (1) examining their expectation of what kind of information they should get at this stage (this expectation is built up from information gathered in other situations); - (2) using common sense to make a judgment whether to accept information or not; - (3) examining information gathered against information from other sources; - (4) considering personal feelings: "do I feel comfortable, do I have any other concern?" Only if they felt comfortable would the information gathered be accepted and the idea confirmed. Information organisation behaviour comes into the picture in this situation. In other situations discussed above, auditors tried to take in as much information as possible. To avoid information overload, they mentioned that they tried to absorb and organise information mentally and on the spot whenever possible. In the ideas confirming situation, auditors stressed that if they could not absorb all the information on the spot, they tried to note down physically or photocopy documents for later use. If no supporting documents were provided to confirm an idea, the auditors noted that a person had confirmed the idea but without supporting documents. The aim was to make the person (the information source) bear the responsibility for the quality of the information if there was no other way to verify its correctness. Auditors moved away from this "ideas confirming situation" when they felt comfortable that the idea they have "assumed" was confirmed as correct. Substage 3: ideas rejecting situation. At some point while auditors were forming ideas, they might experience an "ideas rejecting situation". Such a situation put an end to the "moving" situation of the information seek and use process. When an idea was assumed to be in effect, auditors expected information they gathered to comply with their ideas and expectations. When auditors encountered conflicting ideas, they moved to a "problematic", "fogged", "spin out", "wash out" or "barrier" situation, as identified in Dervin's sense-making research. This is the stage when auditors' emotions were expressed. They expressed feelings such as "frustrated" and "annoyed" when they noticed conflicting answers. The questions (or gaps) they had in mind switched back from closed to open-ended: - (1) Why doesn't this information confirm my expectations and previous information gathered? - (2) What has gone wrong here? What auditors would do at this stage was (in chronological order) to: - (1) look further into the same source that gave conflicting information (e.g. look into accounts statements for a few more months); - (2) look further into other printed sources and talk to accountants; - (3) ask people with authority; - (4) discuss with their own immediate audit manager, and ask him or her for advice. Moving away from this situation, auditors might move to other situations, for example: - (1) if the originally assumed idea was correct, auditors would loop back to the substage of confirming the idea; - (2) if the original idea was wrong, auditors had to modify or completely change the ideas being formed; they had to go back to the substage of assuming an idea, and follow by confirming an idea; - (3) if they had wrongly decided the focus area in the first place, they had to go back to stage 2 of (re)forming a focus, and then go on to (re)forming an idea. Further organisation and evaluation of information took place in this stage. For example, if documents were found to reject an idea (which implies that documents have great potential to be used as evidence to confirm alternative new ideas), these documents were photocopied and filed for later use. In general, to avoid information overload (or "tediousness"), people preferred to use their mental capacity and remember exceptions, unless a document was extremely useful as evidence. Stage 4: ideas finalising situation When an idea was confirmed, information seeking might not end. Some auditors perceived that they were coming to an "ideas finalising situation". They needed to finalise their idea/comments by seeking consensus with relevant parties. They had to keep "moving" with the following questions in mind: - (1) What would my manager think of my idea/comment? - (2) What would the company management think of my idea/comment? At this stage auditors became anxious and worried about their work. One mentioned that he was worried whether he was providing "value-added ideas". Others worried that they could not come up with a full picture and needed the boss's help to fill gaps in their understanding. They also worried about disagreement and challenges from clients. To answer these questions, auditors had exit meetings with the company management and then with their immediate boss. The managers and the immediate auditing boss became the two specific and authoritative information sources at this stage. Auditors aimed at seeking consensus from them. If further information was still needed to support a comment, further action was taken. Only when company management and immediate managers agreed with the final (or perhaps modified) ideas did the seeking and using of information end. However, the process of information use was not complete. In most workplaces, auditors had to move on to a "passing on ideas situation". Stage 5: passing on ideas situation In this situation auditors had their ideas confirmed. They expressed feelings of slight relief, but most auditors pointed out that this was just the end of another routine auditing assignment and that another would follow. However, they emphasised that they had already internalised, filtered and analysed raw data into useful management information. They were ready to switch from an information seeking role to become information providers. The interviewees pointed out criteria for providing good information to others. These included: - (1) understanding who is the target audience (information consumers); - (2) trying to anticipate what questions the target audience has in mind, and aiming to provide answers to these questions; - (3) providing accurate, clear and precise information; - (4) providing information in various formats based on the situation. For example, presenting an audit report is standard practice. If managers were uncertain of certain points, they could call or discuss face- to-face, and the auditor has to provide information in a verbal format and in a timely manner. The iterative relationship between information seeking and information presentation should be noted. When auditors sought information to form ideas, at different stages they used various information sources provided and prepared by different people. They chose sources by using different criteria at different stages of the process. The mirror image to this is that when auditors consciously or unconsciously took up the role of information provider, they were concerned with the questions (gaps) of their target audience; the situation of their target audience (whether urgent or non-urgent); and strategies to obtain answers. They aimed at providing quality information to satisfy their audience's need, and thus aimed at providing comments suitable in length, format and content. In reality, auditors moved among the seven situations identified in a dynamic way. This example is only one among various possible processes that auditors might take. Also, information seeking and using does not stop at the "passing on ideas situation"; rather, it is a lifelong process. Discussion of research findings These findings have implications for educators, librarians, database providers, managers and trainers. This paper highlights seven major issues. (1) Using questions and perceived situation to identify stages of the process The main implication of this research is that the situation people perceived they were in could be used as a predictor of choice of information sources, criteria to determine relevance and other information behaviour. In much research the information behaviour of people seems to be chaotic, since they use different sources at different times, and even different sources at the same time. The information literacy process model described here helps to explain the phenomenon. People used different strategies, not because of some static reason, such as age, position or years of experience, but rather because of a dynamic constructive process of how they perceived the situation they were in when completing their assignments. This is explained below. (2) Use of information sources and choice of sources in different situations In the workplace, no matter what situations auditors were in, people were a more frequently consulted information source than secondary documents. This confirms many research findings from the workplace environment (Chun, 1994; Leckie et al., 1996). However, there was significant difference in the choice of information sources in each situation. The use of general information sources, such as libraries, magazines and the Internet, occurred in the "focus formulating situation"; these quickly became too general as auditors improved their mental constructions and went into ideas assuming and confirming situations. In the ideas formulating situation, auditors tended to choose easily accessible, easy to use, convenient information sources and verbal information. Auditors switched from one source to another, and their persistence in using one source was extremely low. If the corporate library is only useful to auditors at an early stage, this should give a warning signal. If the library is not "visible" at this stage of the process, auditors will not hesitate to use alternative sources. In the ideas confirming and rejecting situations, although auditors still used people as information sources, they turned increasingly to authoritative printed documents, considered to have more weight as evidence to support ideas. Further, if someone or some documents were perceived to be particularly useful and specific to confirm or reject an idea, auditors persisted in using the source to get the information they needed. Towards the ideas finalising situation, auditors switched back to specific authoritative people as information sources when they looked for specific advice and comments on their confirmed ideas/comment. (3) Judging relevance at each stage This model shows that different criteria to judge information relevance were used in different situations. In focus formulating and ideas assuming situations the auditors' criteria for judging relevance were loose. They agreed that they "pick up" or "accept whatever information people give them" to build up an understanding, to form a focus and idea. This only applied until they needed to confirm or reject an idea; then they started using stringent criteria to decide whether they should accept the information received. Auditors said they compared new information received at that time against: - (1) expectations they had formed; - (2) common sense; - (3) personal feelings; and - (4) confirmation from another source - making sure that information gathered was accurate and reliable. (4) Feelings as experienced in the information use process In terms of feelings, Kuhlthau has shown that students start their work with uncertainty, confusion and doubt; they become more confident in the final stage. For the auditors, the opposite occurred: they started their work with confidence but soon became stressed, frustrated and annoyed when ideas were contradicted by information gathered. This feeling remained until the end, when auditors concluded their comments on the client's management. Most auditors said that they did not have any feelings at the end of the job because other jobs would follow. Some also felt anxious at the end, worrying whether they had provided value-added services to the company. Auditors' feelings toward seeking and using information were tied closely to whether they were getting their work done within prevailing constraints. They were confident in the early stage, understanding that information gathering is part of their "routine" job. As they formed an idea, they did not feel particularly happy, because this is what is expected of them. What worried them were situations where they received conflicting information that contradicted the ideas they had assumed. They felt frustrated because this meant a delay in their work. Further, when finalising their ideas, auditors did not feel extremely happy but rather anxious about how their work was being judged and valued. The difference in the nature of the job and the working environment led to a different feeling for auditors when compared to students. (5) Perception of information Auditors referred to information as different things at different stages of the process. Before an idea was assumed, auditors drew on "data, figures, events, words, opinions, comments, experience". Analysing this information, they formed an idea of how the audited company was being managed and areas of high risk. At this stage they looked for "information about" a particular high risk area so as to confirm or reject the assumed idea. When they finalised the ideas, they realised that they had internalised and filtered "data, figures, events, words, opinions, comments, experience" into personal knowledge and value-added understanding. They knew and could comment on the issues; they were ready to present 'information' in the audit report. (6) Information behaviour at each stage of the process Behaviour may not be a good way to describe the process of effective information use. In traditional behavioural information seeking models it is assumed that people first locate and access, then use and extract information, then synthesise and organise, before presenting information. However, this study suggests that auditors perform all these actions, sometimes simultaneously, whenever they acquire or encounter information. The linearity of a behavioural model has to be challenged. Further, there is a need to rethink whether "behaviour" is effective in identifying stages in an information seeking and using process. (7) The information chain Changing the definition of information from "raw data, figures and facts" in the early stage to "gaining knowledge" in the later stage of the model shows that auditors sought meaning which could be internalised as personal knowledge. An iterative information chain was observed. When auditors sought information, they used information provided by various people, various sources and channels. Then when they provided information for others to consume, they became information sources to pass on messages, data and information to others. This highlighted the fact that the ability to seek and use information effectively is not just important for one's own interests. Ability to deliver is also important. Information literacy has a spill-over effect that can improve the quality of information flow in an organisation. Conclusions In this study information literacy has been defined as executing an information seeking and using process successfully in the workplace. A constructivist approach was used to identify seven critically different situations perceived by auditors in the process of information seeking and using. A five-stage process model was used as an example to show one among various flexible processes auditors can experience with these seven situations when seeking and using information. This information seeking and using process model helps to answer many managers' questions: who is (or is not) information literate in the workplace? - (1) Just because people are observed to perform various information-seeking behaviours does not necessarily mean that they are able to turn data into useful information to achieve their work, i.e. having information skills is a necessary but not sufficient condition for an employee to be information literate. - (2) Information literate people are those who are able to go through a constructive information seeking and using process in the workplace; they are ultimately able to turn data into useful information to answer queries which arise from their work roles and tasks. To do so, employees need to be made aware of the various situations they experience in completing their work, and of the possible sources and information strategies associated with each situation. This improved understanding of information literacy in the workplace has implications for information literacy education, information systems design, information policies and management. For example, educators may need to rethink whether students should be taught to follow a "right" path to seek and use information. Systems designers may need to design information systems and databases which can communicate with users, especially concerning situations information users perceive they are in when logging into the system, and thus suggest appropriate information sources, search functions and features pertaining to that situation. Managers may need to reflect on how data, evidence, reports and other information should be organised in the workplace to help their staff go through an "unpredictable" dynamic process in seeking and gathering information. With this model as a framework, these areas need further research. References 1. American Library Association (1989, American Library Association Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final Report, ALA, Chicago, IL. 2. Belkin, N.J. (1980, "Anomalous states of knowledge as a basis for information retrieval", Canadian Journal of Information Science, Vol. 5, pp. 133-44. 3. Belkin, N.J., Oddy, R.N. and Brooks, H.M. (1982a, "ASK for information retrieval: part I. Background and theory", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 38, June, pp. 61-71. 4. Belkin, N.J., Oddy, R.N. and Brooks, H.M. (1982b, "ASK for information retrieval: part II. Results of a design study", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 38, September, pp. 145-64. 5. Bjorner, S. (1991, "The information literacy curriculum: a working model", IATUL Quarterly, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 150-60. 6. Breivik, P.S. and Gee, E.G. (1989, Information Literacy: Revolution in the Library, Macmillan, New York, NY. 7. Bruce, C.S. (1996, Information Literacy: A Phenomenography, University of New England, Armidale, NSW. 8. Bruce, C.S. (1997, The Seven Faces of Information Literacy, Auslib Press, Adelaide. 9. Bystrom, K. and Jarvelin, K. (1994, "Task complexity affects information seeking and use", Information Processing and Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 191-213. 10. Chen, C.-c. and Hernon, P. (1982, Information Seeking: Assessing and Anticipating Users' Needs, Neal-Schuman, New York, NY. 11. Chun, W.C. (1994, "Perception and use of information sources by chief executives in environmental scanning", Library and Information Science Research, Vol. 16, pp. 23-40. 12. Cole, C. (1997, "Information as process: the difference between corroborating evidence and information in humanistic research domains", Information Processing and Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 55-67. 13. Court, A.W. (1997, "The relationship between information and personal knowledge in new product development", International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 123-38. 14. Dervin, B. (1983, "An overview of sense-making research: concepts, methods, and results to date", paper presented at the International Communications Association Annual Meeting, May, Dallas, TX. 15. Dervin, B. (1992, "From the mind's eye of the user: the sense-making qualitative-quantitative methodology", in Glazier, J.D. and Powell, R.R. (Eds), Qualitative Research in Information Management, Libraries Unlimited, Englewood, CO, pp. 61-84. 16. Dervin, B. (1994, "Information-democracy: an examination of underlying assumptions", Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 369-85. 17. Dervin, B. and Nilan, M. (1986, "Information needs and uses", Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 21, pp. 3-33. 18. Doyle, C. (1992, Outcome Measures for Information Literacy within the National Education Goals of 1990, Final Report to the National Forum on Information Literacy, Summary of Findings, ED 351033. 19. Doyle, C. (1994, Information Literacy in an Information Society: A Concept for the Information Age, ERIC Clearinghouse ED 372763.. 20. Doyle, C. (1996, "Across the curriculum: information literacy in the USA", in Booker, D. (Ed.), Learning for Life: Proceedings of the Second Australian Information Literacy Conference, University of South Australia Library, Adelaide. 21. Drucker, P.F. (1994, Managing in Turbulent Times, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. 22. Eisenberg, M.B. and Berkowitz, R.E. (1990, Information Problem-Solving: The Big Six Skills Approach to Library and Information Skills Instruction, Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ. 23. Ellis, D. (1989, "A behavioural approach to information retrieval system design", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 171-212. 24. Grainger, P. (1994, Managing Information: Your Self-Development Action Plan, Kogan Page, London. 25. Gralewska-Vickery, A. (1976, "Communication and information needs of earth science engineers", Information Processing and Management, Vol. 12, pp. 251-82. 26. Irving, A. (1986, Study and Information Skills across the Curriculum, Heinemann Educational Books, London. 27. Kelly, G.A. (1963, A Theory of Personality: The Psychology of Personal Constructs, W.W. Norton, New York, NY. 28. Kemp, D.A. (1990, "Users", in Flemming, H. (Ed.), User Education in Academic Libraries, Library Association Publishing, London. 29. King, D.W., Casto, J. and Jones, H. (1994, "Communication by engineers: a literature review of engineers' information needs, seeking processes, and use", Council on Library Resources, Washington. 30. Kirk, J. (1986, "Information skills in schools", Australian Library Journal, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 82-7. 31. Kuhlthau, C.C. (1993, Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services, Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ. 32. Leckie, G.J., Pettigrew, K.E. and Sylvain, C. (1996, "Modeling the information seeking of professionals: a general model derived from research on engineers, health care professionals, and lawyers", Library Quarterly, Vol. 66 No. 2, pp. 161-93. 33. Marland, M. (Ed.) (1981, Information Skills in the Secondary Curriculum, Methuen, London. 34. Pinelli, T.E., Barclay, R.O., Glassman, N., Kennedy, J.M. and Demerath, L. (1991, "The relationship between seven variables and the use of US technical reports by US aerospace engineers and scientists", ASIS Proceedings, Vol. 28, pp. 313-21. 35. Rader, H.B. (1990, "Bring information literacy into the academic curriculum", College and Research Libraries News, Vol. 51 No. 9, pp. 879-80. 36. Rouse, W.B. and Rouse, S.H. (1984, "Human information seeking and design of information systems", Information Processing and Management, Vol. 20 No. 1-2, pp. 129-38. 37. Senge, P.M. (1994, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Currency Doubleday, New York, NY. 38. Tiamiyu, M.A. (1992, "The relationships between source use and work complexity, decision-maker discretion and activity duration in Nigerian Government Ministries", International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 12, pp. 130-41. 39. Todd, R. (1996, "Information literacy research: charting the landscape and moving beyond the littoral zone", in Booker, D. (Ed.), Learning for Life: Proceedings of the Second Australian Information Literacy Conference, University of South Australia Library, Adelaide. 40. Ury, C.J., Johnson, C.V. and Meldrem, J.A. (1997, "Teaching a heuristic approach to information retrieval", Research Strategies, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 39-47. 41. Wilson, T.D. (1981, "On user studies and information needs", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 3-15.