Here’s the presentation I’ve been using this year (best viewed full screen, as always):

It includes a video I made… yep, I’m a YouTube sensation:

Oh and I unashamedly ripped off a Ned Potter original and created an infograph as a “final word” type thing (click to enlarge):

Now, for me, the good thing about Thing 2 has been discovering new blogs to subscribe to and making the effort to leave the comforts of Google Reader. I’ve revisited a lot of my old faves and it’s been particularly interesting to see how layouts have changed, what widgets/links people have on display and the way they write their ‘about’ bits. It’s got me thinking more about the way my website looks, which I guess leads nicely on to Thing 3.

Although Lex Rigby isn’t an exceptionally unusual name it’s unusual enough for me to literally dominate Google. After scrolling through the first 10 result pages to find a fake Lex Rigby I gave up, it’s all me. Like commenting, vainity searches are also something I do quite often. This is mainly because when I look at my blog stats there’s always someone Googling my name and I like knowing that what they find is OK with me (I still find it unnerving when I see it’s someone from my own institution looking me up though).

At last year’s New Professionals Information Days I spoke a bit about personal brands in my presentation and used an example of some minutes from a Communist Students meeting that I was listed in the apologies for. I’ve never been a Communist Student and it’s not something I really want my name associated with but it was proving difficult to get this removed from the results list. So what did I do? I buried it! I got all up on the Internet so everything I wanted people to know about me was right there on the front page and because I’m persistent it still is.

The name I use on the Internet is (shocker) my real name, purely because I’m way too unimaginative to think of anything clever. Alexis Rigby (I think) is a Scottish swimmer and as no-one ever calls me Alexis it would be weird to use it. All my usernames have always just been Lex or lexrigby but my first email address was lorimeyers@finebody.com (!!) I’ve no idea where I got the finebody domain from but Lori Meyers is a NoFX song (have a listen, still a classic).You might also be wondering what ‘Just another dent in the damage’ means… well, this is also from a song – see One More Reason Why by Count me Out. I tend to call my blog Dents in the Damage for short and have a Tumblr called ‘Smaller Dents‘ (where I post random funnys).

Google images has a lot of pictures of me too (and black cats for some reason) so if you’re really desperate to see what I look like… well, I look like this:

Or there’s that little mug shot of me on the right of my site as well! Come talk to me, tell me how rubbish the salad is.

I’m not really sure I have a visual brand as such, my brand is really to just be me. I tried for a long time to keep the professional self removed from the personal self but again I can’t be bothered to maintain two identities (not online, it’s too difficult). I am what I am and I hope people accept that and can ignore the parts of me that they’re not interested in and concentrate on those that they are. Yes, I talk a lot about being vegan, I talk a lot about conservation, I talk a lot about music, I talk a lot about funny pictures on the Internet and I talk a lot about being a librarian. This is the profersonal me… Is it unprofessional? I don’t think so. Thoughts anyone?

So why am I doing this?

This isn’t something I think others will find particularly interesting to read about but it’s something I want to do for myself… to get me ‘back in the game’ I guess. I’ve been getting bored with blogging/tweeting and contributing in general. People write better blogs, articulate their ideas much better than I ever could, link to really interesting things that I can’t be bothered to track down myself and I guess are a lot more enthusiastic about our profession than I have been lately. There never seems to be any good news and so I think I’ve just started doing other things with my time that makes me happy and keeping my head down.

I find all the ‘you must be an activist if you want to progress your career’ intimidating… I want to break out of the echochamber as much as the next guy but I just haven’t found a creative enough way to do this yet. I want to advocate the work of librarianship but as soon as I open my mouth I’ve already bored myself to death. So in a way I’m kinda hoping that getting involved with CPD23 might give me a giant kick up the ass on the participation front and keep the post-Chartership momentum going. It’ll also be an opportunity to try out some of the ‘things’ I’ve forgotten about (an excuse to start these up again maybe) as well as try out some new ‘things’ that could actually be really useful for me. I’ll probably not do all the ‘things’ but at least I can say I’ve got good intentions eh!

Over the last year I’ve been working on my Chartership, pulling together a portfolio of evidence to reflect on my personal and professional development. It’s a professional qualification awarded by CILIP to members who are able to demonstrate an active commitment to CPD (or continuing professional development), an ability to critically reflect on personal and service performance and exhibit an understanding of the wider professional context. I’m not gonna lie, it’s hard! Really hard. Not because the task is particularly difficult but because it’s really hard to judge whether you’re on the right lines to meet the overly ‘woolly’ criteria for assessment. It’s not like having an essay question to answer or a topic to investigate. It’s identifying gaps in your own knowledge and proposing a plan to resolve them, anticipating the outcome, estimating a timescale and then reflecting on the learning experience and how you’ve applied new knowledge. It’s all very complicated without really needing to be. I think I’ve met the criteria but as it’s a very personal thing I would, whether the assessors agree is another story.

As part of the process you get a mentor and the best advice I can give anyone is to find someone you feel 100% comfortable talking through your anxieties with. There has been so many times when I thought to myself ‘why am I actually even doing this?’ It’s not like I’ll be getting a pay rise or anything but it does mean I tick an extra box on the personal spec for the next step on the career ladder (should it get accepted that is). Aside from that it has actually been worthwhile… I promise. I’ve been to so many really useful events and done so much cool stuff this year, simply because I’ve been able to say ‘oh but it’s for my Chartership’. Luckily my organisation are really supportive when it comes to this kind of thing so it really would have been silly for me not to take this opportunity.

Once I’ve heard back from CILIP (which could be up to 3 months) I’ll hopefully write something a bit more useful for others but for now… IT’S FINISHED WOO-HOO.

]]> http://www.lexrigby.com/2011/06/20/chartership-portfolio/feed/ 1 http://www.lexrigby.com/2011/05/19/information-literacy-conferences-and-strategies/ http://www.lexrigby.com/2011/05/19/information-literacy-conferences-and-strategies/#comments Thu, 19 May 2011 09:16:07 +0000 Lex http://www.lexrigby.com/?p=1680 It’s been a busy old couple of months but I think I’ve finally managed to piece my brain back together. The big news is that this year I was lucky enough to attend the Librarians’ Information Literacy Annual Conference (LILAC), hosted by the British Library and LSE. I thought I’d do the usual and bombard the Internet with every single detail but I think I might actually becoming less interested in using my blog and Twitter in this way. I still Tweeted a lot, don’t get me wrong, but transcribing every PowerPoint bullet isn’t as useful as I once thought it was and quite frankly it’s started to irritate me when other people do it… syntheise people! Syntheise!

Anyway, moving on. Just before LILAC I attended an event at the University of Bradford called ‘Embedding information literacy: from strategy to practice‘. Right on queue it got me thinking more about Information Literacy Strategies and how these can be used to describe the level of support we, as librarians, can offer learners/researchers.

During the morning session we heard from three speakers – Fiona Middleton (Leeds Metropolitan University), Peter Gledhill (Sheffield Hallam University) and Michelle Schneider (University of Leeds). They introduced their institutional information literacy strategies and discussed the practicalities of developing strategies and the issues they encountered.

The common theme to arise from all three presentations was the importance of creating partnerships between subject librarians and academics to deliver IL sessions with specific learning objects. It was widely agreed that by embedding IL within the curriculum students would be better equipped to recognise information needs and develop better understandings about the transferability of IL training – into employment for example.

It was particularly interesting to hear about the merging of the Faculty Team Librarians and the Academic Skills Team at Leeds University, broadening IL training to include academic skills support such as revision and essay writing. Although some resistance occurred others embraced the changes and accepted them as a broadening of their support role.

Following lunch we moved on to hear a further four speakers – Erin Nephin and Belinda Cooke (Leeds Metropolitan University), Dan Pullinger (University of Leeds) and Sarah George (University of Bradford) – outline case studies of successful collaborations between academics and librarians.

One key point to note was the usefulness of ‘library champions’ i.e. academics who positively engage with library developments and share information with their departments. It was suggested that the way to get academics involved is to map student assessment issues that appear time and time again – incorrect referencing, minimal range of resources and a lack of understanding in academic writing – and produce materials that they can take ownership of during their teaching e.g. online tutorials.

All of these themes were picked up again at LILAC but rather than go over these in detail I’ve uploaded the EPIC conference report I wrote for work. I think by taking an iPad along to the event I got carried away with note-taking but for your reading pleasure it’s divided into sections, which you can jump straight to. The Twitter archive is also available on Twapper Keeper.

Ned introduced the session with a very pretty ‘The Time for Libraries is Now‘ and ‘If you want to work in libraries‘ mash-up slide deck with added extras, which you can see below.  It’s really a quick walk through aiming to set the scene, tell you a few things you probably need to know and link you to a few key resources you may well find extremely useful! I honestly think if Ned was a career advisor he’d be the best career advisor out there because seriously this is stuff I would have LOVED to know four years ago.

The first thing I usually say to people starting out on the job search front is to get yourself registered with every recruitment agency you can think of (even Office Angels has the occasional library post come up)! Not only do they list jobs but they have some really great advice on constructing CVs, preparing for interviews and fine-tuning personal statements.Specialist library and information profession agencies have a massive range of roles listed and so there’s generally something to suit everyone, even now that it’s getting harder to find work.

• Sue Hill Recruitment – is probably the largest and most well known of the specialist agencies. I found a fantastic temporary position through these at Leeds Trinity when I first finished my course and out of all the agencies I registered with they were the ones regularly calling me with other opportunities.
• Weekes Gray – was the new kid on the block when I registered with them but Keri has tonnes of experience and was great with interview tips and feedback.
• Jobs for Info Pros – was another newbie in 2007 but I’d had earlier contact with Alex Wilson-Campbell when he was at Instant Library Recruitment. In fact he found me my first library job at The College of Law in York and pretty much got me to where I am today.
• Infomatch – did very little for me overall but they also have a great team with a lot of experience in the field.
• TFPL – always seemed to be very southern focused but that may well just have been at the time I was looking. They’ve been around for ages and are very good at what they do!
• Fabric – I’d never heard of until yesterday, so thank Tina for that one.
• jobs.ac.uk – isn’t a recruitment agency as such but they always have a healthy listing of library related jobs or research opportunities.

However… I actually found my first professional post at Corus through Monster jobs, after almost giving up hope. At the time I was working as a Weekend Coordinator at the Information Commons as well as a Library Assistant at Leeds Trinity and was finding it really difficult to dedicate much time to active job searching. Some weeks I’d be in work seven days after scoring some overtime in the Learning Resources Section at the University of Sheffield and it was really hard. The commute to Leeds ended up costing me more than I was earning but I thought the experience was worth the sacrifice. I could have jacked that in anytime, it was only a temporary position but I persevered and it’s still on my CV now. I cannot recommend temporary positions highly enough… simply because they get you the experience you probably need without your full commitment. My colleagues at Leeds Trinity gave me some great advice on job hunting and one ended up being a crucial reference for my job at Corus.

My long term aim had always been to work as an Academic Liaison Librarian (or whatever variation you find in these job titles) and I remember in one of my interviews at The University of Sheffield (for a job I didn’t get) when asked where I wanted to be in five years time I answered, “I’d really like Maria Mawson’s job”. It’s funny because although the interviewers were a bit taken aback by such a specific answer a couple of years down the line when I was interviewed for my current position the same interviewer had a good giggle before he asked me the same question again! This time I didn’t even need to answer and I actually work three desks away from Maria now. I think I’d decided I wanted law subject responsibilities because I came from a legal-ish background with The College of Law but I actually enjoy my current subjects a million times more.

One of the things Ned talks about is a career not being a straight line from a to b. It’s incredibly difficult to work up a ladder, especially when you’re trying to jump more than one pay grade and in my experience I tend to agree. I’ve worked at this insitution since 2006 but not continuously. I couldn’t get to where I wanted to be because the positions were simply not available and I couldn’t carry on part-time hours whilst I waited. I thought having my foot in the door would stand me in good stead and so I continued working part-time even though I now had my full time job at Corus as well. Again it was hard and I only lasted until the end of the academic session I was working through but then six months later I was back FULL TIME in a job I wouldn’t change (much) for the world. I’ve been in this role now about two and a half years and don’t really know what the future holds other than more work on my Chartership and warning Carmen and Helen that I’m coming for their jobs next.

I’m not sure how much help this is to other people but seriously if you’re still reading this (well done) and as I actually quite enjoy talking about careers let me know if I can help you out with yours… maybe this is something I should be doing in my role as a New Professionals Support Officer anyway though.

What is a Library Cafe?

Each year we (that’s all library staff) are invited to a cafe meet, in which we contribute and discuss our thoughts on a particular topic. Basically it’s an opportunity for staff on all levels to offer feedback for consideration in the strategic planning of our library services.

This year we were asked to discuss the wider organisation’s response to some of the announcements made recently, effecting higher education i.e. increased tuition fees.  The details of our so-called Project 2012 are available online but the specifics of the draft proposition at the centre of our discussions is only available internally. So with that in mind I’m only including my own thoughts on the cafe itself and not the proposal.

The Format

Each cafe lasts about two and a half hours and has about 25-30 staff present (there are three events to make sure most staff are available to attend one). Discussions take place in smaller groups of about 5 or 6 with 1 person appointed as table host. This person is responsible for reporting back the discussion to all attendees after each session. Each host is briefed in advance, which means there’s no time for arguing about who has to do it during the discussions. It seems to work much better than previous years when this wasn’t the case but unlucky for me this year I was cohersed into the role. I was quite nervous but surprisingly I really enjoyed it. Usually I’m the one that gets drowned out by the stronger voices, opting for the easy life instead, but it was quite empowering feeling that I could essentially lead the discussions and interrupt others to make sure everyone got their say, no matter how irrelevant they thought it might be.

Themes and Questions

We had three questions to consider:

1. What do we think of the draft proposition?
2. How will the anticipated rise in tuition fees change out customers’ expectations and requirements?
3. What does it mean to be an outstanding library?

Thoughts

Obviously there’s not an awful lot I can say about question 1 but all 3 questions generated some really interesting discussions and by having a varied group each time I got to hear about some of the work I don’t necessarily know that much about.

Generally I think we agreed that the anticipated increase in tuition fees means that our users are going to be expecting much more for their buck (so to speak). I think we may be expected to do away with core student purchases resulting in greater pressure on the library to provide more copies of key texts, digitise more essential material and produce heavier course packs. We may experience more issues with copyright, missing books, overdues and fines. We may need to offer longer opening hours at all branch libraries, possibly consider a reference only library or invest even further in self-service.

I wonder whether students will expect a more personalised service or whether self-service will respond to all their needs. Do we need to be doing more with the University’s portal, the library web pages and information skills tutorials or collaborate more widely with other support networks to produce a joined up service with computing facilities, student services or career guidance? Should we be focusing on teaching information literacy as a transferrable skill or concentrating on the things a student needs to pass their degree?

As with all these kinds of things you end up with more questions than answers so I’d be interested in hearing more about what other libraries are considering to respond to greater student expectations and what the general consensus may be on what makes a library outstanding. In short our considerations identified the working environment, the library building, its facilities, the library staff, our collections, widening participation, emerging technologies, collaborations and the effectiveness of our out of hours service.

It seems there’s going to be a lot of difficult decisions to make doesn’t it? The main problem we have is that increased fees doesn’t translate to an increased library budget and so much of what we do do is going to have to be done with even less. Eek.

To find out more about what other librarians are up to this week follow libday6 on Twitter or have a look through the list of particpates on the Library Day in the Life wiki.

Research metrics and citations count

Although the next two sessions were really interesting (well they were actually split around Yvonne Nobis’ session on Finding the known unknowns [...] due to timetable rearrangements but it seems logically to keep to the original order), they were heavy going. Bibliometrics aren’t necessarily complicated but it’s difficult to really get a grasp of what’s being explained without live demonstrations. There were screenshots of course but I think it may have been better to see how results are achieved live. The ‘we have no Internet’ excuse was pretty frustrating seen as I was happily tapping away on Twitter via Eduroam. Nevertheless Anne Costigan and Kate Bradbury carried on regardless and really inspired me to push for more support in this at my institution.

Anne started out explaining what metrics are – statistical methods to measure references for authors, articles and journals. Citations and impact factors (IF) then are really what we’re talking about here. Their purpose is to determine the quality of information or the importance of a journal by measuring citations over a two year period. Services like Thomson Reuters’ Journal Citation Reports lists impact factors by subject category so that you can compare journals in a form of league table. It is important to look at the subject ranks as well as impact factors to judge the authority of information. Five year impact factors are also available but not used as often and it’s a good way of mapping whether impact factors are going up or down.

What I’ve never quite been able to find out is: What is a good factor? Anne told us that the highest IF in 2009 was 88 and that this was from an open access journal – a great argument in favour of open access. The median however was 1.2 and factors can vary between disciplines. Some of the criticisms you get with IFs is the use of self-citations and publisher clauses that state an article must cite something else from their journal. This skews results. But Thomson Reuters have thought of that too and have introduced the Eigenfactor. As well as eliminating self-cites it also attempts to overcome the barrier with h-indexes favouring older authors.  A h-index never decreases and so the older you are and the more papers you’ve written the better h-index you have.

Slightly later than scheduled Kate Bradbury from Cardiff University came to tell us about the sessions she runs for researchers – why she does them, what’s covered and what’s the format. Some of the early proposals of REF to judge research on metric indicators led to various discussions about their usefulness and more use of metrics was being promoted to help researchers decide where they wanted to publish material. It meant that more researchers began asking their librarians for help in finding impact factors and needed support in interpreting their results.

In response to this Kate developed a workshop to cover REF, bibliometrics, publicity, finding collaborative partners, researcher funding requirements and open access. During the session she introduces research metrics and allocates time for researchers to practice with a work book exercise covering how to find bibliometrics, set up alerts and register with ResearcherID. It was particularly encouraging to hear that subject librarians are also requesting these sessions as part of their staff development needs.

Finding the know unknowns and the unknown knows

Yvonne Nobis from the University of Cambridge is probably the fastest talker I’ve ever seen talk! I thought by the end she’d be completely breathless… but a las not. She did a great job. Talking about researcher@cambridge she explained that researchers can’t usually find what they’re looking for for two reasons – a lack of knowing what they’re looking for or where to start i.e. poor research skills. Within the University of Cambridge there are over a hundred libraries including fifty-six departmental libraries! Comparing that with our five I’m guessing that print material may well be a nightmare to find if it’s taken back to the wrong library.

For contemporary working scientists there is an increasing amount of material available online and this is beginning to be what researchers come to expect. However Yvonne pointed out that there is still 95% of monographic material at the Central Science Library only available in print format. To overcome this access barrier she told us that any material requested is digitised and made accessible electronically. Great! And better yet, it’s free! I wanted to ask whether she thought the service a sustainable approach for such a massive university but I was too chicken. I’d be interested in hearing what researchers think of this and how many requests on average they get each month. Is it something they advertise widely? She also told us that Aquabrowser (the library’s search interface) is not particularly good at finding things either (lucky my organisation chose not to get this one eh). So science@cambridge was designed to meet the needs of researchers through serendipitous information retrieval – it’s a portal to federated search. Yet with budget cuts and reductions in journal provision Yvonne pointed out that it’s been difficult to keep the user community happy and it may well be worth looking towards document supply models as cheaper alternatives.

A word from our sponsor

By the time we got to Alexa Dungan from Wiley we were already way over time and it was really disappointing to miss the last session from the University of Leeds’ Katy Sidwell and Sara Thornes (due to reserved train tickets). Alexa’s task of the day was to talk about WIREs – Wiley’s interdisciplinary reviews. These hybrid colloborations, conceived to provide authors with professional credibility, I guess are like new encyclopedias. They do sound pretty interesting but I’m not sure how well used something like this would be in my library. Maybe that’s one to look into.

Final thoughts

All in all it was a great day and definitely worthwhile making the trip. The next meeting is going to be held at the University of Sheffield and is to focus on information literacy. If anyone attending has any dietary requirements be safe in the knowledge that it’ll be me arranging it… I’ve already decided. I can’t bear another food mix up, although saying that there is one special Oxford librarian (whose name I stupidly never got) who I wish to know that I am forever in your debt!

And finally… Here are a few more snaps I took of the day:

The meeting itself was held at the beautiful Keble College, with lunch hosted at the Divinity School just opposite the magnificent Bodleian Library. I’ve never seen so many amazing buildings so close together! On this particular day the Oxford occupation was also in full swing and so the campus was surprisingly quiet and security on high alert.

Keynote and REF update

Professor Richard Darton, a chemical engineer, kicked off the day with a rather controversial and quite frankly uninspiring discussion about an academic’s perspective on libraries supporting research. He started off quite well talking about how the role of a librarian has changed and romanticised about old libraries being repositories of printed knowledge. Everyone likes the old “libraries are a treasure” story, right? But it was quite distracting that he seemed to want to justify his ‘knowledge’ of libraries by presenting us with his family history (the Dartons were part of a publishing group way back when). There was also a few jokes in there about library stock, particularly the Bodleian collection, being regarded as museum artifacts and how it was always difficult to loan items – still is in some cases.

So moving on from the librarian as curator introduction he went on to discuss the librarian as supplier with the acquisition of journals “tak[ing] the place of books”. Now that’s not quite true but I’ll give him that one as it’s really the next point I started to take issue with. Professor Darton’s final ‘librarian as…’ meme focused on the librarian as web manager because “everything is available on the web now”. Basically he was suggesting here that today’s librarians do little more than manage user interfaces and journal subscription fees.

Rather than present a case for why we still need libraries he told us all that “high quality information is available on the web and Google gets good results now”. Apparently there’s a lot of information out there and it’s not difficult to get hold of the good quality stuff (providing you know how to of course). So with that being the case Professor Darton announced that “libraries are pretty much a thing of the past”. He said that physical libraries only really have a place for researchers needing access to really old material and that the sciences should stop funding buildings used mainly by the arts. Instead he proposed handing budgets over to researchers to manage their own information needs – something that got a gasp from the audience – as this would overcome the pay barriers they faced when trying to access online material.

Now don’t be too down, the old peer-review model also got a lashing! Consider the idea that many researchers these days have never held a paper journal in their hands <sarcasm> because all journals are electronic now and all the information you need is available on the web anyway </sarcasm>. It means that our loyalties to established journals are disappearing. Academics are publishing material in more specialised journals through open access models and supposedly fragmenting subjects. The peer-review method is no longer a guarantee of quality and to counter this reviewers names should be published alongside papers. This is where I guess I started to lose interest in what was being said, I just couldn’t take him seriously anymore, but it was rather worrying that he seemed to think researchers have an innate ability to evaluate quality, even though he admitted recommended library training to his own students.

A very odd opening to say the least but he got our attention, for the most part. Next up was Kimberley Hacket from the Research Excellence Framework (REF) to give us an update on their future plans. The purpose of REF is to secure the continuation of world-class dynamic and responsive research in the UK through a system of quality assessment (it’s to replace the Research Assessment Exercise). Aiming to support and drive up research across disciplines its key features include a process of expert review (informed by citation information) that measures three distinct elements – outputs, impact and environment. She ran through some on the developments and implementation details, which are all outlined on their website.

Coming next: Part II Research metrics and citations count.

]]> http://www.lexrigby.com/2010/12/02/ustlg-the-role-of-libraries-in-the-research-process-pt-1/feed/ 10 http://www.lexrigby.com/2010/11/22/what-to-expect-from-the-ronseal-effect/ http://www.lexrigby.com/2010/11/22/what-to-expect-from-the-ronseal-effect/#comments Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:56:10 +0000 Lex http://www.lexrigby.com/?p=1549 The feedback from the New Professionals Information Day in London indicated that attendees would have preferred to have more information about sessions before deciding which they wanted to attend. In response to this I thought it’d be useful to post up my brief and tell you a bit more about what I’ll be covering tomorrow in Newcastle.

The Brief

The theme for this year is Find The Passion – the career that lets you work with the things you love.

The working title we have for your session is The Ronseal Effect: online personal marketing for career growth.

The aim of your session is to focus on the benefits of social networking to increase your professional visibility and personal marketing (not forgetting the importance of reputation management). Feel free to alter this title.  What we want you to convey is how you use your online presence and how this ties in with your job – how it has helped you and how you intend to develop it in the future. This is most definitely a working title and we want you to present to a title that you are comfortable with.

The session is 45 minutes long, which should include time for questions.

Further Information

I begin by talking about the role of networking in our professional lives – what it is and why we do it – before moving on to introduce social networking. I discuss the benefits of using social media by drawing on my own experiences. It was also noted in the feedback from the London information day that a number of presentations focus heavily on the speakers’ experiences… mine is one of these. It’s about how I have made use of social networking to create opportunities and take responsibility for my own career development.

Generally the session is targeted towards people who are unsure about blogging or tweeting and need a bit of encouragement to get started. I decided to go with the title outlined in my original brief mainly because I’m too unimaginative to think of a better one and given that Ronseal (the company) are also based in Sheffield how could I not roll with it? My presentation then is about using social media to bring together our personal and professional selves and how to manage an online presence that you’re happy with.

So, hopefully that clears some of that up for you. See you tomorrow!