Our first topic for 1996 is "Librarians as Political Animals." Bruce Daniels suggested this topic and will be leading our discussion. Bruce, a graduate of the University of Michigan, is Director of the Onondaga County Public Library in Syracuse, New York. He has also served as director and deputy director of the Rhode Island Department of State Library Services and in a number of positions at The Free Library of Philadelphia. Active in both the American Library Association (ALA) and the New York Library Association (NYLA), he is currently a member of the ALA Executive Board and is a candidate for ALA treasurer.
Librarians need to be able to assess political developments within a governmental setting and develop the appropriate advocacy strategies. What has been happening at the federal and state levels of government is a prime example. Last November's elections brought sweeping changes to the federal government and many state governments. The library community had to quickly assess the changes and rethink its political strategy. Similar developments will likely occur at the local level.
Libraries are involved in the political process constantly. Achieving adequate funding depends upon how politically effective the library is. Many librarians also need to obtain voter approval for capital projects.
Over the last several years, fundamentalist groups have effectively used the political system to challenge schools. It now appears that libraries may become their next target. Many of the core values of the library profession may be threatened by such groups as the Family Friendly Libraries. Librarians will need to develop appropriate political strategies to deal with these threats.
Politics within a library context are not limited to only governmental politics. Politics exist within a library -- how funds are distributed among the units of a library is a political decision. Politics exist when a library is part of a larger institution -- how many positions will be eliminated in each department during periods of retrenchment is a political decision.
Even though politics is pervasive throughout our libraries, many librarians do not view themselves as being political. Many even view politics as being abhorrent. If our libraries and our profession are to survive, political action will need to be viewed as an essential part of our responsibility. Librarians at all levels will need to understand the importance of political action and have the skills necessary to develop political strategies.
Over the next several weeks, I hope that our discussion will explore how we develop political skills, aptitude, and understanding in graduates of library and information science programs. To lead off the discussion, I pose the following questions:
It also focuses on a quality of librarianship that is often missed, and that is that we function professionally in social groups, not only or even primarily as individuals. We have certain professional roles as responders at reference desks or as catalogers, but the more important professional roles are in directing the energies of our institutions and in creating structures that help our patrons today and tomorrow. These are group activities and require understanding of working in groups, arts of compromise, negotiation processes, verbal and oral communication in both formal and informal settings, and the like.
As a teenager I used to love reading C.S. Forester's Horatio Hornblower series on the English sea captain in the Napoleonic period. Some years ago I identified in my psyche what I called the "Hornblower fallacy," that is, the idea that a single dynamic leader with the right ideas is what makes things happen -- this was of course the theme of the Forester novels. I can't read them any more; they seem adolescent. We certainly need good ideas and dynamic leaders, but they need to work with other dynamic leaders (i.e., the rest of us) and share the good ideas to make them better. This is called politics.
Wouldn't a better approach be an awareness of the role of politics in libraries through a series of seminars presented by a wide variety of faculty members in, for instance, communications, library science, etc. and also bring in working librarians who can lend first hand, up close, experiences in this area of library and information science. As far as using political scientists is concerned, I'd vote no, unless they also happen to have a library science background.
As a former teacher, I have had experience with post graduate training (in the form of inservices) and if presented at a time (not following a hard day at school) and in a manner so that the information would be useful, I can see that post graduate introduction of this sort could be helpful. I discovered -- too late unfortunately -- as an undergraduate in education, that little was taught to education students on how to deal/cope with school politics. Not being one to sit idly by while morale drops and jobs go undone or worse, get muddled due to in-house politics, training might be the answer. What about library policy about these things? If we are to have policy on censorship, etc. why not some kind of in-house policy on political issues. Does the ALA address this in any way?
I will be interested to see how this topic shapes up, particularly from working librarians, both in academic and public settings.
Since libraries are usually part of a governmental entity or an organization, politics as defined is very important.
In most library schools, encouraging students to function effectively in group process should be an integral part of the instruction/learning activities. How can you teach management without considering politics. Surely everyone realizes that budgeting is a highly political management function.
Politics is only as nasty as the individuals involved make it.
Even collection development as a library function can not usually avoid politics as defined.
Student should realized early that acquiring skills without knowing when best to put them in practice (within their library environment) will make them at best knowledgeable without necessarily being effective.
The identification of the individual behind the desk, name and position, would at least communicate to the literate user the level of serve to expect.
That indicates when a professional reference librarian is on duty. This library (for safety sake) uses the identification badge to be sure individuals are not in locations that are off-limit to the public.
By the way, when I mentioned the above situation at a reference workshop (which included MLS librarians and support staff participants), quite a discussion resulted. In some communities, that situation would have been a political issue.
Status issue: this becomes perceived as the same as the name badges worn by lower-level employees, like the jumpsuits at your local quickie-lube with "Mel" embroidered on the pocket. Lots of white collar workers find the badge idea a reduction in status.
Privacy issue: if you try to avoid the above by using last names, you can get into some very sticky situations, up to illegal stalking and other types of harassment.
So, that leaves the security issue: this can be handled by a generic badge, such as "Library Staff," or, if status is an issue, "Librarian," etc.
I think the big point here is one already raised -- "politics" is a broad term, involving a number of aspects of inter-human relations. The ID badge issue can be handled and possible even solved, IF all involved parties are in fact involved.
An example: I was under rather strong pressure to force librarians into wearing badges, because "people can't tell who's working here." I contacted the complainant. He admitted he had seen one person at the reference desk, but when she was busy couldn't find the other staff. The point was, although it was busy, we only had the one staff person. In other words, the issue was not identifying the staff, but getting more staff to handle the workload. We had been arguing for this for years; after talking to the complainant, and he wrote a letter to the big boss, we actually got a bit more money to hire some student assistants. Oh yeah, and we put up a sign saying something like, if there's no one here at the moment, please wait, they are helping other users and will be back in a moment.
How do we equip students to position their libraries at the center of these groups? In other words, what do they need to place the library at the core of the decision making groups within a community and help shape those decisions that not only impact on the library but also on the general community?
There was also some discussion on the pro/con use of name badges in libraries. Is the reluctance of some library staff members to use name badges the desire for not getting involved with people -- in other words also not wanting to politically engage people? Can we as a profession accept this? Librarians need to be involved with their community and the issues and political discussions that take place. This has been a problem for libraries for a long time. Librarians often do not want to become engaged in political activities. We have to dirty our hands and become involved if our institutions are to survive.
What do the rest of you think?
"Considers the way political processes and power structures influence decisions and choices made within and by organizations. Analyzes the sources, distribution, and use of influence in relation to resource allocation, organizational change and performance, management succession, procedural justice, policy formulation, and social movements within organizations. Develops skills in diagnosing and using power and politics in organizational settings. A basic assumption underlying the course is that managers need well-developed skills in acquiring and exercising power to be effective. The course is designed to:
The name badge issue is relevant only to the extent that, within your organization, the badges are symbolic of power or authority (which are not the same thing). If only high level management were "allowed" to wear name badges, wouldn't everyone be thrilled to be asked to wear one?
I think it's valuable that students be taught about power and politics. The course I took used case studies: examining who had power, how they acquired it, who didn't and how they could go about obtaining some, who used political power well, who didn't, and what happens when political realities are ignored or just not recognized. I liked having a single course where I could focus on political issues.
Political scientists tend to focus on governmental issues. I see this more as a management issue, as part of organizational behavior.
I guess it is also a matter of how people come into the profession. My query on this leads to: "It's a job !" I am sure that may be in variance for individuals like lawyers, doctors, even politicians. So, now this leads to the question: "What is taught in Introduction to library science?" Besides telling the freshman student what the library consists of, and how materials are handled, how many data bases are available, the magic and power of the computer, etc., I hope we are telling them the tremendous importance Information and knowledge is to the human being, and the reason for the existence of the library is the human being and not books, CD-ROM, etc., and that they are entering one of the noblest professions -- if not the noblest, because all the professions depend on information/knowledge and the custodians of such resources. They should read (or re-read) some of Jesse H. Shera's papers on social epistemology and on others on the same subject. But then who am I to say? I am supposed to be an "information scientist."
Your points bring up the issue of our student population. Are we still attracting too many introverts (probably too strong a word) to the profession? If so, should be engage them in personality analysis exercises and attitude assessments to help them overcome this problem?
Eventually the strike was settled. And from what I hear of the Billings public library support; it continues to be one of those that actively involves the entire community.
If you insist. The name badge in its various manifestations is a very concrete symbol of what feels like, to the rank and file, the infantilization of librarians. It's like making an employee sign a loyalty oath; it draws a line that states, "we are in control and you are the lackey." It is therefore a supremely relevant line of discussion, however subterranean the point.
You cannot, on the one hand, tell librarians they are professionals who must lead the political effort and on the other hand conduct libraries like a latter-day Dewey, and those of us who have worked the front lines know what I am talking about. We are mice or we are people, but we are not SuperMice. There can be no dialectic before this.
Politics has to do with constituency, self-interest, and influence -- volume of individuals who have an interest in an issue or institution, and the parties wield influence within this arena in dealing with each other to obtain goals, as well as to cooperate so that everyone wins.
Since libraries (as institutions) and librarians (as leaders of those institutions) must exist in reality, and therefore in politics, it only makes sense that politics become a part of educating librarians. The biggest problem, it seems to me, is that many library school students don't perceive that they will be "leaders" or even directors -- whereas, the direction is that fewer MLS librarians in the future means that those few will more likely be in leadership/director/administrative positions (as opposed to "management" positions only). (I assume that you're talking about community politics and not just internal politics.)
I have a pet theory -- so far not taken up by anyone else that's heard it -- that library education could become a public administration degree with a specialty. Perhaps a two-year degree with half of the courses in library science and half in p.a. -- or maybe a public administration degree with an added certificate for library science. This seems plausible to me because of the administrative skills required in managing/directing most library operations as well as the fact that libraries are public institutions. In addition, the "politics" of it is that most libraries are players in the public administration sector of the community.
In other words, "being a librarian" isn't limited to what happens inside the library. And will be even less so in the future. Is that too obvious for words, or what?
I know of a situation in a large research library where the name badge was overlooked as a status issue (in that situation it was). The director and associate directors had to spend significant time dealing with it because they overlooked the significant influence that some of the workers (support staff) in that situation had with the president, the provost, and even some members of the Board of Trustees.
The term "situation" in our discussion should not be underrated.
Another point, we might need to agree on a set of assumptions for each discussion to keep within context if that possible. Personally, I learn quite a lot from these discussions because of the diversity of experiences and knowledge that the participants share.
What I am trying to say in a long winded way is, "Generalizations are very difficult."
As so often in our library discussions we firmly insist on not defining our terms: this allows everybody to say their piece without anyone else really being sure of what the other has said. Take this discussion about librarians and power.
There is a very concise definition of "power" by Amitai Etzioni: "power" is the ability to enforce compliance. Now what are we talking about with regards to power for librarians? Their ability to enforce compliance from the mega-multinational corporations?
When the "Family Friendly Libraries" group accuses libraries of being anti-parenting, anti-family, what should the librarians do?
When the Congress keeps cutting library funding, what should librarians do?
When the Board of Trustees rejects the ALA "Library Bill of Right" or reinterprets it to fit its own political or religious agenda because they think librarians (and ALA) are left-winged group, what do we do?
When a sci-fiction author declares that there is no need for libraries or librarians in his space new world because libraries (or librarians) are out-of-date concepts, (that's what the author told my student when she wrote to inquire), what do we tell our students?
We can whine and complain that none of them understand what we do and debate the right or wrongs among ourselves. Or we can draw a line and declare them enemies and fight the verbal wars and get the anger level escalated on both sides.
Neither of these (whiner or fighter) is useful in political landscape however. A more important, but often forgotten, mission for us is to cultivate the activist' attitude among the LIS professionals. Politics has to do with advancing our own status, with the power to determine what and how much we can do to advance our fundamental beliefs, both at the local level and at the national and international landscapes. Politics has to do not only with how to react to crises (such as budget cut, or unfriendly attacks) but also with proactive outreach.
activism, as an attitude, may not belong to most of the course syllabi in LIS programs, but that doesn't mean it cannot be taught. How many of us are teaching it throughout our contacts with students in and outside the classroom and how could it be done are the two things I am more interested in knowing.
Concerning the badge issue, I have to wonder what the problem is. Aren't people reading too much into this? Jobs require all sorts of dress codes, behavior, etc. so that the profession of which they are part maintains certain standards. Wearing badges for security purposes may be a hassle but to resent them seems a bit absurd. I would much prefer to wear a badge and be recognized as a staff member that to have users wandering around wondering where they could find someone to help them. Isn't that why we're in this field?
I had questioned at the beginning of this new topic a class on politics directed at librarians, but after reading Ninette Gironella's comments on the class she took as a student, I can see how this would be helpful in sorting through a lot of management problems and perhaps even break down some of the barriers between management and staff which can cause unnecessary strife and lowered morale within any organization or workplace. From Bob Cookingham's comments on the use of the library for meetings of a political nature, I would like to add that I think this is what the library is all about --a place to be both entertained and enriched, but also as a forum for differing views-- something of an everyman's university. Isn't this why the public library was born so that we as a nation could be informed politically and that we could make choices that would make this country strong?
By the way, I would like to hear more on "power," especially community power. No apology needed from Boris.
While I'm at it, consider the following. I believe the recent American Libraries article on why libraries are valuable was somewhat of a political blunder. Why? Because it preaches to the choir. Pull some of the jargon out of it and get it in a magazine that a lot of our citizens read. Why is that article in American Libraries -- are we hoping it makes it to Reader's Digest?
How about a two-semester library management course within the confines of a one-year master's program? Library science courses are a bit too redundant to justify a two-year program. Plus, consider that you're effectively doubling your price without considering inflation -- can your program survive? Until your program resembles something designed by Hyman Rickover (father of the U.S. Navy Nuclear Power training program) forget it. Perhaps some team teaching with professors in the public administration or the business arena could be developed.
For that matter, there are more definitions of power than have been discussed on this list.
Read two bell hooks and call me in the morning...
Politics is a part of everything that is human and societal -- how can it not be acknowledged within instruction? The politics of a situation has very much to do with decision-making, strategizing, planning, and managing. It's integral to context at every level. Perhaps the only question left is how the subject matter is presented in different facets.
Most library school either offer the chance for students to go from the general to the specifics in management (six semester hours). Our students at North Carolina Central University, a one-year program (really three academic semesters for most students) require a general management course and student are also required to take a specific library management course, i.e., academic, special, school, or public. We are more prescriptive in our course requirements because it is a one-year program. We also think that there is a common set of principles and knowledge that transcend working environments as currently defined in the profession.
Mr. Graham states, very eloquently, one of the problems that faces the Omaha Public Library. Our political scene is such that the mayor and the library director nearly come to fisticuffs every time a new staff member needs to be hired or computer memories need upgrading. I find that much of the political "hoo-hah" (and I'm not trying to dismiss the importance of politics) revolves around funding.
The library is supposed to be run like a business according to the Executive Board. So, you hire management-focused people to sit on the board. Those are the ones to watch out for.
To them, technology is the end-all and be-all of libraries and providing information. BUT, they have no concept of the extra training, practice, and money involved to make technology pay for itself. Many don't even understand the phrase "customer service," even as popular as it is today.
In the political scene, despite some evidence to the contrary, often it is the library staff and funding that gets cut first when it's time to balance the budget.
One last thing ... KUDOS to Bethany Thompson for reminding us why we are in this profession to begin with. (It's not the money?) The main reason we are in this field is to serve people who need information. Get them what they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford! She hit the nail on the head!
Without a doubt the megastores have at their bottom line -- profit. We all understand that principle very well. Obviously they create an atmosphere where people go to look for information, reading, music, etc., etc., which in the long run contribute to profit. A store's viability is directly related to its profitability. That's business.
Libraries have a problem here because their viability is not related to profitability. So what is their objective? How do they prove value to the community and that continued and/or increased funding is important? Specifically, how do they sell themselves to the decision makers in policy and funding particularly when those decision makers are more familiar and possibly more comfortable with the "profit" model of running a business.
To expand further, if a library is funded by the government and the library hasn't sold its viability or "value-add" to the community then what defense or basis will the library have when the budget cuts come? The same holds true for combating the special interest groups. If the goals and objectives are clearly specified and pro-actively acted upon, a strong framework exists to defend a stance on certain issues. The influence of special interest groups comes from relationships (both personal and financial) with the decision makers. When these groups are saying "We'll withdraw financial support if..." and the focus is on the library, we need to have our own relationships in place and a defensible position coupled with track history.
Does all this require direct involvement with the source of funding (the government)? In my mind, the library has to be as savvy in the political arena (if that's the source of our funding) as all the other groups that have their hand in the till.
By the way, saying some things is not serious to the wrong constituent or constituent groups in reality might not be good politics, if taken seriously.
To the MPA advocate, what would be wrong with an MBA degree with courses in organizational behavior and individual behavior or with courses in public administration? I can think of situation where a number of different options on this theme would be appropriate.
On behalf of the faculty of the School of Information and Library Studies at the University of Michigan that sponsors the CRISTAL-ED LISTSERV, Steve Wooldridge (CRISTAL-ED technical moderator) and I would like to thank the many LISTSERV members who have contributed their ideas, reactions, and energy to our discussions. Without such an active membership, we would not have such a high-caliber discussion on the LISTSERV. We would also like to thank the many CRISTAL-ED LISTSERV moderators who have suggested topics, hosted discussions, and summarized the proceedings. The guest editors are in chronological order of our discussions:
My comment about merging library science instruction with an MPA program came from an observation that librarians at the administrative level are public administrators. The way it got into this discussion is that public administrators are players in the community agenda, which involves politics (external, that is).
This refers to public libraries alone, I guess, but even in academic and special libraries, the administrative skills (and politicking demands in a larger arena) that are needed are possibly identical?
Let me just say that the MPA program appears to prepare administrators in a better way for their role in the larger, very political, external context.
Libraries are in the information service business and will survive if they keep the term "business" and what it means in the appropriate context.
 Home |
 Discussion |