Opposing the Name, But Supporting Alignment

For those of you who follow my iBraryGuy blog, these reflections will look familiar.  My original response to the proposed name was posted there.  I have since accepted the invitation to post an opponents perspective to the SLA Blog and have edited my original piece accordingly.

SLA, the venerable Special Libraries Association, is my favorite organization for librarians and information professionals.  I belong to others.  But I have not given them the years of dedication and active volunteerism that I have given SLA.  SLA helps to define who I am as a professional and a person.  Certainly, you can appreciate that I have taken a keen and outspoken interest in its proposed name change.  I have been participating in the Twitter discussion about this change for several days now.  Rather than Tweet myself silly, I thought I would set out my own reaction to and thoughts on this proposal.

First, let me sat that I really admire the Board for undertaking the Alignment initiative.  It is bold and forward-thinking. I am also sure it has been and will continue to be a great deal of hard work . . . more work than many of us are capable.  Kudos to such dedication and activism.  This is exactly what we need right now and for tomorrow. However, I have decided that I cannot support the proposed name . . . not after my experiences several years ago when we voted at the annual meeting.  I stood up at a mic and spoke in support of change.  We did not get it then and for months I heard from members who were upset that "librarian" was being removed from our name.  What I came to believe is that if that term is not winning with execs and others, it is because we have failed to reclaim it for ourselves.  The new SLA name should be inclusive, yes. But not at the disadvantage of those who have labored so hard to raise the status of this wonderful profession.  How do you tell the folks, whom you claim to be your core, that their title is too much of a drag on the association that they built to be retained? 

My title has not been "librarian" in years.  But I did an interview for Information Outlook just a few years ago in which I said, "I am and will always be a librarian".  I meant it then and I mean it in earnest now. Changing the name for the sake of raising our stakes feels like window-dressing.  It seems like a bandage that masks a much bigger wound.  Changing the name will not change minds or understandings.  This is especially true when we use buzz words that sound so corporate and kitschy.  The discussion on Twitter has been telling.  Members do not know whether "strategic" describes "knowledge" or "professionals".  In fact, supporters and Board members have given conflicting answers!  Either way, the full name "Strategic Knowledge Professionals" simply sounds contrived to me and to many others with whom I have shared it. How long until we have to try to explain what that mouthful means or what we do?  How long until we again have to consider another name change because execs and others don't get it?  To those who say that others do not have to "buy it"...you only discredit your own process.  If that is so, then why change?  Execs and others do have to buy it if we want them to help cover our dues and convention costs. 

I have long believed that name change is necessary and inevitable.  However, I think a name with "librarian" in it somewhere shows far more courage and more promise than the purposeful dilution of who we are for the sake of image.  It shows that we are ready to take this profession into the future for what it is.  Have we ever stopped to consider that sometimes, reinvigoration is far more powerful than reinvention? Reinvention may be easier in tough times, but it costs more and wastes more resources in the long run.  Many of the newer titles have come and gone over the years (as have their organizations).  Yet the librarians are still here in title AND spirit.  The proposed name dampens that spirit.  It tosses out the baby with the bathwater and leaves us an empty tub.  Is this really what we want?  I will not be making the same mistake I did a few years ago.  I am ready for change . . . but not for change's sake (since some think we cannot afford to fail again) . . . but courageous, bold, and proud change.  That's what makes me a librarian.

I encourage everyone to speak up on this important issue, whether you support or oppose the proposed name.  Part of what makes SLA such a wonderful organization is that there is room for all of us and our opinions.  I also urge those voicing opinions to do so with civility and respect.  Remember, those with whom you disagree care as much for SLA as you do. If we cannot have rational and respectful dialog as peers and professionals, then we might as well not have an organization!  Name change or no, the Alignment must move forward.  We need the talents and voices of each and every member if we are going to succeed at raising the profile and prospects of our industry.  Mutual respect and calm discourse will ensure that.  Please, think before you post that blog, send that e-mail, or tweet.

Finally, to our Board and Staff . . .  we cannot function without your hard work and dedication.  But please remember that you too cannot function without the rank and file members.  The more transparency you bring to this process, the better the discussion will be. 

I plan to be here for my organization, regardless of how the vote on our name goes.  In the end, SLA is more than just its name.  It is the sum of its amazing members and the services they and their association offer. That's a sum beyond measure, my friends. Call it what you want, but in the end, a group like that is still the place for me.

Respectfully, John J. DiGilio, MLIS, JD

(Proud SLA Member & Librarian . . . The "iBraryGuy" )

 

Comments

[twitter.com/valariesla]

Thank you for saying what I have believed all along. Although it has been eons since I worked in the corporate world, the one reality that has stayed with me is when an organization is no longer viable or productive it starts looking at how it can change the name or the logo or the location to revamp its image. When you cease to use the word "librarian" you are saying that an honorable and long-historied profession has no relevance. All I have to say is I am a librarian, and there is instant recognition from everyone. But I don't stop there because I then tell them how we are no longer just a bun behind a desk with a book. The SLA Alignment is a great idea, but until the profession lets the world know what it does, the pay will still be low, and the value low only we'll be called "Info Pros" instead.

[Laura Smith]

I agree totally that companies start changing their names when they are floundering. Using buzzwords as your title makes your organization just one of many in the corporate world. No one will know what it means and does except the members themselves.

A common complaint I read here is that SLA isn't known outside the librarian world. Well, after all these years, why not? Isn't it because it is a specialized branch and for that reason is only relevant to those in the field and just adjacent? We are, after all, talking a special niche area here. Isn't that why the org was formed in the first place -- for its members and to differentiale itself from the wider librarian universe?

Specialized librarians, special subject librarians, professional subject librarians, professional knowledge librarians, "librarians: they don't just work with books anymore!" Surely there's a better descriptor than strategic knowledge professionals that could apply to anyone in the broadcasting, animated movie studios, software development, or corporate business worlds as well.

[Barbara Pilvin]

I'm very rarely at a loss for words, but you folks have just said virtually everything I would say. I'll add this: I've only been a member of SLA for a year, but I've been a librarian since 1982 and a member of ALA since my library-school days (1981) and MLA since 2001; my interests range from medicine, consumer health information and the history of medicine to history, genealogy, rare books, historical collections, music and almost anything French. I joined SLA because, like many librarians, I have specialized interests and a sense that we devote too little time and effort to showing the world our true worth. In fact, the director of my library--who is the first woman to run this large and highly-regarded public library, and has only been with us a little over a year--has been known to say that in our profession we have a tradition of giving...and giving... by which she means giving to excess (and I once heard her say that sometimes we give until it is "stupid"--direct quote!). Bringing the perception of our value (and thereby bringing our monetary worth) into line with reality is a wonderful goal and I'd like to see all librarians and other information professionals--and the relevant associations--work towards it. I'm convinced, however, that adopting a name that an organization's members have to explain to themselves as well as their clientele isn't going to help. I'm also convinced that an acronym like ASKPro is just too "cutesy" to help. I have a sense of humor and I certainly try not to talk down to patrons (or anyone else!), but I also have a sense of professional pride and dignity.

[Jean Steinhardt]

I do not support the name change to Strategic Knowledge Professional. I believe, with other respondents, that the term "librarian" should be a part of any name change.

I am a long time member of SLA, and a recent member of AIIP - Association of Information Professionals. When I tell prospective clients I am a member of Special Libraries Association, they know immediately what to think. I then have only to correct what they think they know a librarian is and does.

On the other hand, when I tell them I am a member of the Association of Information Professionals, I first have to explain to them what an "Information Professional" is. "It's sort of like being a librarian," I explain. "Oh" they respond. And then I have to correct what they think they know a librarian is and does.

The moral: A name that includes the word "librarian" or "libraries" reduces the time required to educate a potential client.

In my experience, the biggest marketing challenge is addressing the self-effacing nature of the service. I can remember a number of occasions when the CEO of a company I worked for asked his assistant to find information on a particular issue. The assistant then contacted someone he knew, who then contacted the library. The library supplied the information. But because the information was for the CEO, it was confidential. The library could not take credit for providing information to the CEO. Consequently, the library could not demonstrate the crucial role it played within the organization, and its budget was cut on a routine basis.

This is not a unique experience. It is this experience that represents the greatest challenge facing special libraries ... a name change will not do the job.

If a name change IS required, it should include the word "libraries" or "librarian."

Jean Steinhardt
www.JeanSteinhardtConsulting.com
letters@jeansteinhardt.com

[Alex Grigg]

I understand the concerns that people are raising here, but arguing about whether or not we use the term Library or Librarian in our organization name seems incredibly silly to me. Changing the name doesn't stop you, as a member, from being a librarian, from working in a library, or from advocating for libraries. The main advantage that I see in the new name is that we have room to call ourselves whatever we want and whatever works best. It doesn't pre-label us with a term that may or may not apply to the job and the work that we are doing.

On a similar note, there is no way that the term librarian is going to be reclaimed to adequately express what we want the term to mean. There are too many decades and centuries of the majority of people using libraries thinking of the librarian as the person behind the check out desk who they talk to once they've already found a book. That is leaving aside the whole old lady in a bun stereotype which is less prevalent, but still in the back of many people's minds. One organization of 10-15,000 members cannot change the minds of the billions of people in the world. So get over it. We're not going to reclaim the term by shoving it into a new name.

[Jean Steinhardt]

Regarding "silly" posted by Alex ... OK, let's go with that. What do I call myself after the name change ... a "Strategic Knowledge Professional?" ... what does that mean in the real world?

When AARP - the "American Association of Retired People" ... decided to change their name, they changed it to the acronym, AARP ... because while acknowledging that the mission had changed from representing the "retired" to representing older Americans, retired or not, they did not want to discard a decades long name recognition campaign, so they retained the acronym that the public knows. Which means, (silly me) that they do not have to reeducate the public from scratch. They just have to move the public perception fromn "retired" to "older American."

[David Hook]

@Jean Steinhardt:
What you call yourself after the name change is exactly the same as you would call yourself now. Call yourself a librarian if that suits you. Or Strategic Knowledge Professional. Or whatever you want. The change of the association does not mean that we are all collectively changing our job title.

The word librarian works for some people, it doesn't work for others. The idea is to come up with a more generic name that appeals to a wider audience, be they librarians, info professionals, web developers, research professionals, records managers, etc.

[Your Friendly Neighborhood Librarian]

@Alex Grigg

I disagree. I believe young people today don't see the same history us older folks see with "librarians." I'm not sure how many librarian stereotypes are still out there today but the experience young folks have with librarians is one primarily of electronic resource AS WELL AS books. The way people see librarians has begun to change - It starts with the young folks since they don't have the "history" the rest of us do. I believe the way librarians will be seen in the not too distant future will be significantly different than the way it was seen 10 years ago or even in the very recent past.

Now, I'm just brainstorming here but how about something like "Library & Information Professionals (LIPS)" - I can see the promotion video now: A hot librarian, the camera zooming in on her lips, waiting to help patrons with their research request. When she finally speaks, it is into a wireless headset connected to the computer where she barks commands that quickly retrieves the information the patrons need. Then the patrons say something like "Wow - I thought all you librarians did was Shush people" She then stands up, leans over towards them showing significant cleavage, licks her lips slowly and seductively goes "Shhhhhh"

"LIPS - You'll be amazed to see what your librarian can do today!"
Or something like that...