Getting in the Way by Anne Caputo, President-Elect

Two events happened to me in quick succession recently that illustrated in a very concrete reasons we need to vote for a name change:

1) I sat next to a lawyer and researcher at a recent conference on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act who told me she admired the NY Chapter of SLA so much, attended some of their programs, and wished she too could be a member of our association.  ‘Why you CAN!’ I replied.  Puzzled, she said, ‘But isn’t it for librarians only?’ This story has a happy ending because we had this conversation.  She returned to New York and joined our association the next week.  But her parting remark to me gave me pause.  She said ‘Your name gets in the way.’  I believe there are many more professional researchers out there who could and should belong to our association.  If our name gets in the way it’s hard to find them.

2) At a recent career fair at my local university, one where I teach as a lecturer and have done so for 10 years, the table staffed by student members of SLA was not attracting much attention, while the other professional associations represented did a brisk business.  I asked the dean why she thought SLA’s table had so little traffic.  She said she thought the students – LIS students at that – did not understand what a special library was.  She said, ‘Your name gets in the way.’

Let’s vote for a name that allows us to define ourselves.  Knowledge professionals are:  librarians, researchers, information professionals, competitive intelligence specialists, taxonomists and many other knowledge intensive workers.  That’s what we are so let’s choose an inclusive name that attracts and supports us.

Anne Caputo, President-Elect

Comments

[Iris Anderson, 2009 Chair]

Ann, I whole-heartedly agree with this! In fact, I'd like to see the different titles that our members go by (over 150, I think)scrolling along the top of our website. Special Librarian is our original moniker and one to be proud of for sure; but, we are so much more than that name alone implies to the outside world. It's definitely time for a more inclusive and representative name for the association!

Iris Anderson
Chair
Social Science Division

[Marcy Brown]

I find it interesting that you stated that you "believe there are many more professional researchers out there who could and should belong to our association." You didn't say, "there are many more strategic knowledge professionals." Most folks have a strong sense of what it means to be a professional researcher. But an SKPro?? Not so much.

[Jim Byerly]

Whoa,hold the train! I couldn't disagree more with Anne Caputo's opinion.

I have no interest in belonging to an organization that feels it needs to pander to every "information professional." I'm a librarian, I have a graduate degree to prove it.

I want SLA to fight for my interests. I don't give two cents for those ancillary folks who are just dilluting the value of the graduate library programs and what it means to be a professional librarian.

You don't see members of the American Medical Association inviting nurses, acupuncturists, and massage therapists to join the organization that to quote their Website "represents physicians' interests in both the public and private sectors..."

SLA should represent the interest of Libriarians (i.e. those with graduate degrees) in the public and private sectors.

[Jim Byerly]

BTW, why do people think this koolaid tastes so good?

[Kathy Mills]

I'm all for a name change, but I'm not sure the 2nd example is a good argument for one. I'd be wary of any university where LIS students didn't know what a special library was. It's covered in the foundations course!

[Proud Librarian]

Thank you Kathy! That's covered in the first few weeks. Very poor example. It would be better to ask the attendees why they did not stop by the booth than try to make an assumption to support this crazy name change. As for the first example, if she has attended so many events, she should know by now that the association isn't limited to librarians. This name change business is bogus.

[Your friendly neighborhood LIBRARIAN]

A name change is fine but this name just doesn't sound all that good to me. I know that you all like to shout "change" for the sake of change and people on the other end of the spectrum find it difficult to change ANYTHING. But a change just for the sake of change isn't necessarily good either! There is nothing wrong with "library" or "librarians." If you think about it, it is primarily the "old" folks who associate librarians as exclusively book-oriented. The younger generation I believe, knows how much more we do and how much more "librarian" encompasses. I believe as time goes on, the definition of LIBRARIES will (eventually) catch up closer to what we know it to be.

[Your friendly neighborhood LIBRARIAN]

I do think however, we could use better/more marketing! If only we get the $$ for it!

[Chuck Tornabene]

Once again a fluff arguement from people like Ann that we have misguidedly elected.

Let's find some real issues to worry about and if the name needs to be changed (and I'm alright with that)let id be a name that has some substance.

No, I'd rather not drink this Koolaid!

[Withheld]

"At this juncture" the name is already dated. Strategic is such a buzz word. Can we not think "outside the box" and have an "all-hands meeting" to get our "synergies" together so the decision doesn't seem so "back-door?" I'm all for a name change, just not THIS name change. Anything that sounds like it was thought up in a board meeting using sticky notes and expensive "research" just doesn't feel like it represents all the special librarians and other information professionals I have known in my 20 years in public, government and academic libraries/information centers.

[David Hook]

@Jim Byerly:

You are comparing apples and oranges. The AMA is a completely different situation because you are talking about a association of professionals where an accreditation is a requirement of membership. If this was the case of SLA, then your comparison would be valid, but it is not.

And to add my two cents, I hardly think that including members outside the traditional library field dilutes the value of the association. It adds much more value to the assocation to have a diverse membership.