How a Name Change Could Spell Success

"I am not opposed to a name change. It may be necessary, but it will never be sufficient on its own. If we change our name and change nothing else, it will be simply cosmetics. We need an attitudinal change that results in changes in the way we perceive our profession and our role."

 

- Eugenie Prime, from a conversation with SLA President Elect-Elect Cindy Romaine

One thing that seems to be missing from the discussion about the proposed name change is a vision of how the Association and all of its members might move forward with a new name.  As Eugenie Prime says, a name change alone isn't enough.  We will need action behind it to demonstrate our value even as we are describing it.  We'll also need to focus some of these efforts outside of the profession.  In other words, we need to spend less time preaching to the choir and look at how we can help the rest of the world understand all we have to offer no matter where we work or the specific role we play.
 

This doesn't mean that the Association cares more about the views of others over those of its own members.  Nor does it leave out certain groups of librarians so much as it seeks to be more inclusive of all of our members.  Instead, Alignment challenges us to raise awareness about how much the librarian role has grown.  
 

The name "Association for Strategic Knowledge Professionals" focuses on what we do and deliver rather than where we work or what we're called.  As such it has the potential to be our common denominator, where we overlap and where similar professionals might feel comfortable joining us.  We've already benefited from a diverse membership that includes specialties such as knowledge management, competitive intelligence,  Web 2.0 and other social technologies (just to name just a few.)
 

So whatever your initial thoughts or feelings about the name, I ask you to at least consider how it could succeed and your role in that process.  Envision what it would look like for you and your unique role in your organization and industry.  What could you and your co-workers or fellow division members come up with to communicate the value behind the name?  How could the language and tools already available in the Alignment research help you do that?  
 

A new name is not a magic wand that will suddenly earn us more respect and money.  Yet combined with the right messages tailored to our individual organizations, leaders and industries, it could be a powerful tool in helping those outside of the profession understand just how much we bring to the table.

Comments

[betsy]

"We will need action behind it to demonstrate our value even as we are describing it. We'll also need to focus some of these efforts outside of the profession. In other words, we need to spend less time preaching to the choir..."

I do so wonder who makes up your "We". Individuals members have been advocating for themselves, with varying degrees of success, for some time. What seems to be lacking is advocacy performed directly by the association itself on behalf of its members.

I frankly could care less about the name. I am more concerned, and have been for some time, on the mission of the association. The benefit of a professional association is the same as the stated mission of SLA - education, networking, advocacy. SLA seems to be satisfactory in only 2 of the 3 parts. With this alignment, one can only hope that SLA/ASKP finds a way to get out here with its individual members - focusing EXCLUSIVELY on membership growth, revenue generation, and speaking just to information industry organizations has to stop. It's not just the individual members that need the attitudinal change.

Here's to high hopes that this Alignment works!

[Jerry Ash]

I am extremely enthused over the bold strategic thinking behind a name change for SLA that would not only redefine the work of special librarians but expand SLA's reach to other professionals who are also engaged in various forms of knowledge work.

As a 15 year veteran of the KM movement and founder of the Association of Knowledgework (AOK), I wholeheartedly support the idea.

With a career in professional association management behind me, I founded AOK in 2000 with the vision that it would become the centerpiece of a then-developing KM professional field. It did not happen that way although AOK was successful in establishing a strong community of practice (interest) that became well respected for its Star Series Dialogues and contributed immeasurably to the body of knowledge about knowledge management and work.

Still, it did not become a full-fledged professional association and AOK was morphing into a Knowledge Future Center in 2007 when I transferred ownership to Avigdor Sharon in Israel who still follows that path.

(Incidentally, I have spent the past year developing a general interest publication called Smart People magazine [www.smartpeoplemagazine.com] which I describe in private as "KM lite". It's mission is to carry the KM story and promise in plain language to the vast majority who are not yet aware of the new emphasis on knowledge as the key ingredient of both business and personal fulfillment in the Knowledge Age.)

A few others have attempted to develop organizations to serve as professional associations for knowledge professionals, but with similar result.

Although the reasons are many, I believe the chief among them is that the "profession" of knowledge management/work has not materialized as a distinct and separate field. For example, and as you well know, librarians are knowledge managers and workers but they already have their associations and SLA has shown exceptional leadership in extending the scope of librarianship to embrace KM. Good for the traditional members, of course, but good for non-traditional prospective members who are still looking for a home for KMers.

While the "field" of KM seems to be disappearing, the practice of KM is growing, embedding itself in various functions in the business process. That's a good thing if you believe (as I do) that KM will only succeed when it becomes part of the business process. But the negative is that KM also becomes fragmented and could become secondary, incidental, misunderstood and die when absorbed by the wrong business units.

SLA represents the RIGHT business units and understands KM on broad terms -- not just as it relates to document management per se. Changing the name, broadening the mission may be good strategy for SLA, but it is will also be good news for knowledge management.

Jerry Ash
Founder, Association of Knowledgework
Former editor, Inside Knowledge magazine
Publisher, Smart People magazine
Contact: smart.guy1@smartpeoplemagazine.com