“Change has been constant for libraries. But why does this change feel so much faster, so much deeper? This change feels faster because in many ways it is faster. Technology has played a key role in this perception of change, but it is by no means the only factor. Shifting population centers, changing demographics, and the cyclical ups and downs of the economic roller coaster all contribute to the change with which libraries must deal.” (Casey & Savastinuk, 2007, p.2)
📚📖📚
Theme: “Constant and Purposeful Change”
This theme has stuck out to me a lot so far in this course because to me it is not a new concept. I know that’s a bit ironic or maybe oxymoronic to say, but I really mean that this is a theme that I have seen come through every single one of my classes in this MLIS program so far (at least a little but) and that I have seen in my work in libraries and archives before I started this program. Change is a central theme in the world of libraries and information organizations.
What has motivated me to write about it here, is the way it is being discussed. The quote that opened this blog post, as well as the title for the assignment and theme comes from Michael Casey and Laura Savastinuk’s book Library 2.0: A Guide to Participatory Library Service (2007). This book discusses the “essential ingredients” of the Library 2.0 model, one of them being “Constant and Purposeful Change” (Casey & Savastinuk, 2007, p.12). These foundational concepts were created with the idea that libraries have a goal to meet the needs of their patrons and do so in a sustainable fashion that is good for the patrons and the library staff as well. It also stems from the understanding that technology is evolving and becoming ever-so interconnected with every aspect of our lives. So that means that patrons are going to have technology related needs, and they are going to expect their libraries to help them.
While the truth of technological evolution is certainly a factor of both the creation of the Library 2.0 and The Hyperlinked library model, what I really appreciate is how both models refuse to let tech be the biggest and/or only motivator for change. As it says in the quote above, population changes, political influence and events, cultural shifts, and more non-tech related things have influence over why things in the world of libraries is changing.
Now a counter to this thought could be that everything today has been influenced by tech. The participatory web, social-internet, etc. has permeated everything in modern society, including how populations are changing and culture is shifting. Michael himself even said so in some of the lectures from these first few modules so far. I understand this and see it myself. And yet, I believe there is influencing going the other way too. There is no participatory web without people to participate, right? So that’s all to say that while the web/tech is important to take into consideration, changes that are made in libraries can’t and shouldn’t be completely based on technology changes. This is reflected in the Library 2.0 and The Hyperlinked library through their concentration on people and access being the main goals of the models.
Another reason I’ve chosen to write about the theme of change here and now is that I’ve already done a lot of thinking and writing about change in libraries before. When I took INFO 204: Information Professions, there were at least 3 (and probably more) modules that discussed change, change management, strategic planning, and evaluation of changes. If the idea of constant and purposeful change wasn’t so important for libraries, then why was so much time spent on discussing and understanding it in a foundational class of this program? From that class I took away that being able to make change, be comfortable with change, and being able to effectively communicate about changes makes for a very strong information professional. It’s these lessons that I see again here in the sources from this class so far.
Finally, I write about change here because I know that this is something that will continue to come up so I should be familiar with why and how to handle it. I see through the study of the Library 2.0 and The Hyperlinked library models that change is necessary and important. I see in my workplace in a public middle school library that change is not always chosen it is often inherited. These are the reasons to think about change.
More thoughts I have but am running out of space so I will open up to the comments:
- Where does the trap of “we’ve always done it this way” come into the conversation of constant and purposeful change? Can some of the “old ways” be incorporated?
- Change is almost always easier said than done.
- I didn’t even begin to think about the changes that Gen AI is prompting…
- Constant, I think, can be up for interpretation when it comes to making organizational changes. Does the definition of constant differ when we’re thinking large scale (like strategic plans) and small scale (like where to move the furniture)? Should it?
References