Generations, leadership and respect

From PLN

Jump to: navigation, search

Generations, leadership and respect

Contents

Generational issues come in all flavors, some probably more legitimate than others. There are generational labels (Baby boomers, GenX, Millennials, whatever us pre-baby-boomers are called) and the complex combination of real changes and improbable overgeneralizations that come with each one. Those generalizations are particularly difficult when applied to library patronage and services. Generation labels also come up in discussing library staff and leaders--whether real or assumed generational differences will fundamentally change the way libraries work and are governed.

But there are also intergenerational issues--issues that sometimes have fairly little to do with generation labels and a lot to do with how we perceive one another. On appearances and legitimacy and The age of librarians both consider these issues. Aretha Franklin called for it decades ago, but it's still difficult to find sometimes: r-e-s-p-e-c-t.

This piece combines several blog posts that consider how generations work (or don't work) together, in all cases from a library perspective. Jenica Rogers-Urbanek provides a case study of apparent lack of intergenerational respect. Bill Drew--another SUNY librarian--sees problems with his own generation. Jamie LaRue considers some possible issues in changing generations and the need for clear leadership. Added October 15, 2008: T. Scott Plutchak considers categories and exceptions, stating an essential truth about generational generalizations.

You can stand me up at the gates of hell

by Jenica Rogers-Urbanek, SUNY-Potsdam. Excerpted and modified from this August 6, 2008 post at Attempting elegance by permission.

Scene: Deck lounge, overlooking the Oswego River, drinks flowing, librarians milling about after a long day of discussing document delivery and the future of libraries, including a brief presentation by two collections librarians on the pilot project being undertaken by a small group of SUNY libraries to attempt to do cooperative collection development.

“…so they’re only going to buy five copies of any book, and expect that we’ll all just share them. It’s completely bogus.” “That’s ludicrous. What idiot thought that up?”

At home, I refer to this as a “Jenica Loses Her Temper” moment. Because the ‘idiot’ who thought that up was me, with the able support and collaboration of thirteen other SUNY collections librarians, at the behest of our Directors. And I happened to be standing not five feet away from the men who were so derisively condemning our efforts.

So I introduced myself, and told them what was really going on. A group of like libraries, composed of SUNY four-year comprehensive institutions, are volunteering to attempt to reduce duplication among our collections by not buying more than five copies of any one title, and when a sixth copy is requested by one of these libraries, collections managers will work with the selector to choose another book that is less widely held, unless the selector can identify a pressing local need for an additional copy (like, reserves, or core curricular needs, etc.). In theory, this should broaden the number of titles available for our users to borrow, and therefore meet a broader range of information needs without unduly burdening any one budget, campus, or user. It’s entirely voluntary, it’s non-binding, and it’s a pilot.

The questions I answered in my brief sojourn in Hostile Village (excerpted for this article):

  • Why do I have to justify my request for a 6th copy? Why don’t you? Shouldn’t we all, as selectors and collectors, be justifying every single one of our selections?...
  • So if we want to buy the most recent Pulitzer-prize winning works, or the new edition of a dictionary, we have to do it before five other people do, in order to have a copy in our library? No. Local needs will always trump the project’s limits, and any good collection manager will know and express that clearly...
  • Isn’t it a bad idea to involve the SUNY Central administration in local purchasing decisions? Yes, it is, which is why no one suggested that we would do that...
  • How are we going to implement this on my campus? You’ll have to ask your own collection librarian; I have no intention of telling anyone else how to run their library...
  • Don’t you think it’s unreasonable to ask a librarian to do more collection development work? No, I don’t. I think collection development has been a sideline at small colleges for too long, seen as an add-on to other ‘more important’ duties...
  • Who put you in charge? No one. I’m not in charge. No one’s in charge. I volunteered to report on the group’s efforts, and we’re having different people and campuses host our meetings, so we make that librarian be the unofficial chair for the meeting...

It became clear to me as this conversation progressed that the main naysayers were men in their 50’s and 60’s who were irritated by change. Whether that’s a natural inclination, an age-based position or a personal choice, I cannot say, but it’s representative of many of my experiences as a young woman in this profession. I felt that I was being painted as an uppity young thing making what they saw as unreasonable demands without what they perceived to be the authority to do so.

And that pisses me off, frankly.

A group of dedicated and energized librarians drove a total of 48 hours to come together in the center of our very large state to discuss a forward-looking initiative that we will participate on a voluntary basis dependent on campus leadership’s support. And we’re being condemned for that effort--before we’ve even begun--by a subset of our peers based on their own fear of change, dislike of being directed in their work, and generally poor information gathered through hearsay and innuendo rather than conversations with people actually involved. (And they were doing it loudly! In public! There’s an arrogance there that really bothers me, as well. If you’re going to denounce something in public, you might consider being aware of all the facts and also looking around a bit to see who might be listening.)

They didn’t have the facts, they didn’t have the whole truth and they weren’t terribly interested in learning it. They were getting more pleasure out of grumbling and condemning than they were out of listening or learning, and that became very clear very quickly. Once our conversation reached a polite stopping place and began to drift over to complaints about the SUNY budget process, I apologized for the interruption, thanked them for listening, and excused myself. And bought a stiff drink.

Despite that moment of challenge, I received a dozen compliments on the brief presentation Jennifer Smathers and I gave at the conference, and answered a dozen more interested and enthusiastic questions about what we’re trying to accomplish. I’m planning to let that support and interest carry me over the frustration of those three men kicking mud on my new toy. The thing I won’t forget about that moment of challenge, though, is that the profession hasn’t changed. Not yet. Not really. We’re changing it, slowly and surely through our actions, ideas, and innovations, but the job’s not done. Fear still rules. Tradition still has power. The heels of stubbornness are still dug in. We are scared of a future which looks to be different than the present. And I’m going to get smacked down a few hundred more times before that’s not true anymore.

I’m not giving up, though. I’ll keep waiting for the sea change, critical mass, tipping point, what have you. And until then I’ll keep standing back up and saying “It was my idea. Can I answer some of your questions about it?”

You might want to read the comments, including those noting that the Orbis Cascade Alliance has been doing this sort of thing for a while, with reasonable success. The coordinated collection development really isn't the story here, though--it's the lack of generational (and gender?) respect and the apparent unwillingness of (some) older (or more experienced) librarians to consider change. Which brings us to another SUNY librarian...

Older librarians and change

by Bill Drew, Tompkins Cortland Community College (TC3) Library (a SUNY college), adapted from this August 7, 2008 post at Baby boomer librarian by permission.

Warning!! This is a rant.

I have been seeing and participating a great deal in discussions about librarians and change. I have several questions that may be without any real answers. I have not been satisfied with the answers I have seen in various places. Here is my list of questions in no particular order. Some will make generalizations and refer to stereotypes.

  • Why are older librarians resistant to change?
  • Why do so many older librarians fear change?
  • Why is "because it has always been done that way" a legitimate reason for continuing to do things a certain way?
  • What happens to librarians who, when they were newly minted, wanted to change things but now resist change?
  • Why must older librarians always be so anal retentive and need to be in control?
  • Why are older librarians afraid of younger librarians with ideas and energy?
  • What ever happened to my generation's mantra of "Don't trust anyone over 30?" When did it change to don't trust any one under 45?
  • Why do so many older librarians insist it is the container (the printed page) that is important and not the content?

I am getting extremely frustrated with librarians of my generation and older who are afraid of change and the unknown. I really do not understand it at all. In my view, my generation has seen and has created more changes in technology and the world than any previous generation. Because of that we should be more open to it and actively take part in it. Celebrate it!

People who are resistant to change and actively oppose it tend to end up as bitter and reclusive. Change and participating in it is what keeps me intellectually challenged and intellectually young. In a great many ways I find I have more in common with younger librarians than with older ones. Older librarians are in a position to assist younger librarians in challenging the status quos. In academia, we tend to be tenured and can serve as buffers for the younger librarians. We also are usually the ones in positions of authority or influence.

Please leave me some comments and thoughts on my questions.

Comments

Editor's note: Drew specifically asked for comments and thoughts and received a handful. All are worth reading. Here's most of the first (and so far longest), from T Scott, who writes at T. Scott and elsewhere.

Since you describe this as a rant I won't make a big deal about the fact that many, many older librarians of my acquaintance are not at all averse to change and I know many newly minted librarians who are. I'm sure you know that.

Nonetheless, there are certainly a higher proportion of older librarians who are change averse than those who are younger.

This has nothing to do with being librarians.

Most people are relatively change averse at all points in their lives and become more so as they get older. Simple reason? The older you are the more that you have invested in the way that things are, and the more that you stand to lose if things change. This is true whether you are talking about job, family, politics, art, culture, whatever...

Most of the young radical librarians who are eager to change things will become less willing to take risks and make changes as they get older and more entrenched. It will come as a great shock to them when they find newly minted librarians who are ten years younger than they are giving them hell for being so wedded to their stupid blogs and twitters and so unwilling to participate in whatever the new shiny things of a decade hence turn out to be.

True leadership will always be invested in a small number of people who are willing to take risks and push ahead. If they're good at it, they will find people to follow. But trying to turn people who are change-averse into risk-takers is a waste of time and sure to drive one to frustration. I don't worry about it. It only takes a small percentage of forward thinking people in an organization to make change happen. I try to be gentle with the others, but I don't try to make them be what they're not.

Editor's note: See T. Scott's further thoughts later in this compilation.

Talkin' bout my generation

by Jamie LaRue, excerpted and adapted from this presentation for a library staff day on August 5, 2005.

Editor's note: Other than "Darn. I was going to use that showing-my-age pop reference in an overview," I would comment that LaRue's table has significantly different generational cutoffs than others I've seen--e.g., it would label me as a Baby Boomer, where most tables start that behemoth generation in 1946. I'm only including the introduction and LaRue's conclusions; for the chart of generational characteristics, you'll need to click through to the presentation itself, a four-page PDF.

  • What is a generation? "A generation is composed of people whose common location in history lends them a collective persona." Typically about 20 years.
  • Does everyone fit their generational profile? No. There are many things that may be more important in defining you... But probably you either spend your whole life roughly in sync with a broad mood...or fighting against it. Either way, they've got you!
  • What does your generation want? What everybody wants: To be respected, treated fairly, given the opportunity to grow and contribute. How varies.

The four-generation table follows.

Levels of response

When there's a conflict:

  1. Acknowledge and let it go
  2. Change your behavior or
  3. Use a generational template to talk it over.

Acorn

  • Accommodate employee differences
  • Create workplace choices
  • Operate from a sophisticated management style
    • Supervisory style not fixed
    • Leadership style varies with situation
    • Depend less on positional than personal power
    • Know how and when to make personal policy exceptions without causing a team riot
    • Be thoughtful when matching individuals to a team or a team to an assignment
    • Balance concern for task and concern for people
    • Understand the elements of trust and work to gain it from employees...
  • Respect competence and initiative.
  • Nourish retention

Leading Generation Y

by Jamie LaRue, excerpted and adapted from this July 2, 2008 post at myliblog.

Pam Nissler gave me a fascinating Master's paper by Lieutenant Colonel Jill M. Newman of the United States Army. The paper concerns defining, recruiting, and retaining a generation that prefers to call itself the Millennials. I liked this summary: what Newman calls Generation Y was

born between 1978 and 2000 and comprised of approximately 80 million people. They are the most parented and protected generation yet. Generation Y is highly confident, highly educated, techno-savvy, adept at global and diversity issues, team oriented and multi-taskers. They are also impatient, skeptical, blunt, expressive, and have grown up with a sense of entitlement.

The paper is insightful and useful reading for librarians.

Every generation has its own kind of intelligence. As the parent of two Millennials myself, I like this generation a lot, and see much to admire. But I'll make a prediction: if the problem of the Boomers is that we are so self-centered that we destroy communities rather than build them, the problem with the Millennials is that their very collaborativity, enhanced by technology, has the potential to make them the most spied upon and oppressed people in a long time. There's a pendulum swing between individuation and social consensus; both extremes are dangerous. For all that the Boomers have been insufferable in many ways, we have enjoyed extraordinary personal freedom. Imagine McCarthyism, but this time, fed by a government with instant and detailed access to your online accounts, cell phone calls, IM chats and more.

Newman notes the Millennial longing for the reestablishment of "a regime of rules." As I've noted before...I worry that we are, in fact, raising a generation of soldiers. Soldiers are indeed necessary, as are police. But we don't want a police state, and there's more to patriotism than obedience. Obedience coupled with despotism is a recipe for conflagration. It behooves us more than at any point in history to ensure that our national course is set by thoughtful leadership.

Don't call me that

excerpts from an August 23, 2008 post by Kendra K. Levine at Library attack

[After quoting from a Stephen Abram post telling us to "get over it" if we're sick of generational labels...] Instead of lumping a bunch of people into a stereotype, why not examine that population for a better understanding? I seem to face this in two different ways professionally--other librarians pandering to users, and the profession trying to understand the “NextGen” (an equally idiotic term) librarians...

I’m tired of being told that the new, NextGen, Millennial librarians only want to work with websites and blogs. Really? Every single one of them? That’s not to say that a bunch of us love dabbling in that world, and that it’s a new field of the profession, but it’s not for everybody. That’s just another annoying stereotype, which I guess I validate, but that’s a whole other issue.

[Levine also discusses the flaws in pigeonholing "Millennial" patrons, noting Levine's status as being technically a Millennial. Portions:] When people start arguing about the need to follow the patron and infiltrate their online life by using Facebook or Second Life, it seems that they forget to ask themselves if it’s going to pay off. Will these wild Millennials actually respond to service there? (Nevermind that most of the Millennials I deal with seem to either hate or be blissfully ignorant of Second Life.)

Categories and exceptions

by T. Scott Plutchak. Adapted from this September 24, 2008 post at T.Scott.

Siva Vaidhyanathan has some typically insightful things to say on the myth of the digital generation. There are, of course, broad generalizations that can always be made about classes of people. And humans being love to classify (I was reminded the other day of one of our IT guy's favorite tag lines: "There are only 10 kinds of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.") One might suppose that librarians are more prone to that than people in some other professional groups.

So we can classify by race or nationality (although one of the more intriguing things about Davies' Europe is how he represents ethnicity and nationality throughout Europe's history as being driven much more by cultural and political factors than anything intrinsic). In the US we have red states & blue states and coastal & heartland and urban & rural and so on. We can divide ourselves in innumerable ways.

The hot division

But within librarianship, the hot division is generational. Whether we're bitching about the stodgy, change-averse old boomers who won't get out of the way of the hip, tech-savvy millennials, or desperately trying to turn our libraries into Myspace-listed gaming parlours so as to attract the youngsters whose multitasking brains have been completely rewired by constant exposure to the internet, we seem all too often to fall into the trap of thinking that those very broad generalizations actually speak to some truth about the individuals that we bind into categories.

From the general to the individual

You'd think we might learn something from the insidiousness of racism--the pernicious habit of making judgments (usually negative) about someone based solely on their membership in a particular racial group.

We spent some time on the topic at last week's MLA [Medical Library Association] Board of Directors meeting. There's been a focus in the association in recent years on encouraging people who are making their first career decisions to consider librarianship, and, in particular, health sciences librarianship. Within the governance structure itself, there's a focus on figuring out ways to get newer librarians more involved in shaping the direction of the association. But it is tough to even have those discussions without the language pushing us toward talking as if all of librarianship can be gathered into two groups, separated strictly by age.

The truth about generalizations

Whatever truth there may be in broad generalizations about differences between generations, it would be well to remember what those generalizations tell you about the individual in front of you, whether that person be 27 or 57.

Nothing.

Excerpts from Siva Vaidhyanathan's essay

by Siva Vaidhyanathan, excerpted from this essay, the first portion of a much longer essay in The Chronicle Review for September 19, 2008.

Consider all the pundits, professors, and pop critics who have wrung their hands over the inadequacies of the so-called digital generation of young people filling our colleges and jobs. Then consider those commentators who celebrate the creative brilliance of digitally adept youth. To them all, I want to ask: Whom are you talking about? There is no such thing as a "digital generation."...

I have been hearing some version of the "kids today" or "this generation believes" argument for more than a dozen years of studying and teaching about digital culture and technology. As a professor, I am in the constant company of 18- to-23-year-olds. I have taught at both public and private universities, and I have to report that the levels of comfort with, understanding of, and dexterity with digital technology varies greatly within every class. Yet it has not changed in the aggregate in more than 10 years...

College students in America are not as "digital" as we might wish to pretend. And even at elite universities, many are not rich enough. All this mystical talk about a generational shift and all the claims that kids won't read books are just not true. Our students read books when books work for them (and when I tell them to). And they all (I mean all) tell me that they prefer the technology of the bound book to the PDF or Web page. What kids, like the rest of us, don't like is the price of books.

Of course they use Google, but not very well — just like my 75-year-old father. And they fill the campus libraries at all hours, just as Americans of all ages are using libraries in record numbers...

Talk of a "digital generation" or people who are "born digital" willfully ignores the vast range of skills, knowledge, and experience of many segments of society. It ignores the needs and perspectives of those young people who are not socially or financially privileged. It presumes a level playing field and equal access to time, knowledge, skills, and technologies. The ethnic, national, gender, and class biases of any sort of generation talk are troubling. And they could not be more obvious than when discussing assumptions about digital media...

Once we assume that all young people love certain forms of interaction and hate others, we forge policies and design systems and devices that match those presumptions. By doing so, we either pander to some marketing cliché or force an otherwise diverse group of potential users into a one-size-fits-all system that might not meet their needs...

Invoking "generations" demands an exclusive focus on people of wealth and means, because they get to express their preferences (for music, clothes, technology, etc.) in ways that are easy to count...

Related articles

Retrieved from "http://pln.palinet.org/wiki/index.php/Generations%2C_leadership_and_respect"
Personal tools
Home