Library Alchemy

In which we discuss part two of Andreas Kluth’s special report on contemporary nomadism.

Summary:

 According to at least one set of current research data, workflow for so-called “knowledge workers” is evenly divided in thirds between a traditional office space, the home, and a “third place” of choice.  Unlike telecommunting, which took place in isolation, work nomadism combines periods of solitude with periods of connectivity, in the ratio and manner of the worker’s choice.  The complexities of negotiating communication and “office” politics are examined here, and the challenge of preserving work-life balance (in a world where your work can very easily become your life) is discussed at length.

Random Thoughts:

 The “money quote” from today’s Kluth excerpt is as follows:

James Ware, a co-founder of the Work Design Collaborative, a small think-tank, says that nomadic work styles are fast becoming the norm for “knowledge workers”. His research shows that in America such people spend less than a third of their working time in traditional corporate offices, about a third in their home offices and the remaining third working from “third places” such as cafés, public libraries or parks.

Librarians, the archetypal knowledge workers, have embraced nomadic technologies wholeheartedly.  But how about the workflow?  As I surf my newsreader, I read about a lot of innovative projects various libraries are implementing, making good use of Web 2.0 phenomena.  As far as I can tell, though, most folks are still working in an office in a library.   Would anyone like to share their current experiences?

My own dabblings in this regard are minimal, but, I think, significant.  Take, for example, the blog branding project.  Technically I’m on vacation, but I choose to peek at work mail from time to time.  This is mostly because, if I don’t, my mailbox fills and shuts down with alamring rapidity.  While winnowing for the key messages, I found the .jpg proof of the custom blog banner graphics has been working on for Eleventh Stack. The sooner we get the blog up to CLP graphics/IT standards, the sooner it will be more prominently placed on the website. This will lead, we hope, to better outreach and customer service.

So I sent the file to the blog team listserv and waited a day or so to round up comments. I’m in the process of writing up that feedback and sending it back to the Communication and Creative Services Team. Did I have to be in the office to do that? No. Should the team have to wait until next Tuesday, when I’m physically present, for the project to move forward? No. Did doing twenty minutes of work in the middle of a long, glorious series of recreational activities seriously impair my ability to enjoy a life outside the office? Emphatically, no. And that’s not the only bit of business I was able to take care of quickly and efficiently from a distance, either.

You could make the argument that working from home or a “third place” puts an unfair burden on the folks who have to staff the desk and take care of other tasks in your absence. In my own library’s situation, I would counter with two key arguments:

1.  The number of in-person reference questions we’ve received has dropped, slowly but consistently, over the past few years.
2. The reference questions we DO get require a greater amount of legwork.

In other words, people are using Google, Wikipedia, etc. before they turn to us.  Librarians used to be generalists.  Now that general knowledge is more easily available due to technology, librarians who work at a traditional reference desk are forced to become specialists,  skilled at using traditional resources that are not yet available online in full-text (including, at CLP, certain engineering standards and the local artists’ files). Some people are suited for this kind of work, but it’s not the only way to be a librarian anymore. Ergo, why not save the bulk of the desk work for the people who truly enjoy the desk and the tough questions? Though it’s not always clear-cut, current library rhetoric treats the differences between “old-schoolers” and “twopointtopians” as if it were a fight between the Capulets and the Montagues, when it really isn’t.

The question instead, it seems to me, is, “What kinds of librarians do we want to be?  Generalists, or specialists?”  And the beauty of that question is that people can self-select based on their own interests and inclinations, and everybody can contribute to the organization in the manner that works best for him/her.  Gone are the days when you had to work an 80-hour week and never have a life to prove your loyalty to an organization.  Now, provided your mind is engaged and contributing, your physical body can be in the environment that works best for you.  Again, a win-win situation, with librarians who identify as introverts probably benefiting the most from nomadic arrangements. This is not always clear-cut. I’m a professed introvert, but I truly relish the few hours a week I spend at the reference desk. And I can name at least four regular readers of this blog who move beautifully between both workstyles – true Renaissance librarians!

The work/life balance issue is a complicated one that folks with considerably more experience have debated in various forums. Only the individual, however, knows for sure when s/he has achieved balance. Many of us became librarians after dabbling in other professions, and some of us perceive our profession as a vocation rather than as just a job, or even as just a career.  Those of us who feel that way might be more likely to take the TIPS home, for example, or spend a lovely Saturday morning writing in his/her professional blog. That’s why I think one thing libraries might want to consider doing, if they aren’t already doing so, is investigating workplace wellness initiatives, to help us keep each other balanced and accountable. Granted, we CLP folks have access to a great EAP. However, I’d really love to see a more personal initiative, one on which staff and administration actively collaborate, for everybody’s benefit, just to make sure that we don’t start thinking like attorneys.

Thoughts? Questions? Comments? Critique?

We’ll pick up with part III of Kluth’s report on Tuesday.