Wrangling, Corporate-style

In two weeks, I will split my single library collection into two satellite libraries. Well, the splitting is already completed, on paper anyway. No, what happens in two weeks is the physical division and relocation of the library to its two new accommodations.

This comes as part of my law firm's renovation of our downtown TO office space. Each and every office, corridor, cubicle and kitchen is being re-created according to a designer's imagination and specification. The library, once a single, large and dusty room situated on one floor of our two-floor office tower space will become two, smaller libraries, one for each floor and holding content specific to that floor's user group/legal practice area need.

Splitting a library collection according to user need/practice area takes a lot of work, as you can imagine. Everything from updating the newly created OPAC, colour-coding spine labels to make things easier for lawyers, actually determining which text will go where, duplicating regularly accessed print reference resources, all while managing the library on a daily basis makes for involved times.

STOP!

Now, throw both a Building Committee and a Library Committee into the fray!

GO!

I made a mistake. This professional presented a two-year projection of library services and space requirements designed to maximize services while minimizing physical footprint to the Building Committee via the Library Committee. This professional made a gross error by presenting accurate physical measurements of linear-foot shelving requirements. This professional did not pad or exaggerate figures. This professional should have padded and exaggerated the figures ... a lot. The library was granted 20% less than its minimal footage requirement.

Now, my library is small. By the standards of other libraries, my print holdings are miniscule. It is a single research/reference/administrative/all-hats-worn librarian, full-time operation. Oh, sure, I could sorely use the assistance of a technician, but funds being what they are.... However, regardless of size, we all know that at the very least … well … you gotta have space to place what you gotta have on hand. On top of this, the physical space requirements of libraries change on a daily basis as new materials are added and old materials are removed from the collection. It is the library as organism story.

For a two-year projection, after heavy weeding of old or disused materials, I presented a requirement of 530 linear feet to shelve the collection. At the very minimum, the library requires 500 linear feet to hold the current collection, heavily weeded collection. The library has been granted a total of 440 linear feet to hold the complete, heavily weeded collection. An additional 60 linear feet has been granted to allow for a total of 500 linear feet, but this is on paper only. The additional shelving will not be built. In Corporate Speak, the additional shelving has been “Deferred”. This roughly translates into “The Building and Library Committees recognise the requirements of the Library, will appear to grant additional footage, but will not actually build the additional footage.” Why was 60 feet deferred? Simply, it was deferred because library shelving is ugly and expensive. Quote/unquote.

How will I fit a size 10 foot into a size 8 shoe? By doing what libraries right around the world are required to do: justify holding retention by rate of use and alternate (read: electronic) availability.

Step 1: First to go are the older series of ongoing bound journal subscriptions. Though their colourful and grand spines look wonderful on the shelves of law libraries and are integral to legal research and the practice of law, their return on library space/use can be low. So, in my case, out are all but the current series of Carswell’s Practice Cases, the Dominion Law Reports, Ontario Reports, for example. Though distasteful to do so, these materials are going into off-site storage with their continued retention pending review. The content of these publications is available and searchable via our electronic subscriptions WESTLAWeCarswell, DLR Plus and QuickLaw. Yes, questions about duplication of services arise (i.e., maintaining both print and electronic access), but I’ll deal with them once the move is over. At this stage, if a hard copy is required, it can be recalled from off-site storage within 24-hours, at a cost, or accessed by the patron traveling to another, larger library.

Step 2: Yet another weeding of texts is under way, this time with no allowance for bruised egos. Partners love to have older editions of their publications filling in-house library shelves. Well, if partners will not approve sufficient space to house the working collection, then all ‘archival’, or non-working materials must go. It is into storage, donation or recycling with the lot. Sorry folks, this is a lean, mean legal-research machine: updated editions of current holdings only, with the old edition tossed; replacement of print content when an electronic alternative becomes available, etc.

Hopefully, I will be able to shoe-horn the current collection into the reduced space allowance by employing the above mentioned methods. However, how am I to address ongoing collection growth? Steps 1 and 2 will continue ad nauseum.

Oh, the joy of my recently discovered 2004 article Executing a library move; a planned approach to moving your library by Catherine Dimenstein in Information Outlook. It is a good read containing useful recommendations, most of which I was happy to acknowledge as ‘done’. Certainly, there are several publications available to assist in planning a library move. However, most apropos is Ms. Dimenstein’s underlining the importance of a close collaboration between librarian and architect when designing a new library to ensure that library requirements are adequately addressed.

I wish I had been more aggressive in my interactions with the Library Committee (consisting of lawyers, IT and bean-counters, all with individual veto of the librarian’s recommendations). I wish I had knocked down the doors to Building Committee meetings and communicated library requirements directly to the architect. Then, I wish I had been permitted to pass beyond the hallowed Glass Ceiling to continue the argument before the Executive Board. I wish a lot of things, especially the inspiration of how to deal with this extra stack of print material, roughly the height of a seven-story building when stacked end-on-end, that I cannot fit into my new space allowance.

An ongoing story. The postings will continue. I've started smoking and drinking a fair amount, but the bastards won’t get me down.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

It was suggested that a man, over the age of 40, won't easily find employment in our biz of librarianship. Is this true? If it is true, what are some reasons? I just don't know.

I find this all rather disturbing, because ... well ... I'm looking for the next step in my career (i.e., looking for a professional posting) and ... hmmm ... I have a confession....

I, too, am White, 40+ ... and Male.

Hey, wouldn’t Red Green say something here like, “I’m a man … but I can change … if I have to … I guess”? [Who is Red Green? Well, someone has to tell you. Look here: http://www.redgreen.com/]

For a while I've had the sense of something untoward in the biz, but I find myself repeatedly avoiding that ... ummm ... sense. I just don’t want to go there; it’s too nasty. Ours is so pure and noble a profession. Perhaps, I realize that to acknowledge that funky smell is to give it form, credibility … reality. If I don’t acknowledge it … well … hopefully it will go away. I’m not so sure about that, though.

I must say that while writing this note, at this very moment, I feel the trepidation of approaching a taboo subject. I ask, “How can I, a white, 40+, male dare claim any sort of discrimination when I have all the benefits and advantages of my white, 40+, male world?” I worry that someone within the profession will recognize me and I’ll be labeled as a trouble maker, a hot potato. I worry that to speak my concerns would be to smear myself with a very peculiar, unemployable smell. I don’t know that I can ... or should.

However, upon reviewing some of my earlier posts, I recognize that I have alluded to the topic on two previous occasions. For example:

… I have been informed by insiders that I threatened the position of the head research librarian with my knowledge of current information sources, technologies and practices, and ... most unbelievably ... because I am male. My star was rising too quickly and I had come to the positive notice of the powers-that-be; 'noted in dispatches', as it were. Also, because I am male and knowledgeable, confident, well-spoken, well-dressed ... a.k.a. 'professional' ... clients assumed I was the manager.

See: Which kind of librarian are you?
See also: Back into the Stacks)

I’m still having difficulty mentioning this topic. Believe me, I am. I don’t abide any discrimination of any sort. I will and do speak against it if and when I see it. I'm not militant, but I do attempt to live by positive example. Come on people, really: Don’t we all benefit from a diversity of influences? There are even laws about in-breeding, for gosh-darned sakes, forgive my Flanders-ism. The concept of discrimination is a complete and utter wonk to me.

I recognize the privilege of my state: White male. I recognize the benefit of my age: Experience and Professionalism. I cannot … do not … want to, or need to acknowledge that my privilege is my disadvantage.

But I don't know. I'm not sure. Could I be so naïve? Could I be so wrong? Should I say I'm sorry? Should I change? Should I have to?

No! I am a professional. I carry myself in a professional manner, one which is appropriate to my background, experience and age. I expect others in my field to act in a manner appropriate to our profession. I'm not a stiff ... and I'm not going to act like a victim. Granted, how authentic is it to act like a professional when you can't even find a position within your field of expertise?

For damn's sake....

The Job Search Continued....

During the past seven days, I've submitted ten application packages to professional librarian postings within Canada. An additional five packages will be submitted by month's end, based upon current postings. Also, I am preparing packages for international positions located in the US, UK and France. The tally of packages submitted over the past three-month period is 60-odd.

I'm keeping on top of this job search monster despite the surprises and disappointments experienced recently. Indeed, recent feedback from one interview stated ... yes, stated ... that I am not employable because I am not currently employed. Apparently, it's about "Hiring on the fly" and it's all the new HR rage. You see, a company wants what another company already has. If one is not with a company, then another company doesn't want you.

Other feedback indicated that, due to my 3-month lack of full-time employment, (yes, I maintain a PT position as a Reference Librarian), my skills are now too rusty and I require additional academic time to bring my skills up to date. I believe this plays into the "Hiring on the fly" trend in HR. (Yes, I agree that maintaining currency is vital to our work. Indeed, as a professional in my field, I actively strive to remain current within and beyond my profession. After all, this is my profession. I am a professional librarian.)

This is a frustrating experience.

What are your experiences, insights, suggestions, observations?

The Corporate Tumult: Comes with Mouth-Breathing Morons & Knuckle-Dragging Idiots

My apologies for the delay in posting a new scribble to this blog. I had to fly out-of-province for some family business. Now that I've returned, I'm in the process of negotiating a contract with my present employer. Things are a wee bit hectic.

However...

There've been some interesting happenings afoot in the professional life of this librarian. Most of it revolves around the misunderstanding of what we librarians contribute to the corporate organisation. Throw in an IT consultant ("I've been coding since the '70s!") who feels that librarians "don't know nothin' about nothin'"; directors who believe that the library/librarian are simply administrative assistants and, in this case, should fall under the direction of the Business Communications department (Isn't that Marketing, etc?); the fumbling micro-management of the 'certified' Communications manager who insists upon hand-held instruction to get his head around this librarian's Master's degree-in-practice before determining what this librarian is to do; and, the CFO who really doesn't "understand why the librarian is involved in any way, shape or form with this company's information. Aren't there serious disclosure issues here? Our secretaries can do the same work for less money!" So let them. (See: Let's set the tone... for a description of my role within the company.)

It's frustrating and I'm looking for a new job, but we're heading into the Holiday and winter months in a professional field that really seems to be drying up in Canada on the best of days. I can see where this is heading, unless the stars are in my corner & I employ some of that professional savvy...

KA-BOOM!!!

I love my work; there's a reason why I became a librarian. However, time & time again it's an uphill battle for basic recognition and respect for our professional contribution. (That's our ongoing 'Library Advocacy' in Pro-Speak.) I know that I'm not the only librarian with such frustrations; librarians meet at the pub for a reason. I'm fast reaching the conclusion that the ROI (yes, 'Return On Investment' in Corp-Speak) is too low to continue with this schlep.

I'll let you know what happens in a day or two. In the meantime, I have a mail merge to do. No one else in-house can figure out MS Outlook and imported Excel address lists. Lucky me, as the result of my efforts towards Information Literacy, I'm now in charge of the company's mail. (The degree of information illiteracy in the corporate sector is stunning.)

LegLib