@GeekChick – thank you so much for putting into words the dark thing that gnawed at me about the dues paying – every librarian (and I’d venture to say library staff, too) should be given an opportunity to prove themselves, regardless of age. Give us an opportunity to show what we can do for the library and the community. If we succeed, then give us more responsibility because it’s been earned. And if we fail, it’s not a one-shot and your out deal – these are our careers. Each of us is (supposed to be) still learning and growing. If we fail, show us how to retrace our steps and figure out what went wrong. Then give us a pat on the back and send us out again.

If someone has an idea for change in a library, by gum, let them have a go at it. If you don’t trust them to do good things for the library, then why on earth did you hire them?

(Disclosure: I’m probably the youngest person involved with any aspect of this post.) The profession is not graying. I’ll take the direct approach here. The way I see it, it’s maintaining its grayness (literally and figuratively). Maybe that is preferred or comfortable. Change is difficult, right? Many new librarians are starting out “gray” (again, literally and/or figuratively). It “looks” better to have a new Boomer librarian elevate to management quickly (if not immediately) than it does to have a Millennial like myself make it there within a decade of becoming a professional. (I think this is even more true in the world of public libraries, where I just can’t see myself working right now.)

One of my co-workers (who is not a librarian himself and has been at MPOW for almost 20 years), with whom I have worked for 2.5 years, once told me that I do more professional development activities than any of our non-professional staff. I’m not a librarian yet; I start library school in August. I would add to that to say that I diversify my professional development in more ways than even some of the professional staff. I’m not even supposed to care about [begin sarcasm] such silly things as reading professional literature, participating in library associations, attending conferences and workshops, and maintaining correspondence with other people working in my field. Why would I waste time and money (each belonging both to myself and my employer) on such things? It won’t matter to anyone, right? [end sarcasm] I don’t ever want to hear anything to the effect of “that’s nice” or “good for you” from a current employer in relation to any of my professional development. I’m not spending their money just for them to receive absolutely no return on investment.

I wish I could confirm my earlier assertion that the average age of new librarians is actually increasing (and possibly break this down by type of library). That’s just what it feels like to me (and I’ve been working in libraries as my committed career since I was just barely 21.) I could be much more controversial with this take, but I’ll save that for another day. I’ll just say that it has to do with a career/life path for librarians I have seen (but could never follow myself) that would get me stoned to death if I so much as mention it.

The frustrating thing for me will be waiting. I mentioned somewhere else in the past (I can’t remember exactly where) that it will be difficult for me to feel like I can be taken seriously as a professional (one day, I hope), let alone someone who is employed in a library in any capacity. I hypothesize that this perception (whether it’s mine or indeed that of some of the professional library world) will go away as soon as I turn 40. (Just fifteen short years to go.) I could start racking MLS after JD after MPA after Ph.D, but until I get significantly older, it might be nothing more than “nice.”

Forget the rope. I’ll just scale the building under my own power.

If a newish staff member wanted to do a project (and they had a reasonable plan in place) I let them try. If it worked, I would trust them to do another project if they asked – or I would ask them to do one myself. If it didn’t work – we would reassess and I might reconsider how much leash to let them have.

I was fortunate that my boss was willing to let me do things this way. At my current place of work, my boss works with our department in much the same way. It seems a reasonable way to work.

But libraries need to be making sure that new librarians are learning as much and as fast as they can. About technology, yes — but about everything else too — from “where do we normally store the plunger to prevent mould build-up near the stacks”? to “how does Sarah HRPerson traditionally deal with grant employees who are term, non-permanent seasonal and appointed with a weekly ‘pat on the head’ written into their contract?” Libraries are hell-bound if they do not start bringing the learning (of all kinds) in and around the whole organization. The silo/hierarchy method of handling things is not really going to cut it in the long run.

At MPOW, I hear complaints from almost everyone on how they are overwhelmed and too busy to possibly take on additional work. But who isn’t busy? But when work blends in with the rest of my life, I find time to read and post to blogs, play with new technologies, think about things, play WoW or SL, because these are things that are important to me. I like being aware of what’s going on in libraryland and being challenged to think in new ways by interacting with my library colleagues all over the world. I can’t separate many of my interests into work and non-work piles. But is having the authority enough when it comes to developing and implementing bigger ideas, programs, services? Library management may not be on the same page I’m on or share my perspective on where we should really be focusing our energy and time. But if they were, what do you do when many of your colleagues are still risk-averse, technophobic, and not wanting to participate or make those changes that Jane so desperately wants to happen now? Or what if everyone IS really just too busy?

There are going to be many retirements in libraryland (and including MPOW) over the next 5 years, and I really don’t want to wait to move into a management position to effect change. Why can’t we change now? Why can’t I help contribute to the vision of where the library is headed? Are my ideas less meaningful because I am younger or have only been here 3 years, or have been a librarian about 6 years? Waiting only puts us further behind and less in touch with our users. Why can’t library management capitalize on those who are eager, fresh with ideas, and willing to put their strengths and interests to work for the good of the whole system?

I also know several people who have the ideas, vision, and enthusiasm, but their fire has died down from getting beaten by the system. They have become cynical or have given up completely in trying to make a difference. It’s so sad, and I hope to never feel trapped or so beaten down that I give up trying.

What am I getting at? A shift is looming – in attitude and awareness that organizations need to be run differently, and that all staff, whether new or seasoned, have something to contribute. (Or at least I hope it is!)

I’m at an academic library w/ a large staff, and until recently we were in very traditional units (tech services, instruction, reference, etc). But on top of that we’re liaisons. So if you were an effective liaison, that meant you got pulled away from “unit” responsibilities, which, depending on your supervisor, was not always approved of. This created tensions for a number of people.

We’ve recently moved to a less hierarchical and more flexible, team-based structure, which is great–except that now only a few people are actual supervisors. What we have is a bunch of solo librarians/liaisons working under one roof. The organization is much more flexible and responsive to change–but it may be harder for people to move on & up to other organizations w/ traditional hierarchies.

The focus of ALA, MLA, and other orgs, is currently on “recruitment and retention of managers.” But I really think that as long as libraries stick to these traditional notions of leadership & mgmt, it’s going to be a hard sell to those who are looking for that flexible organization.