I can understand you feeling that the statements do not resonate with your in your current library postion – and that may be owing to them coming from folks who mostly work at research universities.

I have just finished writing (on the ning for TAIGA) a message to the group sharing some thoughts on what needs to be done in the future to be more open and transparent. This experience should be a good wake up call to the group (one of which I am only a recent member I suppose) to pay more attention to the way the next generation prefers their communication. I encouraged them to do more to be open and transparent, and more inclusive in the future. So I appreciate your comments and I hope something good will come out of it.

My issue with the elitism was completely separate and I’ll agree with Steve again and say that it looked like a smoke-filled room to me (for all the reasons he gave and for the lack of a place to comment and engage in a dialog). I think it’s odd that you’re telling people that instead of criticizing the Taiga statements I should talk to an AD or AUL. I don’t have any problems with AD’s or AUL’s (and I’d assume that most people who criticized the statements don’t either). My criticism was of the statements and the organization, and I have no earthly idea who was involved in writing them other than you, though I assume you were not solely responsible for their content.

When I look back at comments you’ve made on my blog, you’ve accused me a number of times of criticizing administrators as a whole when really I was criticizing something an administrator did or said. There is a difference. I can’t speak of the people in Taiga by name because all I know is that it’s a group of AUL’s and AD’s from ARL’s (whether it’s every AUL and AD at an ARL or just 5 or 6 is a mystery to me). And I think that’s a shame, because I’ll bet those statements do not reflect the views of every AUL and AD, and there’s no way for us to know whose views they do represent. Hence the smoke-filled room feel.

Try, fail, and learn from it. And what you might take from my post is not that I’m anti-administrator or want to take pitchforks to AULs and ADs, but that some people feel like these statements are negative and do not represent the reality they’re operating in, and that most people don’t appreciate provocative statements that are written by a shadowy invitation-only group that doesn’t provide any means for discussion and feedback. But if you want to assume that I’m anti-administrator, you can believe that too, though it couldn’t be further from the truth. Administrators come in every flavor, just like middle-managers and front-line workers. I’m sure some AULs are out of touch with reality, while others are moving and shaking (or shoving and making) with the best of them (you and Scott Walter immediately come to mind in that latter category).

There were complaints that there was little discussion of these statements, right? Well how many Assistant University Librarians and Assistant Directors are out there making blog posts and comments and trying to generate discussion?

As for the “take risks and don’t be afraid to fail,” I don’t believe the the exhortation means that one shouldn’t expect to be criticized when people disagree with the substance of what one is saying. It means that messing up and having people say mean things about what you did on blogs is not the end of the world. You seem to be OK with it, Steven. Are the other folks involved not commenting here because they are so scared of us with our pitchforks? Or because they never really engage with librarians in this space at all?

There’s at least one academic library director (outside the one at my institution) who I communicate with frequently. She’s the one in comment number five above, and she doesn’t seem so excited about the statments either.

While I’m all for reactions of any type – and I would really like to see other folks creating their own provocative statements – I don’t doubt some of them would be well worth reading – I think it’s important for reactors like you to separate out the ideas from the people who write them. It needn’t turn into a “let’s get the pitchforks and torches and get after those AULs and ADs” reaction. What happen to the “take risks and don’t be afraid to fail” inspiration one often finds here – doesn’t that apply to library administrators?

Keep in mind that all AULs and ADs were front line librarians in their careers. If they’re like me, they haven’t forgotten that experience (and still look forward to their turn at the refdesk and the occasional instruction session), and their jobs are mostly about getting the resources and support their frontliners need to get their work done – and to support innovative new ideas and services. TAIGA is simply an occasional professional organization of folks with similar jobs and common challenges. It has no formal structure and no hierarchy. There is nothing elitist about it, though that is what others may want to believe.

Rather than getting all worked up about the statements and TAIGA, I’d suggest that folks talk to an AUL or an AD about the statements or whatever is on your mind. Maybe you have one at your library. You might find there is a lot of common ground. If you don’t know an AUL or AD, and you base your opinions only on the statements or what someone else said or wrote, that doesn’t seem too open minded, and that’s not what I’ve come to expect from the many great librarians in this profession.

As far as I know, we were the first to engage with the Statements — LSW in the lead, as always.

And, also, thank you. I’m very excited.

Within the next five years, libraries will be. The rest depends on us. Right now I am working to get along the academic and research programmes of my university- and it seems to be working. The challenge has always been to prove our value- not assume we have none.

Really those statements are just a big shovel for people too willing to dig their own graves.

Love your blog, by the way!