Personnel: Bridging the technical divide
I have always known that training must always be part of implementing new technology. In nearly every job I have held, I have trained people to use new technology. However, the humanity behind of that need did not strike me until when I received an email from a librarian who is no longer in the field.
When she graduated from library school in 1990, the World Wide Web was just emerging. She said nothing in her MLS education prepared her to survive in today’s library and its place in an ultra-connected world. Since her graduation she has found herself migrating repeatedly to new technologies and each time struggling more and more with the change. Eventually, she simply left the profession.
I emphasized the word, as migrating to a new technology and migrating to a new nation have many similarities. When a family moves to a new country, the older generations often have a harder time adjusting to their new home while the younger generations often take to the new culture like a duck to water.
Marc Prensky, in his article “Digitial Natives, Digital Immigrants,” outlined how these immigrants, no matter how well they adapt, will always retain a non-technological “accent.” This accent could be going to books instead of the Internet as the first research option, editing documents on paper rather than on the screen or printing out emails. While he said this is often the topic of jokes, “it’s very serious, because the single biggest problem facing education today is that our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language.” (Prensky, 2)
While Prensky was writing about our educational system, there is truth to this in libraries as well. We are continually implementing new technologies and suddenly, instead of the older librarians training the new recruits on the fine points of Library of Congress subject analysis, the new recruits are training the older librarians how to use the new integrated library system. This can be a flash point if managers fail to bridge the divide between the “digital immigrants” and the “digital natives.”
I believe the first part of the solution is to understand the generational differences. At the 2003 American Library Association annual conference in Toronto, Lynne Lancaster noticed a stark multi-generational presence: “The elegant Traditionalist librarian introducing the speakers wore a skirt, heels, and pantyhose. The Baby Boomer speaker wore a pantsuit, sandals, and no stockings. The Generation X librarian who participated in the panel discussion wore a short skirt and (horrors) flip-flops! Kaboom – a generational collision at its finest.” (Lancaster, 36)
Obviously, these are stylistic differences, but the dress outlines some distinct difference between the older traditionalist and Boomer library employees and the younger Gen X and Millennial library workers. The break between the generation appears with the advent of computers in the classrooms starting in the 1980s.
First the pre-computer generations. Lancaster writes that Traditionalists, born before 1946, are hard workers that believe institutions deserve loyalty and in working together for the greater good. Yet, traditionalists often try to avoid working with technology. The rush of technology can lead this generation to believe their contributions to the system are coming to an end. Boomers, born from 1946 to 1964, are idealistic, competitive and work like crazy to change institutions they challenged in their youth. This generation is managing to adapt to technological change, but is facing burnout as they are trying to balance both family and career.
The post-computer generations are very different. Lancaster calls Generation Xers, born from 1965 to 1981, eclectic, resourceful, self-reliant and highly adaptive to both change and technology. The newest Millennial librarians, born starting in 1982, are highly collaborative and cyberliterate, media savvy and globally conscious.
So how do you balance these generations technologically in a library? By specifically focusing on each generations needs.
Traditionalists obviously need to play catch up in terms of technological and communication speed and methods. To bring them up to speed, Lancaster suggests libraries use evolutionary instead of revolutionary methods when it comes to change. Also, their knowledge should be tapped as mentors to educate the younger generations on the legacies and values of libraries. I think this is extremely important because technology without the skill, art and values of librarianship is an empty shell. The textbook Library and Information Center Management notes that mentoring can be a two-way street that benefits both librarians. (Stueart & Moran, 290) If the mentor and protégé are well-matched, one means for the mentor to benefit is the ability to pull technical knowledge from the protégé. Again, the migration analogy can apply. Prensky notes that “smart” adult immigrants will use their fast-adapting children to learn the ways of the new homes (Prensky, 3).
Regular technology training is another, eminently practical way for management to underscore how the library values the contributions of every library employee. Traditional and Boomer librarians have immense knowledge that the younger staff may lack. Technology training can provide these librarians the tools to leverage their knowledge for further success in the field. Managers should not limit training to librarians on the fast track either. (Stueart & Moran, 291). Technically-savvy librarians, recognizing that technology is constantly changing, will always desire additional training. However, I think limiting the training to those librarians could worsen a library’s overall technical ability. One scenario is that non-savvy librarians may continually go to those in the know for help and let their own skills atrophy. Should this librarian move to a new job (or even be absent for a day), those remaining could fall flat. There will always be specialized technology positions is a library. However, there should be ample training of the entire staff to avoid technical Armageddon should a savvy librarian be absent. Similarly, technology training should not be viewed as an individual enterprise. Rather, administrators should view this training as a team effort where everyone works to build up the technological confidence of the entire staff. (Stueart & Moran, 251).
On the flip side, administrators need to set their younger staff free to use their technical ability and their creativity for the betterment of the library. Younger staff always hear how libraries want to be innovative and creative. Yet when the administration is presented with fresh ideas, say creating a library MySpace page, the very same staff is often shut down. “So those who were and are new to our profession were and are always surprised in their first, second, or even third jobs to find deeply rooted resistance to new ideas and innovation.” (Berry)
I do not believe this resistance is entirely a case of technophobia or a fear of innovation. It could also be a matter of control. For example, the traditional management style prefers having a single voice emanate from the library. There are a number of reasons, such as crisis management, where this is a very smart move. However, technology, such as blogs, also makes it easy for the library to communicate with the public in a multitude of voices. Indeed, allowing the public to hear the voices of librarians sharing their expertise — from recommended reading to providing “lifehacks,” tips on using library resources to improve their own lives — can greatly improve the reputation of the library. However, allowing this bottom-up democratic communication entails a large degree of trust from the older librarians who are used to controlling the library’s reputation. The younger set, again recognizing a different generation’s needs, could gain this trust by taking the first step and suggesting a set of guidelines for this type of democratic communication.
Interestingly, Rachael Singer Gordon argues that it may be the smallest generation – Generation X – that can act as the bridge between their older cohorts and the tech-savvy Millennials. Through interviews with librarians and MLS candidates, Xers feel they straddle the old and new. She notes that Gen Xers, myself included, grew up using card catalogs, but have adapted quickly to new technologies that are currently propelling libraries. One librarian noted in the article: “While my age indicates that I am a ‘next-generation librarian’ and I identify myself as a GenXer, I feel like I share a lot of the same values that all librarians have in choosing this profession. I value public service and doing good in my community. That was my impetus for becoming a librarian.”
While I agree that librarians share many of the same values, the technological divide is very real. This divide is not only about the tools used for research and learning, but also happens to be an integral part of the Millennial generation’s entire culture. For libraries to be successful, managers must address and bridge this divide to allow each generation to make valued contributions. We need to older generations to convey the library legacy to the generations now taking control, yet libraries must continue to move into the future. “I think our elders are a bit nervous about leaving the library legacy in our hands, questioning our values and commitment,” Brian Mathews wrote in the Library Journal. “Yet the profession needs us, perhaps more than is imagined, to ensure that libraries remain relevant in contemporary society.”
Bibliography
Berry, John N. 2006. The Google divide. Library Journal (October 15) Available online: http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6379527.html
Gordon, Rachel Singer. 2005. The bridge generation. Library Journal 130 (November 15) Available online: Ebscohost’s Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts.
Lancaster, Lynne C. 2003. The click and clash of generations. Library Journal 128 (October 15): 36-39. Available online: Ebscohost’s Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts.
Mathews, Brian S. 2006. The inevitable Gen X coup. Library Journal 131 (March 15): 52. Available online: Ebscohost’s Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts.
Prensky, Marc. 2001. Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon 9 (October). Available online: http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf
Stueart, Robert D., and Barbara B. Moran. 2002. Library and information center management. Greenwood Village, CO: Libraries Unlimited.