Wow! SLA may finally have a new name…The Association of Strategic Knowledge Professionals. Are we all happy now? Well, if we can all agree that research and open collaborative discussion are key proceedings in making decisions, than the members of SLA should be excited. After two years of research and discussions conducted by the Association on how to best align the national organization with the institutions and clients we serve, the leadership of SLA are taking action based on their studies.
I for one am excited because I am interested in seeing how members can embrace change and how we as an association can establish a new brand of professionals. Now, I am very aware there are some “haters” out there and among other reasons they do not feel a name change is necessary because changing a name does not change what we do. However, if handled as a business entity that puts forth a new focus to promoting our profession as Librarians along with Knowledge Managers, Strategic Planners, High Tech Anthologies, Taxonomy Developers, User Experience Specialist, etc. the name change opens the doors for new opportunities. These new opportunities allows our Library Schools to align their curriculum with many of these positions that are being established around the skill sets that librarians possess. This does not take away from traditional aspects of Collection Management, Reference Services, Cataloging, etc. The name change simply promotes what we do for our organizations and allows our profession to grow.
So, can old dogs learn new tricks? Can librarians learn to grow? Who knows, along with the name some of us might change what we do.
Do we members get to vote? Or what is the process by which this change is to be implemented? I’ve been looking all over the alignment portal and can find nothing addressing the actual minutiae of the transition process. Is it to be a midnight coup, a dastardly deed done in the depths of darkness? Or is there to be any actual involvement by the membership? Or has the grand transformation already taken place, rendering all this moot? Some information would be most appreciated! Thank you Jamal.
An electronic vote on the proposed name change will take place November 16 – December 9. All SLA members in good standing as of November 2 are eligible to vote(Excludes organizational and honorary members of SLA). Members will receive voting instructions through e-mail on November 16. More information is available at http://www.sla.org/content/SLA/governance/namechange/index.cfm.
I have looked at the SLA Naming Research Report PowerPoint and it brings up several questions.
First of all, John Cotton Dana’s statement, “The name Special Libraries was chosen with some hesitation…”, needs further explanation. As a librarian, my first thought is: what other names had he
considered and why did he have doubts? If we don’t have this information, this is a statement taken out of context and does not provide significant evidence there is a problem with the association’s name.
Second, when did ‘librarian’ become a bad word? I guess when corporations and government entities started cutting libraries and their services. I don’t see anybody trying to change the name of other
professions who get exceedingly bad press or go through troubling economic times; i.e. doctors, lawyers and the like.
I would like to know how many in your survey group were Federal employees. We librarians in the Federal sector are categorized as librarians, archivists or technical information specialists. It will be a hard sell when I go to request funding to attend the ‘Association for Strategic Knowledge Professionals’ annual conference. The proposed name change might work well in the corporate world but I doubt it will in the Federal sector.
I guess the term, ‘librarian’ is becoming a dirty word in your realm but I don’t see the Medical Library Association or American Library Association throwing out their names. Both organizations represent an enormous body of information professionals and it’s good they aren’t spending all this time, money and effort trying to change their name to fit some new paradigm.
I find the tone of this commentary offensive, starting with the title. I resent the implication that if you don’t “get on board” with the name change, you are an “old dog” who can’t “learn new tricks.” Insulting the membership is no way to gain support for an idea.
It’s not that I’m 100% opposed to any sort of a name change — although I don’t understand what’s wrong with the existing name and have a philosophical problem with the money being spent in conjunction with this in difficult economic times.
It’s just that we were given no other options other than what the consultant dreamed up. Which leaves me with the feeling that “Association for Strategic Knowledge Professionals” is being rammed down our collective throat.
We had no say in this process and no say in the expenditure of funds for this process. Dues and conference fees keep going up. It seems like the organization’s powers-that-be just want to keep taking our money and spending it on whatever *they* want.
Feh.
Yeah, maybe if the members are know how to adjust and learn from the other people through experience. If they want to improved and learn to grow they must study and have a self discipline and able them to learn and apply what they have learned.
Here’s a cautionary tale about the kind of turmoil that a name change can bring to a professional association: The formerly-named Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) decided to obfuscate what its members unapologetically did for a living, and hired Fleishman-Hillard to come up with a new name for the group. They settled on the bland “American Association for Justice.” (What exactly does that name mean in relation to what the members actually do?) The consequences have been nothing short of disastrous for the once-proud organization. Long-time members left in droves, and the organization’s deteriorating financial situation led to several rounds of staff layoffs. SLA is now blithely going down the same path, having also hired Fleishman-Hillard (at the tune of more than $1 million) to come with a meaningless name that obfuscates what its members unabashedly do for a living. So before voting in favor of a name change, I would strongly advise SLA members to study ATLA’s experience in this arena. By the way, the chief executive who pushed for the name change was recently forced out by the board. Unfortunately, there’s no quick fix for the damage he caused.
Looks a nice post which having lots of information for blog readers.
Hello guys I am learning about The Association of Strategic Knowledge Professionals because I think that this Association is very useful for many people and I want to read more about they work in this place.
Of course that associations can learn to grow, and is very important that they do that.
Thanks for all information. I’m very interesting in your blog about please send any update