The challenges of transitioning to new metadata workflows have long been a concern to OCLC RLP Metadata Managers Focus Group members (What should metadata managers be learning?, Filling the bench, New skill sets for metadata managers). Recently, the group has asked me to facilitate deeper conversations about how to address these challenges. For the January 2024 session, I contacted Crystal Goldman, General Instruction Coordinator for the UC San Diego Library. Crystal’s research examines how staff in research libraries understand and apply succession planning. She notes that although there is some literature about the potential benefits of succession planning (and a call for more among library leaders/HR professionals), no comprehensive studies have been conducted across different libraries. In both her interviews and surveys, she has focused on three areas of activities (based on a framework from the Society of Human Resource Managers (SHRM)):
- training and development
- career planning and management
- replacement planning or formal succession planning
To help us understand where Metadata Managers stand, we asked for responses to an informal survey using some of the questions from a previous instrument used in Crystal’s study of succession planning in ARL libraries.
Among both ARL libraries and Metadata Managers, formal succession planning (i.e. planning/preparing multiple individuals to potentially step into leadership roles) happens (if it happens at all) mostly at senior leadership levels. Like other ARL respondents, Metadata Managers were more likely to know about formal succession planning in their organizations if they were already managers in a leadership role. Metadata Managers identified that they engaged in replacement planning, often around key life events like expected temporary parental/medical leave and/or retirements. Even in these cases, identifying staff to fill gaps may happen in informal discussions with other managers while not directly engaging with staff who might see themselves in new roles. In the worst-case scenarios, Metadata Managers found themselves with unexpected vacancies, forcing them to promote “accidental managers” into leadership roles.
Metadata Managers reported slightly higher activity than most ARL respondents around training and development. Participants in our session felt this was unsurprising given the nature of metadata work and the changing landscape of technical developments that have been occurring. Similarly, Metadata Managers participate in some career planning and management, especially thinking about what kinds of competencies will be needed in the next five years. Forecasting those skills can inform decisions about hiring new staff members and/or providing opportunities for staff willing to seek new challenges.
When the topic of succession planning has come up in the past, I sensed that Metadata Managers were responding to broad calls to do better in this area – and perhaps felt guilty that they hadn’t made more progress. One of the most valuable things I walked away from the sessions with was a better way to tease apart the challenges we are all facing into structural, cultural, and agentive issues.
Structure
In both our sessions, Metadata Managers acknowledged the challenges of working within organizational contracts, collective bargaining agreements, or other job classification criteria. At a time when metadata is changing, these structures can require additional effort to redefine a position’s required skills and experience. This may not be feasible due to time limitations and/or limited availability from human resources staff that are trying to fill multiple open positions. In these scenarios, it can help to focus energies toward longer-range thinking about competencies.
Several Metadata Managers noted that these structures can be especially frustrating in places where metadata is transitioning. Moving away from cataloging to other kinds of next-generation metadata work can be inhibited by structural agreements that classify staff differently. As hiring managers are already struggling against economic forces to attract people into libraries with the needed computer/data science expertise, this can require additional effort to navigate. Structures also limited Metadata Managers’ agency to provide professional development opportunities to staff with aptitude/attitude for new challenges because they fall outside narrowly defined positions.
Institutional policies requiring searches to be conducted in a specific way (e.g. external national searches) can also make it hard to elevate staff with an aptitude for leadership within the organization. In Crystal’s research and in our discussions, examples surfaced of promising leaders needing to leave their organizations to advance their careers. For other types of libraries, transitioning into a management role may come with risks due to the loss of contract protections.
Culture
In many ways, succession planning in academic libraries reflects the culture of academic institutions more broadly. In principle, these are organized around merit-based systems of advancement (i.e. tenure) that find corporate-style succession planning distasteful. In these contexts, seeking external candidates holds more value than advancing staff internally. These aspects of culture are often reified into structural policies that are difficult to change (either through practice or contractual obligations).
While there is value in adding new views and voices to an organization, this practice of preferring external hires can inhibit investments in developing staff leadership skills that are key to succession planning. This approach can also create self-fulfilling feedback loops, i.e. current leadership is reluctant to invest in leadership training for non-management staff because they will not be able to advance within the organization. This is reinforced by a fear that when staff do get this training, they are likely to find it easier to leave with their new skills to another organization. These kinds of cultural attitudes are also in operation around technical skills that create a Catch-22 for both managers and staff.
Agency
Within these kinds of structures and cultures, Metadata Managers have some opportunities to exercise their agency:
- How can you embed future staffing needs into other strategic planning? Rather than focusing on the advancement of an individual (i.e. traditional succession planning), how can you have transparent conversations about how to advance as a group? In the process, you may find individuals who also want to advance their leadership/technical skills. This longer-range planning can also provide the time needed to navigate structural barriers and provide opportunities to redefine job descriptions that allow for growth with the right attitude.
- As a Metadata Manager, you can cultivate a climate that supports discussions about career planning beyond immediate skills development. Even having a basic discussion with your team about planning can be a good way to start the ball rolling.
- It may also be helpful to have a conversation within your organization about what it means to be successful regarding the different activities that make up succession planning. Is developing staff who leave to be successful elsewhere a win or a loss? If this is not the outcome you’re hoping for, how can you change the structural/cultural roadblocks to success?
An area that would be worth additional follow-up discussion is the relationship between diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in libraries and succession planning activities. This intersection was outside the scope of Crystal’s work and only briefly discussed during our sessions. On one hand, formal succession planning has been viewed as a detriment to DEI because it can reinforce systemic bias about who can advance in an organization. On the other hand, conscientious use of succession planning activities can help clear away these same obstacles. In our discussion, it was noted that the culture of external searches has been tied to DEI recruitment goals. As noted, this already creates tension when successful leaders need to change institutions to advance, potentially having a detrimental effect on the retention of diverse staff. If this is a topic that you’re currently working on in your library, please reach out about how we could facilitate a future conversation among the Metadata Managers Focus Group.