The Borough Market Twelve Meet for talks on Professional Associations

On Friday 3 July twelve librarians, information professionals – call us what you will - enjoyed a breakfast at Roast in Borough Market as part of the Sue Hill Recruitment breakfast programme.  The hot topic of the morning was ‘ Professional Bodies - Do we need them?’  The short answer was that the group were passionate about the information work they do and yes having a professional body where we can all ‘hang our hats’ really does give kudos to the profession.  However the issue is what should the professional body look like and offer its members.  It is quite clear that there is a multiplicity of choices from BIALL, SLA, Sconul, SCIP, National Council of Archives, RMS and of course CILIP  and its groups, too much choice can cause confusion to those outside the profession looking in.  Why did they all evolve? A disenchantment with other professional associations?

The debate was extremely lively and for once I found it hard to get a word in as the conversation flowed and in what seemed like a blink of an eye it was nearly 9.30am and time to head off for our respective work places.  In discussing success stories and best practice in growing membership, it was clear that having an outward facing strategy with strong CPD aspects is key and an organisation should not exist for the benefit of its officers and employees alone.  The membership should be driving through their needs and expectations of a professional body and have a true voice that is heard.  Examples of strong leadership and success were discussed and common denominators appear to be ‘ passion’, ‘energy’, 'speed of response' and good succession planning.  The group agreed that CPD, networking, having a best practice body of knowledge and advocacy are core benefits of a professional group.  However the issue of professional certification was discussed and the group concluded that ‘qualifications do not make you professional’ and that it could be argued that ‘hiding’ behind professional certification is no benchmark for how professional or relevant to a post an individual maybe.  It can certainly assure a level of competence but it is the body of work that drives through professionalism, values, competencies and skills. What next then for professional groups?  How to make the right choice?  In this economic climate members may vote with their purse. 

From the lively debate it is clear that there needs to be significant change in how professional bodies are structured, managed and financed to serve (a key word to use and is often forgotten) its members.  One can look to the US and SLA for examples of how strong and charismatic leadership is driving forward, with a passion, its offering, relevance  and CPD in abundance and value for money.  It is not yet the tolling of the death bell for professional bodies but it is quite clear that there needs to be significant change and quickly before ‘others’ prey on the disillusioned and ‘lost’ librarians.  A call to arms! 

 - Sue Edgar

Comments

[Charles Oppenheim]

The demise of CIG makes this debate even more relevant. For many years CILIP has failed to give the leadership that is so obviously needed in the LIS profession today. Over the years, the services CILIP has provided have gradually contracted, largely due to its financial difficulties; that means it is now an organisation that no longer serves its community adequately. It is time that CILIP Council got a grip of the problem of CILIP's slow decline - but does it have the courage to do so?

[Jeremy Clarke]

When recently chatting with a contact at a successful (non-library) membership organisation, he made the point that at this time when organisations are looking for cost savings and potentially considering the benefits of paying their annual subs, it is all the more important to make sure that as a membership organisation you are offering a service that meets the very real and immediate needs of your members to support them in this climate. On top of this, not making the mistake of losing touch with your members during difficult times, now more than ever should a membership organisation be reaching out to ask 'what else can we do to help?'

[Alison North]

As one of the Borough Market 12 I am pleased to note that we aren't the only ones who have strong feelings about professional bodies and their value to the information community. BUT we need some action so WHAT NOW?
Please keep talking.
Thank you

[Phil Bradley]

I think a professional body needs to 'serve and protect' as well as promote and offer a good example of best practice in whatever area of expertise it works in. I do however think that professional qualifications are important, if they're used correctly. They illustrate a level of competence and professional understanding. Of course, the problem is that if someone got a professional qualification 20 years ago, does it actually mean that much in todays environment? Probably not, which is why continued professional development is important, but unfortunately all too many information professionals don't appear to be given time to do this on a regular basis. This is where a professional body needs to step in to provide a management structure with advice and guidance.

Having started with an American reference I'll end with one - perhaps professional bodies of all types need to consider - not what their members can do for them, but they can do for their members!

[janicelachance]

Sue, on behalf of SLA, I am thinking of the AUKML and CIG members now left without an association to bring them together. You ask about professional associations, "Why did they all evolve?" I can only address how SLA evolved, and is still evolving, to meet the needs of information professionals all over the world.

A hundred years ago, a group of librarians got together to form an association that would serve and advocate for a need breed: special librarians whose job was to provide practical, actionable information and intelligence to their organizations. A century later, SLA has some 11,000 members in 75 countries, including a large and growing European membership.

While we have a small, dedicated professional staff, SLA is and always has been run by members. Accordingly, our primary focus is on building the best continuing professional development, networking, and advocacy opportunities for our members. In uncertain economic times, the benefits of the association have never been more meaningful to SLA members.

In recent years, we have built an online university, Click U, with myriad educational offerings including free member webinars and online certificate programs in competitive intelligence and knowledge management. Benefits such as free online libraries, an innovation lab that keeps members up to date on the latest Web 2.0 technologies, significant discounts on online degree programs from major universities mean that members can keep up their skills anytime, anywhere.

We have also formed a network of lively online communities where our members help one another and discuss issues important to their many disciplines. And, of course, SLA holds the largest, most important annual conference for info pros. It took place last month in Washington, D.C., and even in this economy, we saw a 16 percent increase in attendance, including significant numbers of European attendees.

One of SLA's most important current efforts is the Alignment Project, the most comprehensive study ever undertaken to identify the best ways for information professionals to demonstrate their value to the organizations that employ them. Our deep commitment to our European members is represented in our approach to this research, which has included a broad sampling of executives and info pros in the U.K.

I invited all AUKML and CIG members who are looking for a new banner under which to gather to look into the rich benefits of SLA members. Please feel free to contact me personally, and check out our Website at www.sla.org.

Sincerely,
Janice Lachance
CEO, SLA

[Susie Kay]

As another member of the 'Borough Twelve' I would very much like to see this diverse and talented sector regain the stature and respect that it deserves. One of the key missing elements, from my perspective, is that CILIP has never met the challenge of describing the rich complexity of the sector. The many diverse smaller organisations exist to gain recognition for their skillset and to work together to drive what is pertinent to them. An effective starting point in looking to the future would be to determine the breadth and depth of the sector and to describe the skillset at all levels - a competence framework in fact. This would ease the process of making sense of and recognising the requirements for services to members. It also realigns the emphasis onto the members not the organisations which represent them.
Happy to help!
Susie Kay
MD
The Professionalism Group

[Penny Bailey]

Firstly, commenting from the viewpoint of the new Chair of one of the Special Interest Groups of CILIP - the Commercial, Legal and Scientific Interest Group (CLSIG), I would say don't overlook the enthusiasm and passion that happens within CILIP's grass roots - its members are organised into diverse interest Groups and geographical Branches. CLSIG is very active in organising highly regarded social, practical and CPD events relevant to its workplace members and guest attendees. With over 1400 members it is one of the largest CILIP Groups and the first to achieve the CILIP Seal of Recognition for its Professional Development Club evening seminars. CLSIG has more members than BIALL, SLA Europe and CLIG combined - this is hardly a decline! We listen to our membership and continually ask our members what do you want the Committee to organise for you? Furthermore, helping on the committees of our professional associations is a great way to learn new skills and raise your own professional profile. I am surprised not more do it – it is a two way process the members are helping themselves not some anonymous professional body. By joining professional association you are a stronger voice not a lone voice.

Secondly, I would back the case for profession qualifications as important and highly relevant. CILIP is unique in the UK for having the only internationally recognised qualification for library and information professionals. When I worked in legal libraries I found it extremely reassuring to be able to point out to lawyers that I was a Chartered Librarian - just like their Chartered Accountant - when arguing the case for my own professional recognition and to insist that my professional expertise was taken seriously when making decisions about the library and information centres I managed. If my professional opinion was by passed I made it a resignation issue. If not enough librarians stand up for their profession, don't see the relevance of profession qualifications or CPD then we can expect to be on the receiving end of lack of regard for our profession.

For those chasing fewer job opportunities, speaking now from my point of view as an employer, I would have expected candidates with professional qualifications and evidence of recent professional development to be better placed to persuade an employer to take them on in preference to other candidates with only similar work experience. It can give you the edge in competitive situations.

[Oriole Newgass]

Interesting commentary on what appears to have been an extremely worthwhile meeting. The Borough Market Twelve seem to have been prepared to look into the abyss the demise of CiG has opened up – are we all now ready to do this?

The significance of the ultimate failure of CiG cannot be over-emphasised. From a relatively small beginning it became synonymous with professionalism, class, quality and a shrewd business awareness which brought serious sponsorship into the information profession for the first time. All the other professional associations have learned a lot from the innovations of CiG – and yet, despite everything, they failed.

There are references above – some more forthright than others! – to CILIP’s role/non-role in all of this. Surely now it must be clear that for an association seeking significant long-term success in the future, as opposed to mere longevity without change, there will have to be a seismic and creative shift away from any of the models in the current landscape?

[Bob McKee]

These are fundamental issues and I'm grateful to Sue and the "Borough Twelve" for raising them. There's a lot of personal opinion in the various postings so far, but there are also three important and useful outcomes.

One is consensus on what a successful professional body looks like: it's driven by the membership; it's outward facing and advocates for the value of the profession; and it supports the activism and personal development of practitioners through CPD, networking and sharing best practice. That's a model CILIP can sign up to and, I would argue (of course), already delivers - although there are always ways in which we can make a better job of delivery!

The second outcome is around the issue of certification/accreditation. Views in the discussion to date are divided - and yet this is the crucial question for any future model which CILIP might choose to adopt.Is the model of a profession self-regulated by its professional body still fit for purpose in the modern employment marketplace? Should we de-couple the notion of "qualification" from the value added for practitioners by their professional body? Or can the concept of CILIP as an awarding body continue to sit alongside the concept of CILIP as a professional community?

It's easy for a few noisy malcontents to accuse CILIP of "lack of leadership". But if you were sitting in my seat where would you place your bet: CILIP as regulator of professional practice? Or CILIP as community of professional practice?

The third outcome is one I've taken as implicit in the discussion although it's not yet been articulated explicitly. CILIP is a generic professional body which seeks to cover the whole of the library/information spectrum. Other bodies operate in (relatively speaking) niche communities of specialism or setting. So - given the plethora of niche bodies where a practitioner can find a like-minded professional community - is there a need any more for a generic body like CILIP?

CILIP exists because library/information practitioners brought it into being. So, all you library/information practitioners out there, tell me the answers! Do you still want a generic professional body? Do you still want that body to regulate the profession by awarding professional qualifications?

In the meantime, I'll get on with making sure we're Member-led, outward-facing, and focused on helping library/information practitioners be the best they can be.

Cheers,

Bob

[Susie Kay]

Couple of things here Bob.
Firstly, please don't call me a noisy malcontent. As a member I think I would expect a little more respect from the Chief Executive. Some of us have come together for a discussion on what we all felt were pressing issues for this profession. One of the key problems for many professional associations is an inactive, lethargic membership. We don't fit that category and that can only be good news. As Penny pointed out, working together produces a stronger organisation.

Secondly, successful professional bodies are driven by sound strategic vision. Memberships of successful professional bodies are, de facto, professional communities and as such will expect guidance and support which will enhance the public perception of excellence for those who achieve certification or qualification from that body. Lack of visibility of the body and its qualifications is not an argument for scrapping the requirement for demonstration of competence.

Your last point about a 'generic' body is, I think, well answered in my article in the current issue of UPDATE. It describes the lack of a statement from CILIP about the breadth of the community and asks for the construction of a framework which will allow all of the various specialisms to become a unified sector. Generic then becomes 'inclusive' - a much better vision for a professional association don't you think?

Susie Kay
MD
The Professionalism Group

[Bob McKee]

I wouldn't dream of calling you a noisy malcontent, Susie - you're not one of those who accuse CILIP of lack of leadership, carping without being constructive. Your approach is positive, and, on a personal level, I agree with the points that you (and Penny) are making. Working together can make us stronger. Strategic vision can make us clearer - and more clearly visible. Certification can be an assurance of excellence. Generic can become inclusive. Absolutely! Let's do it.

Cheers,

Bob

[Susie Kay]

Hi Bob
Does this mean you are offering me a project to compile the competence framework for the sector? Happy to negotiate.

Cheers
Susie

[Bob McKee]

Well, it's true that an agreed competency framework would be very useful indeed - and that falls very neatly, I would have thought, into the remit of Lifelong Learning UK as the Sector Skills Council for the libraries, archives and information sector. Perhaps you should a word with them Susie!

Cheers,

Bob

[Susie Kay]

On their website Lifelong Learning UK offer the combined suite of National Occupational Standards (NOS) for Libraries Archives and Information Services and Records Management. They state that these can be used to support the development of 'competency based frameworks'.

It would seem that they have already made a statement about next steps in production for such frameworks. I am sorry that CILIP do not think it is their responsibility to do it. I think others do. If you change your mind do let me know.

Kind regards
Susie

[Jo Bryce]

I have recently discovered this blog as a result an email from Sue Hill. I have been working as an Information professional for around 5 years now. Never in a library, I hasten to add.
My mentor (which I arranged myself) suggested I join CILIP. After two years of membership I felt that as a non-Librarian I was being ignored. I challenged CILIP and explained that I felt the focus was very one-sided towards libraries. I was told that they didn't feel this was the case, and that they have lots of content on their website about the information sector more generally. When I looked at the pages they referenced they were all in the context of libraries. I think everyone needs to take a good look at themselves and decide if they truely are representing everyone they think they are. If anyone can suggest a professional association that truely represents information professionals outside of the library sector I would really like to hear about them.

[Eldin Rammell]

I feel a similar frustration to Jo. CILIP claims to represent "information management", but this only appears to be the case in a Library environment or an "Information Services" environment. Having worked as a records manager within the pharmaceutical industry for 18 years, followed by 6 years experience as an independent records management consultant, I see little on CILIP's website that applies to my sector.

I get a great deal of benefit from niche professional bodies (Drug Information Association, Scientific Archivists Group to name but two) and 100% support their continued existence BUT they don't offer professional acceditation/certification nor do they truly represent information management as a profession. The amalgamation of these niche bodies is never going to happen, neither is it desired particularly.

So, CILIP, take up the challenge and show how you can truly represent records management as a core component of the information management community.