« Always read your contract | Main | The Recession - is the worst over? »

August 19, 2009

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e553746d0688330120a55b2ff5970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who should represent the full spectrum of information professionals?:

Comments

Tim Buckley Owen

Very interesting observation, this. I was recently commissioned to do a very short piece for September’s Information World Review magazine contrasting what you need to do to qualify as a librarian with the requirements for an archivist. Researching this piece, I was struck by the remarkable similarities between CILIP’s and the Society of Archivists’ academic and professional qualification regimes. The system Sue describes certainly does seem to favour those with CILIP qualifications at present. But with the growing importance of effective record keeping for accountability and compliance purposes, it seems to me that government departments are missing out by not insisting on appropriate qualifications for record keepers as well.

Amanda Quick

This is an important issue. Sadly, silos are still alive and well - even within the library sector and definitely once we look at the wider LIS arena. If we don't enhance, announce and apply our transferable skills, we risk increasing irrelevance. In the information society, most professions lay claim to a measure of knowledge and information skills - this will become a threat if we do not work together to develop a brand that is inclusive yet distinctive.

Innovation and Enterprise blog editor

I have also been fascinated to see the discussion leading on from the SHR Breakfast blog.

I agree that we need more cooperation and even consolidation within and across the profession, but I personally don't feel CILIP is up to the job.

Edwina Wontner

I agree that this is an issue and working for a government department, I am aware of non-CILIP members that are perfectly good at their jobs but don't have the CILIP stamp of approval. They are effectively discriminated against under the current set up.

Alison Raisin

Bringing the various strands of the KIM profession will be toughand if CILIP doesn't tackle it who will? More seriously for evryone, what will happen if they don't?
If CILIP take it on they face the challenge of continuing to demonstrate relevance to its current predominantly library based members at a time when membership numbers are causing concern, while widening the remit to KIM. I have already heard many complaints (from outside the government sector) about the non-library content of Gazette. Equally there are a number of highly skilled KIM professionals (both with abd without CILIP approved qualifications) who have given up on CILIP because of its overwhelming focus on the library world.
Where to start? If you look at teh beginning of the process there are many KIM degrees and masters not recognised by CILIP even when they recognise the library focused qualifactions at the same institution. At least some of these courses produce graduates with the skills we need in the wider KIM work.
Then there is Umbrella. Maybe next time we need a strand for the broader profession and invite Records Management Society and Society of Archivists along? We should be looking for where we can work together and build recognistion of the common skills, not enforcing the differences.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment