Part 3 – Demand
Now that we have established what is going on with supply, and how it will affect the job market, let’s take a moment and look at the final component of the discussion… Demand for librarians. Before I continue, I want to mention that I am well aware that there are exceptions to all that I am about to say. There always are. Everything I say should be considered as being ‘as a general rule’. Please to not nit-pick stuff on a micro level. Feel free to nit-pick on a Macro level tho! I LOVE debating. Seriously. I do. =)
Ok, then, here we go. Let’s start by touching on some of the things that affect librarian demand.
- Price of Librarians. How much would one cost?
- Quality of Librarians. How do they compare to other Master Degreed people?
- Price of Alternatives. How much are Paraprofessionals?
- Quality of Alternatives. How well can Paraprofessionals perform at a Librarian level?
- Number of positions nationally (Demand). Currently, there are 132,991 such positions according to the ALA.
- Number of Librarians nationally. How many MLS’s either employed or looking for a job.
The textbooks would argue that the price of librarians (at the moment this number is $56,259 according to the ALA. FWIW not anyplace I have ever lived) is the most important factor in determining the demand for librarians. I would agree if the price for Librarians was to decrease, but would contest this if the price was increasing because based on a sharply left veering Demand Curve near the Price line. Therefore there is very little flexibility in upward price. This is due in part to the fact that librarians, especially public librarians, are not funded on profit motives. In other words, the entity hiring the librarians does not have to demonstrate their worth (but there are some good ROI models out there), making the Librarian price inflexible at best, fixed at worst. Sticking it to the tax payer syndrome so to speak. However, even tho the taxpayers foot the bill without choice, you will still never see $80k a year librarians for fear of rioting. No politician feels that lucky. Hence the near horizontal demand curve as it approached Price line. I will coin this theory the “Green Ceiling for Librarians”. They cannot prove they are worth more, thus will not be worth more. I contend that in their current state (skill-set and abilities), they simply are not worth more.
Add to that the fact you have 132,991 librarian positions (according to
I assert that the most important factor in determining Librarian demand is not price, but quality. If Librarian meant more to the job market then just ‘can use wooden information retrieval devices’ then it would be a step in the right direction. Librarianship needs a complete re-tooling. Librarians need to be masters of the Internet and all information in digital format. They need massive database training. They need to understand business to better manage people, libraries, and information. All industries, no matter the scope, should want a few Librarians amongst their ranks. Just like all businesses benefit from an Accountant, so too should they benefit from a Librarian.
Of course this would change the very foundation of what a Librarian is. Like we talked about in Part 2, the Librarian would posses an undergraduate that alone, would offer a profitable career. The MLS should be the icing on the cake, not the whole dish. Alas, these types of degrees are hard work and the washout rate would be high. Yay! I say! Like one of my Economics professors once said… “Money = Not Easy”. Succinct and very true. The MLS undergrad should be 2 parts Business, 1 part Computer Science, and 1 part Education. That would be the perfect foundation for the perfect Librarian. Anything else is less then optimum. Nothing else should be accepted. No longer can we accept incompetent or undereducated people into our ranks. This must stop. It has to. Our reputation is at stake! Reputation will play a key part in our Demand.
The other great threat to Librarian Demand is the Paraprofessional. Why? Quit simple really, they can do what a librarian does almost as well, just as well, or even better, for a lot less money. Many librarians will disagree, however you are not fooling anybody. I went thru library school. I know how easy it is. I know full well that a person with an undergrad in art and an MLS is far inferior to a person with a Bachelor in Business as far as overall quality is concerned (remember the washout discussion in Part 2?). Many tell me how hard library school was. I have to try not to lol. Obviously these were not Business or Science Undergrads. You never hear the latter complaining of how hard the MLS was. What does that tell you?
Librarian Darwinism
Charles Darwin had a little theory. It went something like this…. “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.”
Librarians, due to their unique situation (i.e. tax funded and/or hard to fire) have managed to avoid the natural evolution that occurs in the normal workforce. If you offer a product nobody wants, your business fails and you are done. If you are incompetent, you are fired. You must produce something somebody wants or it is all over. Librarians however, can be computer ignorant in the digital age and still have a job. Exsqueeze me? Alas, it is true. I know many Librarians that can barely function online. They have never downloaded an E-book (or anything for that matter) and have never used a flash drive. They cannot function in Excel and you can just forget Access. They are typically older ‘boomers’ and many have no desire or willingness to learn. They will continue to suckle at the library/taxpayer teat until they see fit to retire, immune from
5 comments:
Are you really suggesting that History majors, with their background in bibliographic research, or Philosophy majors, with their background in logic and analytic thinking, or even Music majors, far more prepared for music librarianship than the rest of us, cannot make good librarians in your sense of the idea?
To be frank, everybody that complained to me about how hard library school was turned out to have been education majors. I think that speaks for itself.
Yes, that is pretty much what I am suggesting. History and Philosophy majors do not typically have the technical and managerial skills needed to play a medium or high level (i.e. good paying) role in libraries. They have few to no computer classes, personnel classes, finance classes, accounting classes, or marketing classes. All these things vastly improve your ability to run a library at mid to upper levels.
As far as logical and analytical thinking goes, noting is better then computer science and business for this.
You did throw a curve ball in there tho... I agree with you, I think a music major would be better suited for a music librarianship than would a computer/business major. Anytime you get very specialized you will have exceptions. However, to actually run a music library... hmm... I would have to still go with the business major. Of course the perfect option here would be a combo.. a person with BOTH credentials. Perfection!
Ideally, you have both a liberal arts and a business background. A good example is that most well-respected business management theorist, Peter Drucker, who has a liberal arts background. He claimed that his thesis on Kierkegaard was one of him most prized accomplishments.
I also think that you cannot make such broad and sweeping statements about one degree over the other. There's no proof that a person with a business degree is going to be more successful in business than someone with a liberal arts degree.
I have a liberal arts degree. I'm also working toward a business degree and I have to say, that I'm not always impressed with my fellow business majors. I was, however, rarely disappointed by the level of intellect amoung my fellow philosophy students.
Soren,
No doubt there are many smart people in other disciplines. I was mainly trying to focus on skills pertinent to running a library.
"There's no proof that a person with a business degree is going to be more successful in business than someone with a liberal arts degree."
...or a person with no degree. There are always exceptions if you look at this on a person by person basis. Look at Bill Gates. I am talking "over all". If you take a thousand people with a Liberal Arts degree and a thousand people with a Business degree and put them all into the business field, what group will do better? The existence of these different specialized degrees is proof of their effectiveness. Why would you take a business degree otherwise? You do it so you can be better then "everybody else" at that one specialized skill set.
Post a Comment