One aspect of the new SLA Strategic Vision asks everyone in our Association to think more broadly about who could value from having SLA as their professional home. The specific language from the strategic vision is:

“The information profession is evolving faster than ever, thanks to the rapid rate of technological change and innovation. In this evolution lies opportunity to grow SLA’s offerings to new and nontraditional sectors of the information profession, and to enhance SLA as a professional home for these groups—e.g. competitive intelligence specialists, IT development specialists, and software and standards trainers.”

I’m sure we all find ourselves working more and more with professionals in allied fields – computer specialists, research analysts, brand managers, etc. Many of us are also probably working in these fields, taking our skills and knowledge and applying them in very different ways than what we had thought we would when we were in school. I personally have been an “Internet Librarian” and a “Web Analytics Manager” as well as an “Information Resources Specialist” and finally in my current position as a “Librarian.” Throughout my career I have worked with a large number of professionals in the information arena that would have benefited greatly from having a professional home like SLA.

The reality is that while many SLA members share a similar career path, there are a lot of people working today with data, information, and knowledge that could benefit from the networking, professional development, and connections they should make within SLA. SLA members can also benefit from the participation of these groups as well.

There are plenty of organizations that cater to one niche or another but SLA is unique in the diversity that exists within our Association already. How can we market what we have to new and growing sectors of the information marketplace? Are there opportunities for collaboration across Chapters and Divisions that could draw even more of these non-traditional information professionals into SLA? Can we give them a professional home where they can grow and help us grow so that we can meet the challenges in front of us today and in the future? I think so.

The SLA Board of Directors – and specifically your Division and Chapter Cabinet leaders – want to hear from you about how SLA can diversify and grow. You can comment on this post, reach out to a Board member, write your own blog post or just initiate a dialogue between the members of the SLA units in which you are active. We have an opportunity to broaden our impact and share our experience and the Association wants you to be part of this effort.

Richard Huffine is SLA’s Division Cabinet Chair for 2012.

by Darron Chapman, Europe Chapter, Academic, Business & Finance Divisions

Earlier this year, TFPL used its extensive networks to take a snapshot of how organisations are assigning Knowledge and Information Management (KIM) responsibilities and to see what trends are emerging. Key to the survey was the concept of ‘responsibilities’ rather than job titles and the KIM Responsibilities Framework. The Framework was developed following TFPL research in2006 and provided a structure for the survey. Respondents came from global, national and local organisations and were predominately UK based. The full report based on the survey is available on the TFPL website http://www.tfpl.com/resources/reports.cfm but the following key points standout.

Organisational strategy for innovation and investment has become a significant driver for assigning KIM responsibilities, suggesting that KIM is regarded more as an essential, rather than discretionary, business function.  This is a discernible shift towards KIM roles reporting into the business, as KIM needs are identified on an enterprise-wide basis. A model has evolved towards the dispersal of KIM practitioners throughout organisations supported by a central team. A matrix approach also means that dispersed practitioners are also part of a KIM team. So, in spite of rumours to the contrary, KIM teams still have a place in what’s often called the “future ready” business.

KIM headcount is remarkably stable, having not significantly fallen over the last five years. There is evidence of patterns of growth and decline in public and private organisations; however there is a net gain overall, with a wider range of sectors employing KIM staff.

There is a modest growth predicted in roles across the Framework with some areas more dynamic than others. The apparent loss of some traditional roles and responsibilities has been mitigated by creation of other, enriched roles calling for a continuing development of new skills and novel application of traditional skills.
There is a clear move towards the core KIM disciplines – information management, records management, library and information services, business analysis, and knowledge management,– coming together or merging. However, some relevant functions — such as Research, Competitive Intelligence and Information Technology – do not generally align themselves with KIM community.

The personal impact of individuals, team members as well as KIM Leaders is increasingly important. It is crucial to be able to align with, and understand, the organisation, to have the ability to develop skills, and to recognise how the role contributes to corporate success.

Questions raised

Inevitably the survey raised a number of questions in our minds, and we are sure that there are many more. So, for example:

• Should KIM professionals focus on aligning themselves to corporate strategy, innovation and investment?
• Will the KIM profession develop into a multi-disciplinary but cohesive group, or will it become a federation of different disciplines?
• If KIM roles are increasingly dispersed within organisations, will individuals continue to identify with the KIM community as a support network? Or, as new people are recruited into these roles, will they identify with their business community first?
• How far are we experiencing a step change or continuing to evolve as a profession?
• Have some functions, such as Research, began to split off from KIM as a career path?

We would welcome feedback and any further questions you might have at info@tfpl.com.

Darron Chapman is the Managing Director TFPL Ltd and President Elect of SLA’s Europe Chapter. Darron has been with TFPL since 1990, initially focusing on recruitment, becoming Managing Director after TFPL’s acquisition by IDOX Plc. Darron’s work as Director of Recruitment gave him a broad and unique view of developments in the information and business world. An established member of the executive team he helped shape the direction of the company and launched the first recruitment service dedicated to knowledge management.
Darron can be reached at darron.chapman@tfpl.com and followed on Twitter @DPCHA.

by Gretchen Leslie, Oregon Chapter, Science-Technology Division

I am writing this post because I believe we, as an association, have not really done a good job of researching our industry—the information industry—and using that research to better position our members  and our association in the future.  We talk about being “Future Ready,” but I have not seen us applying our core research competencies to scoping where the growth is and what the trending is in the information industry, what skills we need to find work in the coming information industry scenario, who our potential partners can be, and where the hidden snakes lay on our path to the future.  The research, data, and analysis are out there, generated by companies such as Outsell Inc., Simba, IDC, and Gartner.  Are we using it?  If not, why not?

So I guess this post is a call to action for the association leadership to begin a program to buy and use the published research about the information industry. Perhaps we could even partner with other associations, and cooperatively build a sustainable way to get the needed data and analysis on a continual basis.  That way, we could always benchmark on where we are as informational professionals, vs. where the information industry is headed.

What do the rest of you think of this “info pros – research thyself!” approach to mapping out what Future Ready means?  I’d like to hear from my colleagues in SLA about the idea of using market research on ourselves; making market research of the information industry part of our websites and continuing education, applying the ideas of where the information industry is moving to how and what we teach in information science graduate programs, and ultimately, building a better understanding of the global information industry and where we fit in the future as information professionals.

Gretchen Leslie has a 35+ year career in special libraries, and has always wondered why we cannot do a better job of analyzing our own industry.