There is a big, healthy discussion going on right now about a new name for SLA. The Association has conducted more than two years of research to ascertain how to best align our association with the institutions and clients that we serve now and in the future.
After reading and reflecting on the Alignment Project research, the Board, with input from the membership, concluded that a name change is needed and put the name Association for Strategic Knowledge Professionals before the membership earlier this month. We’re all trying the new name on for size, and the reactions predictably run the gamut from 0 to 10. For some the name is a tad presumptuous and doesn’t quite fit yet. For others, it’s something we’ve been doing for years and are very comfortable with.
One thing that has influenced my thinking in this discussion is Eugenie Prime’s admonishment: NO PUNY VISIONS! –that is, we need an identity that captures the full gamut of what we can do and what we want to do. And that is not a puny vision.
In the discussion of a new name, we must look at the cost of staying the same, that is, the lost opportunity cost of relinquishing information and knowledge management to another discipline. Thomas Friedman, when referring to the read/write web, states, “Anything that can be done will be done. The only question is will it be done to you or by you.” It’s a tough statement, and points out that, in our case, we need to take ownership of the information landscape or others will.
Recently, I spoke with Eugenie and asked her for her opinion. Here’s how the exchange went:
Cindy: SLA is in the midst of re-aligning itself, and there is a name-change possibility in the works. What is your take on these developments?
Eugenie: I am not opposed to a name change. It may be necessary, but it will never be sufficient on its own. If we change our name and change nothing else, it will be simply cosmetics. We need an attitudinal change that results in changes in the way we perceive our profession and our role.
I worked at Nike for 16 years and from that experience, I saw that Nike was at its most compelling when it was highlighting human potential through athletic endeavor. Nike sells fitness apparel, but its real strength is when its message challenges us to maximize our potential and be all that we can be as individuals. That’s the power of branding, and it serves as a guidepost as we position ourselves for the future.
Whatever we call ourselves, be it librarians, consultants, knowledge managers, or information wranglers, the mission is the same. We provide answers, we organize, disseminate, and analyze information. We need to look at our aspirations. We are strategic to the business and the client. We facilitate smart business decisions and inspire world-class research. We are a valuable link in the chain of execution in an organization.
The name the Association for Strategic Knowledge Professionals is a step forward. You can still be a special librarian, an information professional, or one of the more than 2000 other titles that we call ourselves. The new name will help us capture the growth areas of our industry, and sit in that sweet spot where our work is valued and not just a commodity. So don’t get hung up on just the name change – there’s more to it than that. This is our chance to change our name, change our attitude, and our future.
3 Comments
October 19, 2009 at 5:26 pm
[...] SLA President-Elect, Cindy Romaine [...]
November 4, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Here’s a cautionary tale about the kind of turmoil that a name change can bring to a professional association: The formerly-named Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) decided to obfuscate what its members unapologetically did for a living, and hired Fleishman-Hillard to come up with a new name for the group. They settled on the bland “American Association for Justice.” (What exactly does that name mean in relation to what the members actually do?) The consequences have been nothing short of disastrous for the once-proud organization. Long-time members left in droves, and the organization’s deteriorating financial situation led to several rounds of staff layoffs. SLA is now blithely going down the same path, having also hired Fleishman-Hillard (at the tune of more than $1 million) to come with a meaningless name that obfuscates what its members unabashedly do for a living. So before voting in favor of a name change, I would strongly advise SLA members to study ATLA’s experience in this arena. By the way, the chief executive who pushed for the name change at ATLA was recently forced out by the board. Unfortunately, there’s no quick fix for the damage he caused.
November 4, 2009 at 10:49 pm
In my experience the information that Fleishman-Hillard delivered to SLA was well-researched and insights were at a high level.
There has been some turmoil for SLA over the name that we will vote for. Although it has not all been positive, we are having a robust discussion informed from all sides and that is health. Regardless of which way the vote goes, we need some time to think about who we are in the 21st century and the necessary changes we need to align within our organizations.