Knowledge work in the library is guided by a complex array of maps that outline how work should be done, who should do it, and how staff should think and behave. These maps originate from human and non‐human actors in the work system, including management, staff, patrons, technology, and physical space. In this study, six public library staff engaged in think‐alouds and semi‐structured interviews aimed at learning more about the function and content of these maps, how these maps were acquired, the challenges staff faced in trying to follow these maps, and how staff responded to these challenges. Results suggest how library management can support staff as they attempt to navigate the affordances and constraints of these maps—work that is key to sustained library resilience.

As knowledge workers, library staff are assumed to be highly autonomous, meaning that they are in control of how work is done. Yet, this work is heavily influenced by the expectations of others, and the expectation to take control can pressure staff to overwork. In this qualitative study, 13 public library staff members engaged in think-alouds (TAs) and semi-structured interviews (SSIs) aimed at uncovering potential misalignments between a staff member’s own prescriptive expectations for library work and the expectations of management, customers, colleagues, and technological and material artifacts. Findings suggest that public library staff have several expectations for how work will be done and, at times, want the freedom to control work in ways that match these expectations. They devise and implement defiance workarounds aimed at reinforcing their own expectations in the face of conflicting expectations from other system actors. Yet, autonomy is a multifaceted concept that goes beyond the mere need for control and, sometimes, giving up control meant that other needs were fulfilled. This study advances research on the nature of workplace autonomy and the active role of workers in its expression. This study also has implications for library management, as it suggests important considerations for shared autonomy and workplace relationships, as well as the need to engage in efforts aimed at shifting problematic expectations in the library work system.