Social capital and leadership in academic libraries: the broader exchange around “Buy In”

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce the concept of social capital to the literature on academic libraries as it pertains to leadership and management as well as to demonstrate the limitations that the current discursive use of the phrase “buy in” represents. Design/methodology/approach – This paper brings critical insights from outside fields of intellectual inquiry, including business, knowledge management, computer and information systems, and sociology. The paper is organized around a series of questions posed at the end of the introduction and serves to introduce its audience to the key findings made in these fields as well as to apply relevant observations about social capital to the unique context of leadership and management in academic libraries. Findings – The paper elucidates a number of limitations to the current practice of using the phrase “buy in” as a way of exploring the concept of social capital. The most significant risk that the phrase’s use incurs is a lack of context and clarity around critical concepts of leadership, including trust, trustworthiness, and shared vision and meaning. Originality/value – This paper argues that a broader contextualization of “buy in” in the scholarship on social capital can lead to a richer dialog that allows academic library administrators to understand the concurrent and competing factors that accompany an exchange where “buy in” is given or withheld.

Beyond Individual Relationships: Programmatic Approaches to Outreach and Engagement at UC Santa Barbara Library

“…A key finding from the ARL 2015 Pilot Library Liaison Institute report was that 'librarians tend to be unable to see or imagine the impact of their work in the context of solving larger institutional problems' (Rockenbach et al 2015, p. 21). Many subject librarians direct their own work; our libraries fail them and our users by not creating the structures that can empower them to move beyond transactional service offerings to scalable and potentially transformational ones (Miller & Pressley 2015;Schlak 2015;Bracke 2016).…”

“…The literature on social or relational capital as exercised by library leaders is sparse and this is another area that deserves deeper scholarly inquiry. The literature that does exist tends to explore the role of library administrators internally in managing staff development programs, relational networks among staff, organisational climate and change projects (Town 2014;Schlak 2015). The Library Leadership and Management Association (LLAMA 2016) published a set of competencies for library leaders that introduces relationship building as a subsidiary skill under the heading of 'collaboration and partnerships'.…”

The level of individual social capital and social activity among librarians and managerial personnel

“…In his paper, he analysed how librarians cooperate with each other in their workplace and how librarians, directors and deans of universities that have their own libraries may generate social capital through libraries. He noted that over the past 20 years, the work of librarians has significantly changed and is now strongly based on social relations, the willingness to support others and the act of “goodwill”, which is a manifestation of social capital (Schlak, 2015).…”

Social capital in the theory and research of LIS professionals in the light of the literature on the subject. Review of current knowledge

“…An interesting context of leadership and social capital in academic libraries was explored by Schlak (2015Schlak ( , 2016, who believes that social capital could contribute to making the dialogue between the library management and the library personnel more effective, which, in turn, stimulates change management and change acceptance by personnel. Schlak analysed how librarians cooperate with each other in their workplace and how librarians, directors and deans may generate social capital through libraries.…”