The questions

The following list of questions were asked in our staff interviews. (Common questions appear in regular text, Garrison’s are in bold, and Nutefall’s are in italics.)

1. 1. Tell me a little bit about yourself, how long you’ve been at our institution, what you like and don’t like about your job, and what you like to do when not at work.
2. 2. What are a few words or phrases you’d use to describe yourself? What would you say are your strengths and areas for development?
3. 3. What values do you bring to work with you (whether personal, or professional)?
4. 4. Please tell me what your job entails day to day. Are there tasks or functions you wish you could either start or stop doing?
5. 5. What are some things you think our library does well, and not well, now? What is the one thing you most wish will happen at our library within the next 2–3 years?
6. 6. What are your expectations of me as [director]?
7. 7a. How well do you think the recent reorganization is working, and do you have any thoughts on how it might’ve been done differently, knowing what you know now?
8. 7b. How connected is the library to the university? In what ways do you see the library advancing the university’s strategic plan?
9. 8a. If our library could have new positions, what would your top three position priorities be and why?
10. 8b. What do I need to know about [our institution] to be successful?
11. 9. What questions do you have for me?

After compiling the results from our set of interviews, Garrison found numerous common responses to many of the questions. He presented these themes at an all-staff meeting, representing common words and phrases from each question’s responses as word clouds. This approach didn’t especially resonate with most staff, but it was a simple way to visualize dominant ideas. Nutefall shared the themes she found with her supervisor.

In addition to getting to know our libraries’ people and endeavoring to become engaged and engaging leaders, we feel that the interviews helped establish us as approachable people who are open to ideas from anywhere in the organization. Exchanging at least some knowledge with each person helped establish trust.

Garrison believed that his interviews made later processes, such as developing new core values, mission, and vision statements, more successful than they might otherwise have been. Having asked everyone in his library about values, he used both large and small group meetings to refine large concepts into specific points and statements using just a few questions.

Nutefall believed that her interview process established a set of priorities on which she could follow through. During her interviews she outlined an inclusive strategic planning process for the library. The strategic plan was completed in July 2013 and included many opportunities for staff input and feedback, demonstrating her commitment and seeking to build trust. Having found success with the initial interview process, Nutefall completed a second set of individual interviews in which she asked each of her staff to tell her how they felt she had done in her first year at her library, and how she could continue to improve in her job.

While it may seem more efficient to conduct first meetings with people in small groups, not everyone may feel comfortable speaking in a group setting, as some may be introverted, others may dominate the conversation, etc. Meeting people one on one gives everyone a chance to offer any thoughts they wish without fear of reproach or retaliation. It also disregards past conflict between colleagues that could prevent the new director from hearing each person’s true opinions and ideas.

Our advice for new directors in selecting a location for individual interviews is to consider your personal preference and your library’s past history and culture. Would it be best to go to a neutral location inside or outside the library? Meet the staff in their workspaces? Have them come to your office? Or meet in a location that takes others’ individual preferences into account? What tone do you want to set while conducting the interviews, and how do you want to distinguish yourself from previous directors?

Before starting the interviews, consider how you will use the information shared. Will it be kept confidential? Will you share a summary/overview with staff or your supervisor? How might you address specific themes that emerge? Also, consider what you are and are not prepared to share about yourself with your new library. Are there any topics or questions that are out of bounds? How will you deal with any such things that arise, either from your end or others’?

Since many of the staff have served through one or more previous directors, we each learned a lot about the history of our libraries. Director turnover was more frequent at Garrison’s library than at Nutefall’s, and each setting featured unique sets of expectations. It’s important to listen and learn about your library’s history while working to set a new tone and expectations. You will likely need to respond to comments about or expectations set by your predecessor(s); consider carefully how you’ll do so, both in words and actions, and the messages those responses will convey to staff.

Finally, the meetings allowed us to hear what staff saw as opportunities for change and how open they were to it. Every director comes in with ideas about change, but it is important to understand a library’s tolerance for change, which may vary widely between individual librarians and staff. In our experience, considering change within a larger framework, such as an inclusive process to create a fresh set of values, mission, vision, and strategic planning, helps those who are not ready for change begin to consider it for the future.