Who am I? How public library staff manage conflicting information about the self-concept

Abstract

Purpose Information represents the building blocks for identity construction, yet it is also full of contradictions and conflict. This is particularly true in the workplace, where workers must navigate conflicting information about their own standpoint on who they are, would ideally be, or should be, and the standpoint of management, customers and colleagues. This study considers how staff working in public libraries deal with conflicting identity-relevant information, as well as the outcome of these approaches. Design/methodology/approach Twenty-one public library staff members recorded a series of 5 audio diaries about their frustrations in routine library work. They then participated in a 45-min semi-structured interview intended to follow up on topics discussed in the diaries. Findings Participants employed several conflict management styles when confronted with conflicting information about the self-concept, including dominating, obliging, integrating, compromising and avoiding. They adopted a dynamic approach, using different styles and combinations of styles to construct a working self-concept. Outcomes for most of these styles were mixed. Originality/value While a significant amount of research has considered library identity, fewer studies have considered how staff actively construct their self-concept within the context of professional practice. By contributing to a better understanding of identity-relevant information and how library staff navigate it, the current study supports the profession’s efforts to (1) recognize problematic identity information, (2) revise routines in which this information is present and (3) train staff on the use of different strategies and inform them of the potential outcomes of each strategy.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 3 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.