Leading Change In Libraries: A Case Study By Catherine B. So

Leading change in libraries: a case study Catherine B. Soehner

In September 2012, the J. Willard Marriott Library at the University of Utah faced a significant organizational shift following the departure of the Associate Dean for Library IT. This moment presented an opportunity to evaluate and restructure the library’s IT services, which had been historically fragmented across two departments: "Library IT," focused on enterprise services such as the catalog, website, and digital collections, and "Computing and Media Services" (CMS), handling desktop support for staff and campus labs. Over time, this division had led to duplicated efforts, inefficient processes, and inconsistent technological development—such as separate backups for data and competing versions of the mobile website.

The library aimed to harness IT capabilities to enhance digitization, archiving, and access to special collections, thereby demonstrating its contribution to research and learning. Given budget constraints and a strategic shift, the focus was on reorganizing existing IT resources to better support these core goals, prompting the need for organizational change.

This case study examines how the Marriott Library adopted John Kotter’s organizational change model to guide its restructuring, emphasizing the first three steps: building urgency, creating a guiding coalition, and formulating a shared vision. The process offers insights into managing resistance, inclusive leadership, and effective communication within academic library reform initiatives.

Paper For Above instruction

The Marriott Library’s initiative to unify its IT departments exemplifies how strategic organizational change can be effectively managed through structured frameworks. Central to this process was Kotter’s eight-stage model, which the library adapted to fit its academic environment and cultural norms. The initial step involved establishing a sense of urgency by engaging all staff members in open dialogues about the current inefficiencies and threats posed by departmental silos. These discussions, structured around a SWOT analysis, revealed critical weaknesses such as duplicated efforts, lack of transparency, and inadequate collaboration. Recognizing these issues highlighted the pressing need for change to support the library’s strategic goal of enhancing digital collections and access.

Forming a guiding coalition was the next crucial step. The library leadership assembled a coalition comprising key managers from both IT units and a campus change leader. This coalition facilitated cross-departmental input and ensured that those most affected by the change had a voice in planning and implementation. They collected baseline data via departmental reports and acknowledged discrepancies, such as perceptions of being unheard, which underscored the importance of inclusive communication. To strengthen the change process, a task force of IT managers—equal in number from both departments—was created, embodying Kotter’s principle of a powerful guiding coalition that supports change at all levels.

Creating a shared vision emerged as a pivotal moment during the first joint meeting of the IT Managers. Here, participants began discussing norms and values necessary for a unified IT department, setting the foundation for a common purpose. This collaborative environment fostered the development of a vision centered on streamlined services, integrated systems, and better digitization efforts aligned with the library’s overarching strategic goals. The process reinforced that a compelling vision must be co-created to motivate staff and gain buy-in.

Despite successes, the library experienced challenges that reflect common organizational change complexities. Resistance from individuals who feared workload increases or job loss necessitated frank conversations, highlighting the need to address resistance proactively. One staff member’s persistent concerns led the leadership to make targeted adjustments, such as reallocating personnel and establishing mutual assistance agreements, illustrating the importance of flexibility and ongoing dialogue. This component aligns with literature emphasizing that change management must confront resistance directly rather than ignore or suppress it.

Furthermore, some managers lacked readiness to embody leadership roles essential for driving change. The library provided leadership seminars, yet some managers still expressed fears of losing staff or quitting, indicating that short-term training may be insufficient. Building leadership capacity within the change process is critical, especially in academic environments where organizational inertia can be strong. The recognition that leadership development is ongoing aligns with scholarly understanding that successful change requires cultivating leaders at multiple levels.

An interesting insight involved staff perceptions of being listened to. While leadership believed open meetings and feedback channels demonstrated attentiveness, some employees felt unheard. This disconnect underscored that listening is often mistaken for agreement; effective communication must distinguish between understanding concerns and endorsing all viewpoints. Transparency and continued dialogue are essential to maintain trust and mitigate resistance.

Additional reflections suggest that wider communication efforts could have reduced tension. Reiterating the sense of urgency in all interactions and ensuring consistent messaging across leadership levels would have amplified awareness and commitment. Regular, credible communication aligns with Kotter’s assertion that without it, change efforts risk failure. The library’s experience underscores that sustained messaging and engagement are vital for cultural shifts within academic institutions.

In conclusion, the Marriott Library’s case illustrates that successful organizational change in academic libraries depends on a deliberate, adaptable approach that combines established models with sensitivity to institutional culture. Clear communication, inclusivity, and addressing resistance directly foster trust and buy-in. The process demonstrated that while frameworks like Kotter’s provide valuable guidance, effective change also requires ongoing dialogue, leadership development, and a readiness to modify strategies in response to unforeseen challenges. Ultimately, embracing flexibility and open communication are fundamental to transforming library services and fulfilling strategic goals in a complex academic environment.

References

• Burke, W. Warner, Dale G. Lake, and Jill Waymire Paine. (2008). Organization change: A comprehensive reader. John Wiley & Sons.
• Geyer, E. M. (2002). IT enabled organizational change: A framework for management. Journal of Library Administration, 36(4), 67-81.
• Helphand, M. (1997). Leadership for successful change. Unpublished workshop materials, United Way of Greater Salt Lake.
• Jaguszewsk, J. M., & Williams, K. (2013). New roles for new times: Transforming liaison roles in research libraries. Association of Research Libraries.
• Kotter, J. P. (2007). Leading change—why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 85(1), 96-103.
• Lubans, J. Jr. (2009). The spark plug: A leader’s catalyst for change. Library Leadership & Management, 23(2), 88-90.
• Soehner, C. B. (2013). Be brave: How to have a difficult conversation even if you’re terrified. Paper presented at the Utah Library Association Annual Conference, Provo, UT.
• Williamson, V. (2008). Relationships and engagement: The challenges and opportunities for effective leadership and change management in a Canadian research library. Library Management, 29(1-2), 29-40.
• Wikipedia. (2014). SWOT Analysis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWOT_analysis