Monthly Archives: October 2011

“How successful I’ve been”

Posted on October 29, 2011 | Leave a comment

Members of the public learned this week what I’ve sensed since late summer and known for a little while, that Tim Naftali is leaving his post as federal director of the Nixon Presidential Library.  Tim’s last day as an employee of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) will be November 19.  

I admire Tim greatly.  He is pictured below with his boss the Big Dude, aka AOTUS David S. Ferriero, and with me at Archives 1 in Washington, DC on June 29, 2011.  The first photo was taken with my camera, the second is an official NARA photo.  That was one of the happiest days of my life.  Yes, really!  I was honored to meet in person Ferriero, of whom I already was a big fan, and to see Tim, whom I first met June 6, again.  The joy I felt is rare and truly wonderous to feel, as a human being and a public servant.  (My thanks both to David and to Tim for their kindness in taking the time to pose with me!)

 \

Tim and I became friends even before meeting and I understand him pretty well.  (The two elements haven’t always aligned in all my relationships, I’m the first to admit!) I strongly felt late in July that Tim soon would leave to return to scholarly research and writing.  That he took time off in August to do some writing confirmed it in my mind.  All the signs were there for me, or so it seemed.  Sure enough, Tim told Ferriero last month that he would be leaving in November.  After that, he told me and some other friends of his decision.  The public learned of it last week through publications such as David Walsh’s article at the History News Network and Matt C0ker’s blog post at OC Weekly.  More on the latter in a minute.

Walsh wrote of Naftali that

“’I’ll leave it up to other people to gauge how successful I’ve been here, but I believe I achieved the [objectives] I set out to achieve back in 2006, and it’s time for me to move on,’” he said.”

Comments under Walsh’s article pretty well fell into line with what the writers, including former docent Will Alexander and historian Ken Hughes, previously have written elsewhere.  So what do I think of Tim’s tenure and the coverage of his departure?

I’ll say at the outset that from where I sit, Tim has been successful, very much so.  To the extent I know them, he achieved the objectives he set out to achieve, and more importantly was tasked with achieving, starting in 2006.  Naftali was a critically important figure, the last director of the NARA Nixon Presidential Materials Project for which I once worked and the first director of a NARA Nixon Presidential Library.   From the federal side, the mandate was clear.  You take a fact based, objective, non-partisan approach to handling issues that arise from handling the records in your care.  This Tim did, superbly well.   He showed great courage and integrity in how he handled his duties.  I am proud to call him a friend.

What is expected from former presidents, their families, their associates, their friends, is not mandated by law or codified in professional principles and standards.   As I recently observed with a touch of sympathy here, many of them are “the walking wounded.”  They operate in a very different culture from most Americans who get up and go to work every day.  They do what they believe serves their principal or their interests best.  That varies from president to president.  All served as President of the United States.  All also served as leaders of their political parties.  If it was challenging for us to distinguish, as the law required, between such roles in our disclosure review, it is even more challenging to get the balance right for private sector actors operating in an environment where you make up your own rules and apply your individual standards. 

There seems to have been a lack of knowledge in the first decade of the 21st century by Nixon’s side of the extent to which the records in federal custody provided evidence of the “abuses of governmental power” generically known as Watergate.  Much that transpired during Naftali’s tenure stemmed from that.  John H. Taylor, former executive director of the Nixon foundation, correctly states that he, then-AOTUS Allen Weinstein, and then-Presidential Libraries head Sharon K. Fawcett all agreed that Naftali was to put up an authoritative, comprehensive exhibit about Watergate.

Much of what Tim has accomplished has been difficult for outsiders to assess.  Walsh’s article contains some errors of fact, and not just in his referring to disclosures from Nixon’s tapes during Naftali’s tenure (which spanned the tenures of two U.S. Archivists) as resulting from declassification.  That is a term of art referring to national security classified information.  However, the most challenging issues surrounding the Nixon tapes during the former president’s lifetime stemmed from the content of unclassified information.  (At one point, as Taylor reported, a Nixon representative told him, “The tapes must never come out.”)

NARA has released most of what my archival cohort sought to release of such material, although it never can or will roll back the public defamation to which we were subjected.  Working my way to accepting that is part of operating in Fedland.  You really do learn that “it’s not about me” in some areas, it’s about the larger goals and objectives.

Walsh writes that

“The Nixon Library was established by the Nixon family in 1990, without the benefit of Nixon’s presidential documents, recordings, and other records held by the National Archives and Records Administration. NARA refused to turn their documents over to the private Nixon Foundation for fear that they would be misused, and indeed the private library developed a reputation for zealously safeguarding the president’s legacy to the point of distortion. After considerable legal wrangling that spanned the course of a decade and a half, the library fell under NARA’s authority in 2007, when Naftali, already director of the governmental Nixon Presidential Materials Project since 2006, was put in charge of the library in Yorba Linda, California.”

Yet there never was, is not now, nor ever will be,  a question of NARA turning over its “documents” (records is a better term) “to the private Nixon Foundation.”  This is a question of property.  Those portions of Nixon’s records that deal with his activities as President are the property of the United States.  (The property concept is important in Federal records, as well.  Indeed, it is a violation of law and a punishable offense to destroy scheduled federal records in a manner that does not conform to authorization from AOTUS.)  There was never an intent that there be a transfer of legal title.   What the law did require was that the government separate purely personal property from the materials it held and return that to Nixon and later his heirs.

One of the most disappointing elements to me in the Nixon and NARA story is the reliance on stereotypes.   I’ve been subjected to them, still face them right now, at times, from many sources, and feel dismay at the ease with which people of all kinds pigeonhole each other.  I’m a complex, multi-faceted human being and yearn to be viewed as such.  I often sigh, “Don’t put me in a box” because that may be the easiest way to view me.  Ironically, Nixon’s side has argued for years that he deserves a nuanced view that recognizes his complexities and the challenges he faced, as well.

Docent Will Alexander alleges in his comments under Walsh’s piece at HNN that Naftali hates Nixon.  I’ve seen no evidence of that and do not believe it to be the case. 

Coker, in the original version of his article at OC Weekly, stated that John Taylor tried to get rid of Naftali and leaked information about his private life in an effort to accomplish that.  John was a strong advocate for Richard Nixon while serving as his chief of staff.  But to my knowledge, he never leaked information about Tim’s private life or made that an issue.  (That Tim is gay is something he revealed himself publicly.)   I have, however, seen articles unrelated to Taylor about Tim which did raise the issue, one which I believe is irrelevant to his job performance, hence unsuitable for mentioning.

Taylor quoted from the original article in comments posted under Coker’s article and observed, “I never ‘leaked’ anything about Tim’s personal life, nor have I ever discussed it ‘publicly.'”  I agree.  His best known article about Naftali was supportive of him professionally and did not mention his private life.  

He explained,

“It was I who suggested he be appointed the library’s first federal director and who recommended to the archivist of the U.S. that he be given responsibility for redoing the Watergate exhibit. As foundation executive director and as Nixon’s co-executor I took many steps to accelerate the opening of both federal and foundation-owned records.

Tim and I had our ups and downs when we worked together during 2007-09. I take full responsibility for my part in all that, and I’ve told him so. I hope he would agree that our differences were more temperamental than substantive. In [any] event, I never criticized him publicly (nor he, me).

During 2010-11, after I’d left, as the Nixon foundation battled him over the Watergate exhibit, I did whatever I could to support him as he finished the difficult job we had asked him to take on. When the exhibit opened in the spring of this year, I was proud that he called me his friend:   http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/01/local/la-me-0401-watergate-nixon-20110401.”

As a friend of both Naftali and Taylor, this rings true to me.  Coker removed Taylor’s name from the article.

I’ll have more to say on this, you can be sure of that!  But as he steps down from his post as a NARA presidential library director, I am proud to say again, “I am Tim Naftali.”   I voted for Nixon, wrote letters of support to him.  But I would have handled my duties as federal director of the Nixon Presidential Library the same way Naftali did.  What Tim did was due to the choices I and my archival cohort made.  Naftali’s actions stemmed not from hatred of Nixon or bias against him but from a deep and honorable understanding of the historian’s role in public service.

Leave a comment

Posted in NARA

Tagged , , ,

AOTUS, the hands on leader

Posted on October 29, 2011 | Leave a comment

I’ll be writing this weekend about stereotypes.   Some people are trapped by them.  Some break out.  Others can’t and become resigned to them.    Still others lash out at those who stereotype them.   More to come on all that.  In this post, I just want to share a story about someone with the confidence to just be who he is.

The Big Dude, aka AOTUS David S. Ferriero, is an agency head.  I’ve laughingly said he’s up in the stratosphere while people such as I are trudging along on a gravel path far below him.  Yet he reached out on May 12 and we became friends in his professional circle.   It was an astonishing thing to do for someone such as I, I pinch myself at times about it still.

As I am, David is an Introvert.  When he outed himself as such, he posted a list of characteristics that include an outward perception that Introverts can seem quiet and aloof.  Another characteristic?  Knowing more than they reveal.   It’s easy at times to mistake some of the qualities of Introverts for arrogance.  I don’t find David to be so.  (A couple of people at NARA have described him to me as such.  More often, however, I’ve heard NARA friends describe him as nice, even fun to be around.  That is what I myself have observed and find him to be.)

I’ve seen great examples of Ferriero being approachable and very down to earth.  I’m not just thinking of the fabulous way he greeted me at NARA earlier this month.  Actually, I witnessed something totally awesome when I attended the Berlin Crisis 1961 Conference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) on October 27.

David stopped by prior to the start of the conference to say hello and shake hands.  I gave him an update on an ongoing Fedland issue involving NARA that was uncommonly complicated, as such matters go.   (Things can get really tricky in Fedland sometimes!  However, I successfully concluded the complex matter with NARA yesterday.  Thursday morning I could see that a resolution was near.)   He looked pleased that things were working out and made a lighthearted comment about it.  Ferriero walked on up the stairs of the McGowan Theater.  I smiled to myself about his nice greeting and encouraging and supportive reaction to my Fedland issue.  But I soon witnessed something that meant so much more to me and made me smile even more.

The start of the program was delayed as we all waited for a bus from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that was stuck in traffic.   (The conference was a joint effort by NARA and the CIA Historical Review Program.)  Up front, near the stage, I had noticed some consultation among one of the members of the audience, interpreters for the deaf, and one of the CIA officials present.  My old friend, Neil Carmichael, conference organizer and NARA division director, went off in search of chairs backstage.  But I soon saw AOTUS come back down the stairs, carrying a chair.  With him was David Mengel, Deputy Director, NARA National Declassification Center. 

The two men quietly placed the chairs in front of the stage to the right and the left so interpreters for the deaf could use them.

I did a double take.  But then I realized there was no need to be astonished.  David, the head of the National Archives, in what I recognized is his typically helpful, responsive way, had walked up the stairs to the lobby in search of chairs to bring down for the interpreters.  He found and  grabbed two.  David Mengel saw him pick up the chairs and offered to give him a hand.  Instead of handing off to other subordinates, Ferriero simply and without a fuss did what was needed, carried one chair down while Mengel followed with the other.  It was so wow to see that, it reflected so well on the Big Dude and also on my old friend, Dave Mengel.  You see Dave (with dark hair and wearing glasses) on Thursday in the photo  below, glancing over at me from the front row in the photo. 

As with Jay Bosanko and Neil Carmichael, I’ve been a friend of Dave Mengel since the mid-1990s.  My late sister, Eva, once was their boss in NARA’s declassification division.  You see Dave kneeling in front in the photo below from 1996, which also pictures Neil in a dark polo shirt, Jay in a plaid shirt, and Eva on the far right.   The late Jeanne Schauble, declassification division director, is standing next to Eva.  I am so very proud and glad beyond words at how well some of my old friends are doing at NARA these days.

Just as making Maarja laugh with joy on October 5 won’t appear in a federal Performance and Accountability Report, neither will AOTUS taking a hands on approach, literally, to resolve an issue quietly on Thursday, in a low-key way.   But it sure tells you a lot about the way he rolls.  He may be an agency head in Washington but stereotypes just don’t apply to David Ferriero!

Leave a comment

Posted in NARA

Tagged , , ,

Getting through the crisis

Posted on October 28, 2011 | Leave a comment

Historical events can seem different depending on whether you are looking at what occurred retrospectively as a student or yourself lived as a player through significant events.  Niall Ferguson was right on the mark when he wrote earlier this year in Newsweek in “How to Get Smart Again” that

“Philip Roth rightly suggests that it’s the sense of inevitability—whatever happened had to happen—that makes school history so dull: “What we schoolchildren studied as ‘History’ [was] harmless history, where everything unexpected in its own time is chronicled on the page as inevitable.” But when historic events are actually happening—as now in Japan and the Arab world—‘the unfolding of the unforeseen [is] everything … The terror of the unforeseen is what the science of history hides.’”

I’m part of Fedland.  I’ve studied presidents and executives and leaders, some from up close.  When I wrote here about Ferguson’s observations about studying history, I explained that

“Those of us who serve in government understand what it is like to grapple with choices and decisions while events are unfolding. You do the best you can, sometimes with more support and a clearer picture than at other times, and you keep going. You try to learn from your failures as well as your successes, you acknowledge your own role in events. (I’ve admitted fault and apologized to bosses a few times during my nearly four-decade long federal career.) Sometimes the path is straight, sometimes it zigs and zags. Sometimes you can form strategic alliances, sometimes you have to go it alone. Having done this for 38 years, I approach the study of the presidency with considerable humility and knowledge that presidents really aren’t that different from you or I.”

On Thursday, I had the privilege of coming to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for a conference on the Berlin Crisis of 1961.  At the same time, I was wrapping up a complicated Fedland issue that involved some senior people at NARA.  (Yes, I actually do have a real job, other than blogging here!) 

When the Big Dude, aka AOTUS David S. Ferriero, stopped by to say hello and shake hands with me, I spent the few minutes we chatted giving him an update on the issue I was working.  Amazingly, I actually got a signal in the McGowan Theater and not only was able to read email messages but to listen to a voice mail message from a helpful, dependable colleague that had just been left on my telephone at work. 

I prefer to keep my interactions with David light-hearted at public NARA events but sometimes Fedland responsibililties intrude!  But in typical Ferriero fashion, AOTUS capped our chat with a flippant but affirming comment that made me smile.  (Thanks, Big Dude!)  I had another chance to smile later, when I saw Ferriero’s low-key, hands-on and very responsive approach to fixing a logistical issue that came up right before the conference opened.  (You know what I’m thinking of, very nice touch, well-played, David!)

Although the issues I deal with in Fedland don’t come remotely close to rising to the level of events described at the conference, I certainly was primed to listen to people talking about uncertainty, contingency, and what it is like intellectually and viscerally to try to guess at what is coming, think on your feet and to react to fast-moving events.   The conference, skillfully organized by my old friend, Neil Carmichael, a division director in NARA’s National Declassification Center, was a joint effort of the National Archives’ center and the Central Intelligence Agency’s Historical Review Program.  David knows that Neil and I are old friends and that I respect and admire him as a NARA manager.  

After welcoming remarks by Neil, David, and CIA Director of Information Management Services Joseph Lambert, the conference kicked off with a keynote address by Georgetown University professor William R. Smyser.  I enjoyed the way he vividly set the scene in Cold War Berlin and engagingly explained events from a perspective as an academic and as a player in some of the events he was describing.  Dr. Smyser had served in Berlin as an aide to Gen. Lucius Clay, who represented President John F. Kennedy.  He was well positioned to describe the uncertainty, determination to serve the United States well, and debates over how to best to do that which affected those on the ground who watched events unfold.   His description of driving through the Potsdamer Platz as a representative of the Allied forces just as the barricades were going up was especially gripping.

Dr. Smyser mentioned during his presentation how Kennedy aides who initially had been smiling and joking about the crowds in Berlin that greeted the president during his trip to West Germany in 1963 fell silent as they saw the massive turnout and heard the impassioned chants from the crowd, “Ken-ne-dee!  Ken-ne-dee!”  He said the chant still echoed in his mind.  He explained that no, President Kennedy did not say he was a “jelly doughnut” when he told the crowd, “Ich bin ein Berliner.”  He couldn’t say “Ich bin Berliner” as that would mean he was born a Berliner, which he clearly was not. 

That Dr. Smyser mentioned JFK’s speech gave NARA a chance to demonstrate customer service and responsiveness in real time, LOL.  During the break in the program that followed the keynote, Ferriero obtained a copy of White House notes prepared for President Kennedy on how to pronounce “Ich bin ein Berliner.”  He presented Smyser a copy of the briefing item at the start of the second half of the program, drawing smiles from those on stage and in the audience.  The photo below shows Neil, David and Dr. Smyser right after the presentation.  AOTUS is partly obscured in my snapshot. I’m sure my friend Earl McDonald, a NARA photographer, got much better photos of the nice presentation!

After the break, Dr. Donald P. Steury, CIA historian, hosted a history panel consisting of Dr. Don Carter, historian at the U.S. Army Center of Military History; Dr. Gergory W. Pedlow, historian, Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE);  Dr. Hope Harrison, historian at the George Washington University and the Woodrow Wilson Center; and retired CIA officer Lou Mehrer.   They offered a fascinating look at the personalities and events that shaped the United States’ handling of the Berlin issue from the late 1950s through the mid-1960s.    As I know from my own Fedland experiences, goals, objectives, personalities and perspectives don’t always align well!  I chuckled on hearing that East German leader Walter Ulbricht had a habit of bombarding the Soviets with lengthy missives, given my own rather wordy writing style.  One letter from Ulbricht ran 15 pages!

The panelists (joined by Dr. Smyser for the Q&A portion of the program) offered somewhat different perspectives on the Kennedy administration.  I’m not an expert on Berlin although I have read a number of books about Kennedy’s relations with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev.  Some focused on the Cuban Missile Crisis, others more generally on foreign relations. During that somewhat stressful period of my life in the early 1990s, I immersed myself in Michael Beschloss’s  1991 book, The Crisis Years:  Kennedy and Khrushchev, 1960-1963.  To each his or her own, but turning to the captivating 600-something page book by Beschloss then actually helped me!

Dr. Smyser believes that Kennedy grew into his job and that the young president who came away from the Vienna summit in 1961 feeling blindsided subsequently learned and developed a better sense of how to react to events and make choices about how to use power.  He describes Kennedy as a fast learner.  JFK did not always take a hierchical approach to reaching out for information and people who could help him carry out his objectives.  Because I sometimes err and stumble, I liked hearing about a vibe of continuous learning and development even among those who greatly outrank me.  As a senior executive in Fedland recently said to me about himself, there are growth opportunities for us all.   Indeed.

It was wonderful to see so many old and new friends at the conference, including my longtime and cherished friend, Dr. Timothy P. Mulligan.  Before retiring from NARA at the end of 2006, Tim was the agency’s expert in captured German records.  He speaks German beautifully and is the author of several books about World War II.   Upon his retirement from the National Archives, then AOTUS Allen Weinstein presented him with a well deserved Lifetime Achievement award on behalf of the agency.  Tim also is an expert on the U.S. civil war and currently is doing research in 19th century documents.  I enjoyed chatting with him yesterday about primary sources, among other things!

Not content to be a listener and observer, I snapped a few pictures from my seat up close but also got up and wandered around a bit to catch some other photos.   The picture below shows so many of my other friends, not just new ones such as the Big Dude, but also many of my late sister’s former colleagues. Among those pictured in the front row are Earl McDonald, Neil Carmichael, David Ferriero, William (Jay) Bosanko, David Mengel, and in the second row at the far side of the theater, A. J. Daverede, and Don McIlwain. 

I I greatly appreciate that so many of my NARA friends, starting with David Ferriero, were warmly welcoming and took the time to stop by to shake hands or to say hello.  It was so nice!  Best part?  I didn’t get lipstick on any of my longtime NARA friends when I hugged them (did have one close call).  So Ferriero doesn’t have to do any extra research, ha!  I liked seeing Neil sitting next to AOTUS, that was super cool for me, given that we’ve been friends since 1994.  My old friend, Jay Bosanko, whom I greatly admire, is sitting next to Sheryl Shenberger, director of NARA’s National Declassification Center.  As Executive for Agency Services, Jay is her boss.  Records management policy is another part of his portfolio.

 

NARA and the CIA Historical Review Program produced a great conference handout which includes a DVD with newly declassified documents.  I came away from the conference having learned a lot but also having enjoyed myself.  Knowledge, insights, and fun, that is a great combination that reflects well on David Ferriero’s National Archives.  My thanks to all who made the conference possible.  I look forward to many more such events although it will be hard to top this one (well done, Neil and team)!

Leave a comment

Posted in NARA, U.S. History

Tagged , , , , , , ,

The meaning behind the words

Posted on October 26, 2011 | Leave a comment

I’m not like the Big Dude, aka AOTUS David S. Ferriero, who links at his blog to books he is reading.  I don’t mention them often!  He definitely is a big reader, as I am.  I mostly read nonfiction but read some fiction, as well.  Mostly mysteries.  The photo at left shows David during his tenure at Duke with Roger Crais, one of my favorite authors! 

After I met my boyfriend nearly 20 years ago, we laughed when our Christmas lists both included suggestions for books by Crais.  Also on my list every year?  History and biographies!  Right now I’m reading James Kaplan’s bio of Frank Sinatra, Frank:  The Voice.  In true historian fashion, I discovered Sinatra’s music chronologically.  At one time, I read a great deal about World War II.  My sister and I bought LPs that included some of the songs Sinatra recorded during the period when he was a huge fan favorite with “bobby soxers” in the 1940s.  Later I collected some of his other albums, then CDs. 

So why am I writing about a singer who was born during World War I and who died in 1998 in a blog about history, government, archives and records management?   Kaplan writes that early in his career, Sinatra learned to immerse himself in the lyrics of the songs he sang by first reading the words out loud as if they were a poem or work of prose.  He thought it was important to truly understand the meaning of the words before he tackled the music.  He became popular not just for his voice and phrasing but also for the meaning with which he infused the lyrics he sang.  You hear all those qualities in the clip below, a song that was a big favorite of mine about 20 years ago.

 

That’s classic Sinatra, in a performance from 1958–the meaning behind the words come through strongly!  Notice just as one example how he sings “cafe,” a word he infuses with meaning and memory!  

So, what about records, not LPs, but letters, memoranda, notes, briefings, email messages, all the documents that capture human interactions?   We don’t usually use that phrase in discussing archives and records but as I was fond of saying in my rambles on #thatdarnlist, every step of handling records, from creation to disclosure to the public, involves human beings.   

Even with all the information available about Richard Nixon, whom his former chief of staff, John H. Taylor has called one of our most introverted presidents, we don’t know everything about him.  I’m an Introvert, too, but I can be awfully sharing in what I chatter about at my blog!  But even then, I only reveal bits and pieces.  So, too, with records.  Historians rely on them, primary sources are primary in many senses of the word, but scholars also turn to oral history interviews, memoirs, and other sources of information.  (I’m fascinated by the books Nixon read, the movies he chose for viewing in the White House and Camp David, the music he liked.)

Focusing on governmental actions and record keeping definitely represents a niche interest.  I remember when Archivesnext, one of several bloggers who inspired me to start writing here, put up a poll at her site several years ago to gauge readers’ interests.  (Monday morning I woke up realizing I had just been dreaming that I had met and was talking with @archivesnext in a fun, conference setting.  Clearly I was showing the influence of all those tweets I had been reading about #MARAC!)   Of course, I joined in.

In the poll, I picked the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) but not everyone else did.  It definitely didn’t outrank other topics and I completely understand why.  Studying governmental actions is a specialized field even among historians, especially in the “post modern” period.  So, too, is following NARA an area of interest only to some in the world of archives and records management.   But the agency itself?  It is engaging with and drawing on the knowledge of citizens, an initiative captured in David’s first blog post and explained in  a series of posts and in public remarks.  (Don’t have the time to Google so no LMGTFY!)  Those of us who follow NARA issues debated on #thatdarnlist in 2010 why Ferriero started out blogging by writing about Citizen Archivists.  I was right on the mark when I said it didn’t seem like a random choice but reflected a governmentwide initiative! But from my study of him as an executive and leader, I believe such outreach fits with David’s instinctive and learned response to archives, too.

AOTUS blogged from Spain yesterday, sharing his remarks at a meeting of the heads of governmental archives institutions.  He represented the United States’ government so very, very well!  David’s recounting of his favorite section of the National Action Plan for International Open Government Partnership is my favorite part of his blog post:

“My favorite line from the Plan states that ‘The backbone of a transparent and accountable government is strong records management that documents the decisions and actions of the Federal Government.” Music to my ears!”

True that.  When Sinatra recited the words on a sheet of lyrics when first preparing to add it to his repertoire, he was studying the foundation of a song.  Records management captures the words which when combined with the music, tell us not just what happened, but why and how.

Leave a comment

Posted in NARA, U.S. History

AOTUS and “All the nation’s records”

Posted on October 25, 2011 | Leave a comment

So, did you all know that the Big Dude, aka AOTUS David S. Ferriero, is in charge of “all the nation’s records?”  Wow, that is a huge responsibility!  And not one I knew he had, when I coined that nickname for him.  (You’ve noticed I’ve mostly written about him as David over the last few months although I laughingly throw in Big Dude once in a while.  I smile in recollection when I think of how he adopted my nickname and signed himself that way in a note to me on May 12, 2011!  I took the photo at left at a fabulously fun event at the National Archives on October 5, 2011.)

AOTUS isn’t in charge of “all the nation’s records,” of course, just the ones generated by the federal government or donated to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).  But reporters sometimes refer to his duties that way, as in an article this summer about his visit to NARA’s Eisenhower Presidential Library.  The quote I’m using today comes from more recent coverage of David’s appearance on October 13 in New Canaan, Connecticut. The article carries a crowd pleasing title, “Archiving excitement.”  But those of us in Fedland know there’s a lot more to the story than that!

Today, David is in Toledo, Spain, with some of his international counterparts, attending the CITRA conference.  I’m enjoying his tweets about some of the presentations!  Ferriero’s commitment to Open Government is genuine.  That he is interested in access and accessibility of information shows in many ways, including the focus of his blog.  The latest post at AOTUS blog discusses last Friday’s plenary session of the Digital Public Library of America at NARA.  Knowing David, I expect to see much more at his blog on that and related issues.

Yet NARA’s mission encompasses many different responsibilities on the archives and records side of the house.  Ferriero showed his wry sense of humor in New Canann when reporter Chris Hansen observed that most people don’t have a good grasp of what the National Archives really does.  David replied, “You think?” 

NARA has made good use of social media (Facebook, blogs, You Tube, Twitter) to share information about its mission, holdings, exhibits, and strategic priorities.  Some of those priorities I view a bit differently than do Ferriero and his team.  (I’ve touched on some of that in prior posts.)  But I certainly understand why they are taking the approach they are.  It’s a valid and reasonable approach and I respect that.

Hansen asked David about the Presidential Libraries.   Here, as I’ve seen in other forums, there were good intentions but also guesswork in how the reporter framed his question.  Hansen said, “Each one of those former presidents has a family who very much cares about the president’s legacy and I can only imagine some of the discussions you have in terms of what goes in and what stays out and how it’s all organized.” 

Yet what the libraries of presidents starting with Ronald Reagan contain has depended on the seemingly “not exciting” but critically important process of statutorily directed records management.  In terms of what NARA takes in, records management is a key element in implementing the Presidential Records Act (PRA) and the Federal Records Act (FRA) with which federal departments and agencies deal.  NARA has a large role in records management under the FRA.  It’s a weakness of the PRA that NARA’s statutory responsibililties kick in only at the end of an administration.

David replied, properly, that “It’s more so about what’s made public and what’s made available.” 

You know this part caught my eye!   Hansen asked Ferriero which presidential library was his favorite.  Not surprisingly for an agency head, David replied he couldn’t name one.  (Honestly, that’s like asking parents to name which of their children is their favorite!  But it’s the sort of question people such as AOTUS have been asked before.  And will be again, I dare say.)  But Ferriero did comment on one of the presidential libraries.  David noted that

“Each one of them has a story to tell. You probably read in the press that we recently opened a new Watergate exhibit at the Nixon library. We now have more information about that presidency then we ever had; 150 oral histories of folks in the Nixon White House to really tell the story in a library where the story really hadn’t been told.  That was the first thing I dealt with as the Archivist of the United States was working with the foundation, the family and my own staff to plan this new exhibit. It was incredibly challenging.”

Indeed.

Given the amount of effort that went into the interviews, and the different perspectives captured, I’m pleased that Ferriero mentioned the oral history initiative of NARA Nixon Presidential Library director Tim Naftali.  (I’m pictured with David and Tim at NARA on June 29, 2011.)  Tim revived and built very strongly on the nascent oral history program that my former NARA boss Fred Graboske and I had started in a small fashion in 1987.  Every administration generates an interesting and incredibly complex story, Nixon’s more so than most due to the turbulent times in which he was president and how he left office.   In the digital age, what we learn increasingly is shared online.

He’s the Big Dude, but David Ferriero isn’t in charge of “the nation’s records.”  State, local, and muncipal government officials in the United States create records that are administered by entitities outside the National Archives.  But what NARA holds in its records, shares with citizens, on site and in the virtual world, uses in exhibits, and builds on through oral history programs, can be very “exciting” indeed!

Leave a comment

Posted in NARA

Collaborative workplace cultures

Posted on October 24, 2011 | Leave a comment

In a post on the Archives and Archivists Listserv, subscriber PeterK. posted a link to a visual graphic about how some employers assess the content of Social Media to hire and fire people.  It has some useful information but doesn’t cover everything that is involved in studying people.  

It’s been my experience in life that the best way to pick up clues about peoples’ reactions or some of their wiring  is to communicate face to face.  You can read body language, realize early on when a conversation is starting to go off track, back up, make mid-course corrections, try a different approach, or drop what you’re doing altogether if you think that you’re making someone uncomfortable with your approach. 

Online, it’s easy to miss such clues.  You can really be blindsided.  Even speaking on the telephone doesn’t always work as well as talking in person, where you can watch facial expressions and body language.    Management theory recognizes this and suggests that coaching be done face to face.  But when it comes to the wider world, we increasingly interact online.  Whatever employers get out of studying Facebook and Twitter, it may not be telling them all they need to know about how people interact or would fit in within a collaborative culture.  Still, there can be some clues. 

I went back and looked at what I posted on the Listserv back in the spring of 2009.  Man, that is a long post for a listserv. Yep, blogging suits me much better (thanks, friends, who nudged me into doing it)!  It was a post to the List about collaborative cultures and compassion (for oneself and for others) as an element in the management of people. 

Some of this fits with what David Ferriero has said in interviews about empathy as a characteristic of successful leaders.  So I’m repurposing it and publishing it as a blog post this morning.  I’ve struck the links as they no longer work.  This focuses on leaders but there’s a lot of good stuff in it for a wide audience, in my view.

“Saturday afternoon and I’ve finished most of my chores and am back at the keyboard.  I’ve seen a number of bloggers discuss how to help archivists, librarians and other information specialists who are out of work or in challenging job situations.  There’s a lot of good advice out there about networking, resumes, and so forth.  Coincidentally, I ran into a knowledge management blogger this morning who linked to something about facilitative leadership. 

What that article describes struck me as the sort of thing that I *know* many employers look for.  This is especially true for organizations where “generations collide;” people from multiple disciplines have to work together; and the ability to work collaboratively is one of the core competencies on which people are rated.  Since many employers Google people these days, it strikes me that blogs and the world of Web 2.0 can provide people a wonderful chance to shine in these areas and to show what they are all about.
  
Take a look at http://www.schwarzassociates.com/files/231.pdf
 in which Roger Schwarz discusses, “Creating a Culture of Collaboration.”  Many workplaces value collaboration but it can be difficult to carry out.  Schwarz gives his take on why.  He describes the unilateral leader model, which often can result from good intentions, such as seeing oneself as a steward.  He says characteristics include “I understand the situation; those who see it differently do not • I am right; those who disagree are wrong • I have pure motives; those who disagree have questionable motives • My feelings are justified” while those of others aren’t.  Schwarz believes this approach leads to limited learning. 

Schwarz writes that when they recognize that this model has limited effectiveness, people sometimes overreact and swing the other way, adopting a “give up control model.” He describes this as one where “everyone participates,” “everyone wins and no one loses,” “you express your feelings” but sometimes “suppress your intellectual reasoning.”  However, Schwarz feels that “The results of the give-up-control model are the same as those of the unilateral control model: increased misunderstanding, unproductive conflict and defensiveness, and reduced learning, effectiveness, and quality of work life.”

Instead, Schwarz advocates being a facilitative leader, something which he says centers on a mutual learning model which involves anchoring other values on compassion.  He points to “compassion, which means temporarily suspending judgment in order to appreciate others’ perspectives. It means having empathy for others and for yourself in a way that still holds people accountable for their actions rather than unilaterally protecting others or yourself. When you act with compassion, you infuse the other core values with your intent to understand, empathize with, and help others.” 

I’ve seen some bloggers display this (historian Jeremy Young at Progressive Historians comes to mind).  I think I once saw Jeremy say that his mother was a trained Myers-Briggs practitioner so maybe he learned some of his tolerance and compassion and ease of conversation when growing up.  At any rate, his blog suggests to me that when he starts looking for a job after getting his doctorate, I suspect that many potential employers will like what they see!
  
Roger Schwarz explains that ‘As a facilitative leader, you assume that you have some information and that others have other information and therefore that other people may see things you have missed and vice versa. In other words, you know that you don’t know all that you need to know. This includes recognizing that you may inadvertently be contributing to problems. This leads you to be curious and to ask about the ways in which others see you as contributing to the problems.

You assume that differences are opportunities for learning rather than conflicts to be avoided or contests in which you must show that you’re right and others are wrong. And you assume that people are trying to act with integrity, given their situations. If people are acting in ways that do not make sense to you or that you think you understand but disapprove of, you do not conclude that they are acting that way out of some dubious motive. Instead, you begin from the assumption that people are striving to do the right thing; part of your task becomes understanding the reasons for their actions and then evaluating them accordingly.’

I saw and recently commended here on the List about an archival blogger and List subscriber who gave credit to someone whom others were criticizing in private emails to him.  He made a point of saying he thought the person was acting with integrity, which is the sort of thing I know employers like to see.

I think what Schwarz writes about is great advice, and not only because like everyone, I sometimes stumble where I should shine and act like a dummy in areas where I could do better!  I know from talking to my late sister (who went through some of NARA’s change management courses back in the day) and from observation that the qualities of a facilitative leader are valued by *many* employers.  It is going to be all the more valuable these days, where institutions will have to do more with less. 

So, I thought I’d share the Schwarz piece with you.  If you don’t have time to read the 11 pages to which I’m linking below, look for the two charts, which describe qualities and outcomes of unilateral and mutal leadership.  More and more workplaces include teamwork and colloboration in their rating systems and I think there is some good stuff there!  Link is
 
http://www.schwarzassociates.com/files/231.pdf
  
Good luck to all who are seeking jobs and especially to the one I recently saw tweet about an encouraging interview he had had and a follow up inquiry about references!
 
Maarja”

Leave a comment

Posted in Workplace issues

Archivesmatter(s), Nixonara, AOTUS blog

Posted on October 23, 2011 | Leave a comment

I entered the blogosphere not long after the Big Dude, aka AOTUS David S. Ferriero, did.  David launched his blog on April 7, 2010 with a post, “No Small Change.”  It drew 23 comments, including one from me and one from one of the best known and respected archival bloggers, Kate Theimer.   I launched my first, anonymous blog, Archivesmatter(s), on April 17,  2010, writing about (what else) “Blogging AOTUS.”  I hadn’t yet coined the term Big Dude, I called Ferriero “the big guy” when I offered words of encouragement:

“The archives profession is not going to be where AOTUS is going to spend his starting-a-new-important-job-and-pushing-to-open doors-ya-know-Open Gov-initiative currency. Too important for him to go outsider, first, to the customers, bigtime, before he works out ways to hold out a hand and help pull us along, inside the profession.So, OK, not first. But yeah, we can and should hope he’ll tackle some the other issues later. Theimer was right, status and professional issues and credentials do matter, a lot.

So. We’ll let the big guy set the tone, he’s on the right track. Archivists will think about and debate the details, outside of NARA – and inside it. That’s how we roll here in the land of the free and the home of the brave. And if NARA is keeping its institutional fingers in the air, it’ll hear and see those debates. Continue advocating, Kate Theimer, and everyone else who blogs and tweets and posts to the listserv and who thinks that archives matter.”

Because I do believe that archives matter, I launched a second blog, Nixonara, on December 6, 2010.

A year after AOTUS and I launched our blogs, I outed myself and explained that Archivesmatter(s) wasn’t the male employee of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) that some people evidently thought I was, but Maarja Krusten, federal historian and former Nixon Presidential Materials Project archivist.  By then, I had been blogging here at Nixonara for several months under my own name.  David Ferriero and I hadn’t yet become friends in his professional circle, he triggered that wonderful development about a month later. 

Neither of my blogs drew many comments, although I was very pleased to see three people join the convo here last week.  (Super cool, many thanks!)  That hasn’t surprised me–I’m a niche blogger and my posts are quirky.  In terms of temperature, they’ve run the gamut from angsty musings to near euphoria.  The topics ping and pong about a bit, too.   It’s a work in progress and shall remain one!  Right now I’m working on finding a bit more middle ground in how I blog, less up and down and ping ponging.

That Ferriero’s blog doesn’t draw many comments surprises me, however.   He’s the big guy, he’s in charge of a hugely important federal agency.  I had thought his blog would attract comments from researchers, including historians, records managers, archivists, “history buffs” (yes, @gordonbelt, I know), citizens who visit NARA’s exhibits or are interested in its mission.  But there’s been less than I expected.  (I’m honored that I’ve had opportunities to discuss his blog with David and also with other NARA officials, face to face.)  Often, in recent times, I’ve been the only one to post a comment.  I’ll do that from time to time going forward, of course.  But I’d love to hear other voices there, whether I’m in the convo or not.

Someone observed in a tweet during the Mid-Atlantic Regional Archives conference this past May that “#marac @archivesnext points out that AOTUS blog doesn’t interact w/comments. Makes it sound overly corporate. Same pt @NixoNARA just made.”  I’ve thought about that.  An agency head is tremendously busy.  He can’t interact with readers to the extent we ordinary bloggers do, whether he wants to or not.  It’s to David’s credit that he has not handed off to a subordinate the job of acknowledging comments.  Personally, I’d rather see him himself post an occasional comment as he has time or feels inclined rather than to see the typical Fedland solution of using surrogates to post comments using his name.  His blog, his voice.

But why don’t more people post comments under Ferriero’s blog posts?  They are short and concise and easy to read, unlike some of my lengthy essays.  The content varies but much of it is excellent.  I’ve pointed to the difficulty of navigating his blog but I’m unusual in studying it so closely.  I’m part of Fedland, at least for now (retirement eligible!) so the blog has served me well in many areas.  One is pattern recognition, to see where NARA’s mission focus lies and where it is headed.  That’s been useful to study because I sometimes have to decide whether or not to backfill or fight rearguard battles. 

At times during my 38 year career I’ve felt a part of the regular Fedland army, deployed officially and led by commanding officers.  At others a part of a rag tag militia or even the resistance.  Recently, I’ve been contemplating whether it is time for the “soldier girl” to accept reality and to stand down altogether.  (Many complicated elements which differ from those present in the Nixon wars.  I can’t discuss the battles, much less the objectives.  But I can say there are some areas in Fedland where I’ve just been beaten fair and square.  However, I’m about to celebrate behind the scenes a huge victory that I set in motion and after that, who knows.)  If I stop fighting the rearguard actions, you won’t notice it at my blog.  Different from retiring, which as of now I don’t yet plan to do and which I definitely would announce!

AOTUS  blog also is interesting for me to study to learn about David.  He’s such an interesting executive and leader!  I generally support his efforts to transform NARA.  I’m interested in many of the same issues he is, including how to ignite joy in the workplace, encouraging people to listen to their inner voices (I’ve spent a lot of time recently listening to mine!), and engaging in workplace issues.    And I’m fascinated by his management style, his thinking on rewards and recognition, contextual sophistication, and on how to deal with human beings in the workplace.

Even if you aren’t as interested in people issues as he is and I am, his blog has many other topics that he covers in posts.   Look at the categories listed!

That’s a lot of good stuff there, including the recent post about the Citizen Archivist dashboard!  NARA tracks performance indicators and although blog readership is down for some agency social media sites (although some, such as You Tube viewing, is up), AOTUS blog draws a lot of readers.  Why isn’t there more engagement?   It’s David’s blog, his voice, his vision.  I like, respect, and admire him.  He’ll continue to do what he thinks and feels is best at his blog and elsewhere.  He has really good judgment and I’m so impressed by how he rolls.   Yet I do believe, strongly, that he definitely believes in a learning culture and continuous improvement, as I do. 

I’d like to hear from my readers about what you would like to see me write about, what you like about my blog and what you’d like to see me change (“shorter posts, Maarja!”).  Tell me, too, what are your reactions to AOTUS’s blog.  And why you think it doesn’t draw more comments despite what seems to me an increasingly authentic and engaging tone.   (David won’t mind, I’ve told him I’m going to ask that question here.)

Let’s engage!  If you have any thoughts to share about my blog or David Ferriero’s as AOTUS,  post below to share public comments or email me privately at [email protected] or my regular addy if we’ve corresponded there.  If you email, let me know if you will let me summarize your comments at my blog, without revealing your identity.  Thanks for reading and thinking, peeps!

Leave a comment

Posted in NARA, Workplace issues