Monthly Archives: February 2015

Inside, outside archives

Posted on February 27, 2015 | 1 comment

As I listened to the presentations at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) yesterday, I tweeted, “My favorite records topic: “Working together: breaking the silo mentality.” The American Society of Access Professionals offered an all day training session in the McGowan Theater on Thursday.

Sometimes, you can just tell from the title of a presentation on an agenda who might get it. Sure enough, the speaker, a lawyer at the Department of Justice, got it. Not only that, but Allison Stanton of the Civil Division expressed the concepts in a way that showed a solution oriented understanding of how bureaucracies work.

I had thought when I registered for the event that I would attend it as scheduled in early December. But funding issues for some of the potential attendees due to budget uncertainties led to postponement until February 26, 2015. (I chose to pay my own way.) A couple of inches of snow yesterday morning made for a picturesque scene as I arrived at the National Archives around 8:20 a.m.

Speakers from the National Archives included AOTUS David S. Ferriero, who gave welcoming remarks; General Counsel Gary M. Stern; Chief Records Officer Paul Wester; records policy expert Arian Ravanbakhsh; and digital engagement specialist Kristen Albrittain. You see Kristen explaining how NARA manages its blogs and other social media sites. The dynamic content, comments (and moderation of comments!) present interesting challenges which the agency is working through still in a process of continual learning.

The training was open to anyone who works on records issues–records managers, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) officers, program officials, analysts, attorneys, IT specialists, and officials with hybrid functions related to the records life cycle. My longtime friend, NARA FOIA officer Joe Scanlon, was a lead in the group which developed the content.

Joe is pictured with my late sister Eva, his former supervisor at the National Archives, in February 1996 and with me yesterday. I would love to know what the photographer said to Eva to make her laugh that way! I enjoyed talking before and after the symposium and between training sessions with the NARA officials present (David, Gary, Joe, Paul, Arian). Yes, my laughter rang through the McGowan Theater at times. I am very much like Eva!

The program brought together people from NARA and other federal agencies and departments. I nodded along as I heard Allison Stanton, the DOJ lawyer, talk about how a well-run records management program provides “safe haven” for an agency or department. (Handling records issues poorly–the reasons for that vary greatly–ramps up risks and makes it harder to defend what has been done.) And that this depends on people partnering with each other.

Stanton noted, as I have in online forums, the value of saying, “I’m not here as your competitor. We bring different insights and knowledge to the table. Let’s work together so that we all can be stronger.” I liked her realistic observation that there is plenty of brainpower within the federal agencies and departments but that that stakeholders don’t always find or “know each other.” As in so many areas involving records and archives, why this is and how it plays out as it does varies. “It depends” was one of the themes of the training conference, along with openness to continual learning.

There were many moments yesterday when I thought about my late sister, who, as I do, valued bridge building and dialogue. I was touched that a former NARA official, Ramona Oliver, told me after the program that she remembered Eva. Ramona (now with the Department of Labor) did a great job along with attorney Scott Hodes with the conference wrap up. They devoted most of their session on bridging the gap and looking at best practices to interaction with the audience. Good move, one that paid off well.

Understanding best practices requires acknowledging what can go wrong. That means you have to establish a safe haven for talking about the good and the bad rather than signalling you’re looking for “the public relations” version of records issues. I very much liked hearing some of the candid questions and observations (including from one of the program officials in the audience). Honest engagement was a sign to me that for some, the sessions had established a good trust zone.

Because they are so complex and there is so much at stake, federal records issues deserve realistic discussion. Gary Stern’s morning presentation was notable for its candor and focus on finding solutions. Gary explained how NARA developed its new Capstone approach to records scheduling. The Office of General Counsel slide stated: “Take the human out of the equation.” Gary observed candidly that the traditional records management solutions to managing electronic records–print and save and click and save (in an Electronic Records Management System) “were not happening.”

Gary also observed what I have found to be the case sometimes, too: that there is a lot of confusion among the general public and among some stakeholders about what the Federal government is doing. I thought back to what Stern said from that same stage in January: “Come talk to us.” I very much respect the NARA officials who are inside, working through complex issues, and out there, engaging with the public.

Among those officials is Paul Wester, who spoke at the American Historical Association conference in January. Yesterday at the ASAP training at NARA, Paul gave a good overview in “Laying the Foundation” of ongoing records management reform initiatives. (David Ferriero set the scene very well in his opening remarks.) Paul took questions after his presentation. I nodded along when he responded to a question by explaining how templates don’t always fit because situations in agencies and departments are so different. Indeed!

I saw the same through line in the presentation by Arian Ravanbakhsh of the CRO staff at NARA. Tone and content matter a great deal. Arian hit the right balance as he walked the functionally diverse members of the audience through sustainable format issues. As he explained evolution in how the agency formulates and issues policy guidance, Arian conveyed the same realism about what should be and what is as did the other NARA speakers. I really liked seeing multiple NARA speakers convey the importance of creating spaces where people will listen and talk to you. On stage, in your written guidance, and across various platforms.

You can’t parachute in to someone else’s world and impose solutions on them. As a number of the agency and departmental speakers noted, you have to understand the unique culture in every organization. This includes looking at which senior executives’ email accounts fit into Capstone. In the discussion of this aspect of electronic record keeping, bonus points to Mark Patrick, chief, Information Management Division, Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Patrick talked about using internal consideration of the Capstone option to look beyond records management. To examine which officials have what policy and operational responsibilities and why they hold the rank that they do. Patrick has a great Twitter handle: @JSinfoDude!

Hearing thoughtful examinations of complex issues by federal officials, including those from NARA, lifted my spirits yesterday. Many smiles and nods from me during the day. One such instance occurred when Allison Stanton explained so very well what is at stake. I like how she stepped back and looked at the big picture.

Stanton said that FOIA and e-discovery and litigation are important. But she explained that the fundamental reason for maintaining a good records management program is “agency mission.” She said that you don’t want to have to rely on the reminiscences of that agency “old timer” as to what was done, why and how. You want to turn to the records, instead. Yes!

Yesterday’s wintry weather, the falling snow and icy sidewalks and roads, reminded me of that great quote from Wayne Gretzky–skate where the puck is going to be, not where it is. Having the right vision is as important as having the right equipment. The talent and coaching make a difference, too.

Records issues require looking at the forest and the trees, as I’ve often pointed out here and in other forums. And thinking through complex issues depends on letting people talk about what is, not just what should be.

Sometimes, the best thing to do is to sit back and listen to others. I’m grateful I had that opportunity yesterday. That it was at NARA was an added bonus. Somehow, I don’t think that was a coincidence. The National Archives these days it is a place for continual learning–a place where, as my readers know, I like to be!

1 Comment

Posted in archival issues, NARA

Out there and in the community

Posted on February 25, 2015 | Leave a comment

An inquiry on the Archives & Archivists Listserv on February 17, 2014 about job searches and graduates drew thoughtful advice from a number of subscribers last week. Then it morphed into an examination of soft skills. I lurked the first part but initiated the second thread after reading Abraham Miller’s good comment about emotional intelligence.

Yesterday, Miller shared a great blog post about how to demonstrate people skills on your IT resume. The opening paragraph read

“One of my favorite Dilbert cartoons shows Dilbert interviewing a recently graduated engineer. The candidate, leans back cockily in his chair, tells Dilbert, ‘It’s funny that you’re judging me. My engineering knowledge is current and yours is ancient.’ Dilbert stares blankly, and then the candidate slaps his forehead and says, ‘Ooh! People skills! I forgot!’”

I thanked him and observed

“Excellent blog post, thanks for sharing! For job seekers who haven’t built up much on-the-job experience, you can point to people skills by referring to the work output of committees, task forces, and groups in which you’re participated. This includes reading/discussion groups for books and articles about archival and records issues. Added bonus, if online, reading groups are good places to demonstrate your professional skills, writing skills, and people skills!

Also, in line with the attorney buy-in example, any facilitation you’ve done across academic disciplines or professions would be good to highlight, as well. I highly recommend an essay by Joan Mann on the IT-user gap. http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol1/v1n4p253-267.pdf Although her essay dates back several years, what she says about jargon, assumptions, jockeying for position, miscommunication, all is useful for understanding barriers.”

Many employers, including the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), post some workplace policies online. I addressed some in “Free from discrimination, hostility, intimidation.” Worth taking a look, if you plan to apply for civil service jobs or work collaboratively with federal agencies. You also get a sense of the competencies that employers value. AOTUS David S. Ferriero has discussed some of them in his speeches. And the National Archives is open about sharing them online.

One issue we’ve discussed on the Listserv in the past is electronic footprints. You can read one of my old messages from 2005 here. There are two links in the message. The first doesn’t work. It dates to a period where, as you can see in the old List interface’s right hand column, technical problems wiped out all messages from 2002 and most of 2003. The second link, which addresses List news links and other issues, does work.

In the now missing post, I pointed to the fact that my archival cohort was labelled with various pejorative terms. But that there was no record to back up some of the charges, which we felt were untrue. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, when we were working with the Nixon records as employees of the National Archives, it was easy to keep a low profile. No blogs, no Twitter, no Facebook.

In 2011, I saw a chart about social screening and how what they see online influences some employers in hiring and firing people. Some of the advice was pretty obvious. Don’t post photos of yourself doing stupid things. Don’t make inappropriate comments in public, especially in professional forums.

Coming across as sexist, racist, ageist, ableist, etc., directly or through innuendo, can be interpreted as a red flag for potential conduct issues that cause headaches for employers. The sorts of issues professional associations address in Codes of Conduct also can cause trouble in the workplace.

Other behaviors require a high degree of self-awareness to correct or mitigate. For example, the chart points to self-defeating behaviors such as “Keep everything negative. Don’t post anything positive.” It suggests the importance of making potential employers aware of your awards and accomplishments. But there’s much more to it than that. You need to come across as a “we” person, not a “me” person.

If your online presence never reflects praise of others–including people unlike yourself–you can come across as insular, competitive, overly partisan, or even hostile. That can signal limited promotion potential.

The National Archives explains in its great new Supervisors Handbook that positive energy is not the same as simple cheerleading. It refers to characteristics such as realistic optimism and openness to listening and learning. NARA notes in its leadership competencies that a good manager or executive

“Engages, Motivates, and Inspires: Creates positive energy and a sense of camaraderie, and helps others feel personally invested in their work and the agency’s mission. Seeks an understanding of all sides and strives for win-win solutions. Demonstrates resiliency; maintains poise, focus, and instills a sense of realistic optimism, even under adversity or uncertainty.”

Also, if you’re on Facebook, think about how you come across to people who don’t know you in person or in other settings. The comments you post under a Facebook friend’s status update can be read by any of their friends, if the setting is set that way. Some people have a wide circle of professional and personal contacts on Facebook. You can see that if you take the time to scroll through their friends. Those people may work in the academy, for the Federal government, in corporate settings.

When you post under a Facebook friend’s updates, you’re potentially revealing what may be your core characteristics–including biases–to all those people! You never know when you may need to work with them, ask for their support, or otherwise engage professionally with them.

I mentioned on the A&A List yesterday the importance of what Joan Mann calls hybrids. People who can bridge the IT-user gap. There are other potential workplace gaps as well—generational, academic, and, of course, personality. Mann points to problems with the use of jargon to establish dominance (“I know more about computers than you do”) within a functional area. I’ve seen this in other professions, too.

These competitive behaviors can lead to winning small battles but losing overall. As Mann notes, they are the opposite of what the end user, the customer, the people with whom you partner or whom you serve, may need. Moreover, the better, more generous way, to look at yourself is to acknowledge that others are experts in their fields, too. Or as I noted in one of my blog posts in 2012, to consistently strive not to one up, but to help everyone in the enterprise do better, yourself included.

Mann includes a good chart about “I” versus “we” behaviors. She points to the value of humor about a profession’s shortcomings. Mature professionals are comfortable with this type of self-deprecating humor. And it is much more effective than mean-spirited humor, which tries to build up one profession by putting down others.

A sense of fun is important in the workplace, too. And small gestures that cost nothing but a little time and attention can make a big difference. When I first met AOTUS David Ferriero, whom I call “the Big Dude,” I told him I would be attending a forum at the National Archives. Then NARA official Tim Naftali moderated a panel in June 2011 on the 1959 Kitchen Debate. The photo of the event looks conventional–but the sign on my front row seat next to Ferriero was not!

David told me he would save me a seat–but it didn’t have the customary “reserved seat” sign on it!

From: [email protected]
To: maarja
Sent: 6/27/2011 7:04:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Re: (1) permission (2) June 29

There will be several seats in the front row with “Guest of AOTUS” signs. Among them will be one reading “Guest of BD.” That one is yours!

A thoughtful gesture, one that set me at ease despite the difference in rank! And made me laugh, in a good way.

The photo also is a reminder that you never know how people who read or hear your words may interpret something. The screen photo of the guides at the U.S. exhibition in Moscow looked innocuous to me. I remember making a sotto voce comment to David about the women wearing white gloves. Having grown up in the 1950s, I remember the styles and conventions.

During the Question & Answer period that followed the panel discussion, a member of the audience took Tim Naftali to task for using the photo. She complained that it was taken at an unflattering angle. But Tim didn’t take the picture! And the panelists, who included Ambassador Gilbert Robinson and tour guide Tatiana Sochurek, provided context on the image during the program. Sometimes, how things look really comes down to where you sit!

This is true in the workplace, as well. That’s why emphasizing soft skills and being able to highlight them in job interviews is important. You’re often hired for your technical and professional skills. But selecting officials also consider fit and potential and future contributions.

Being a successful manager means having people in your care. This requires reading their articulated and unarticulated needs and acting to bring out the best in others. One of the reasons I really liked David Ferriero’s 1982 article, “Burnout at the Reference Desk,” was its compassionate tone and deep insights into individual and group behaviors in a helping profession with burnout potential. The team must look out for each other.

I’ve seen the positive impact in the workplace of people with good soft skills. I’ve also witnessed the effect (including termination of employment for conduct reasons) of the most disruptive employees. In the less extreme cases, managers face the challenge of keeping up morale, developing unit cohesion and assigning work to people different in temperament, aptitude, and skills.

Some employees are low maintenance, some are high maintenance. Ideally, you can deploy people as suits their talent and temperament but also serves the enterprise best. But you don’t always have that luxury.

The higher up you are in rank, the more you have to balance in terms of budgets, program priorities, workforce issues, and, yes, stakeholder issues. The ability to do that can show up early on in people. I saw that with Jay Bosanko, whom I first met when he was an archives technician. We’re pictured in 2011, soon after he was elevated to a Senior Executive position at NARA.

My late sister, Eva, a supervisory archivist and team leader at NARA, was good at spotting and helping to develop talent. As she did, I could tell early who would go far. But she also worked hard to bring out the best among her team–all the people she supervised. I see that same vibe in some of the people who once worked for her at NARA. Nearly 20 years after the photo of Eva with her team was taken, David Ferriero named Jay to be Chief Operating Officer at NARA.

Neil Carmichael (third from left) was an archives-technician, as was Jay (left), when that photo was taken. Neil later became a division director in NARA’s National Declassification Center, then the Insider Threat Program Manager. Some of the people he has mentored now also work for the Chief Operating Officer. One is Trichita Chestnut pictured (right), with Lucinda Robb (center), granddaughter of President Lyndon B. Johnson. I took their photo at NARA last July. Recognizing talent and mentoring people, as Eva did Jay and Neil, often leads to them paying it forward later.

Archives and librarianship are helping professions. That extends beyond assisting customers and users in finding the records, information, and sources they seek. Many of us feel a strong sense of community and stewardship. We know the job market is tight. But we also know how much you have to offer and how much the profession needs you.

We want you to succeed, to join us in helping share knowledge with the public. Knowledge of the rich, vibrant and diverse story of the history of the United States. At historical societies. In corporate archives. In the special collections departments of universities and colleges. In state and local government offices. And in Fedland, at NARA and other agencies and departments, too.

How we react always will be individual. But I believe that out there, online, and more broadly, in the professional community, the team must look out for each other!

Leave a comment

Posted in archival issues, Workplace issues

To be golden

Posted on February 23, 2015 | Leave a comment

In 2012, I praised Kate Theimer, @archivesnext, in a blog post about role models in leading change. “You mean skinny jeans aren’t business casual? Dang!” got more hits than usual at my blog. As I looked at my dashboard during the days that followed publication, I laughingly tweeted that the image of Kate’s dog got the most link clicks in the post.

The dog is having fun and doing what comes naturally! Don’t we all just want to “be ourselves” at times? And don’t we all struggle with when we can and when we can’t?

On Friday, Kate wrote at Archivesnext what is for her an unusually personal blog post. She admitted she hadn’t moved forward on some projects: “My conclusion at the moment is that I just haven’t found quite the right angle or approach or philosophy that feels genuine to me.” And she explained,

“People tell me from time to time that they think I’m a ‘rock star’ archivist or things like that. Which is flattering and everyone likes to get compliments, but that’s certainly not how I think of myself. Ever. And I thought it might be helpful, if only to a few people, to point out that if you sometimes look at people and think ‘Wow, she’s really got her shit together’ and that makes you feel even a little bit bad about yourself, you shouldn’t. There probably are people who totally have their shit together and never feel self-doubt or like they are total screw-ups, but I’m betting they are few and far between. I’ve never felt qualified to be anybody’s role model or mentor, but if I can be a role model for people who feel kinda stuck and frustrated and depressed, that’s a role I might feel comfortable with!”

When she shared the link on Twitter, I immediately read it. (Twitter is an important lifeline to the archives community for me.) I then tweeted to her, “Brave, strong, post by @archivesnext abt not feeling inspired ‘What’s next? A slight hitch in the proceedings.'”

In 2011, I watched the video of AOTUS David S. Ferriero’s presentation at the Best Practices Exchange (BPE) in 2010. I wrote in a blog post that

“In his comments at the BPE conference, David pointed out that transformation is difficult and that it takes time. He noted, wisely, that you need to separate out past accomplishments from what you are trying to do in achieving change. Putting down the old ways indiscriminately won’t get you there. Some good people used them, after all, for reasons that made sense at the time. On #thatdarnlist, I tried once to explain that people who could communicate with older and younger archivists would be golden to employers hiring now. I still think that empathy for those around you is an asset in many jobs. It’s the most effective response, given that you won’t be able to change your colleagues’ core characteristics. You want them to listen to what you’re saying, not to feel as if you’re beating them up.”

These days, I rarely use the term #thatdarnlist for the Archives & Archivists Listserv although the hashtag still shows occasional use on Twitter. I never used an earlier hashtag, #a&ahateration, it just wasn’t me.

No two online communities are alike and what works in one doesn’t necessarily work in another. And just as in the workplace, various people bring different strengths and weaknesses to the job. Force fits don’t work. Ideally, work assignments fit aptitude, temperament, skills. When they don’t, you try to understand why.

Part of engagement, online and in the workplace, is learning about people, their needs, their values, what they offer. For me, people who see the forest and the trees are golden, especially when they have vision and the courage to share it. Kate Theimer is one of those people.

When I posted on April 24, 2009 on the Archives & Archivists Listserv about people who can communicate across generations and professions, I had someone in mind although I didn’t name her. Kate Theimer. This was before Kate became an internationally successful author and speaker. She then was known mostly for her blog. But I already had come to admire her knowledge, skills, courage and capacity. A rare combination, hence all the more to be valued.

I’m a creator and user of historical information. I knew at the start of the 21st century how much the world of archives and records had changed since the 1980s. I’ve been in a one-person function for a long time in Washington. The virtual world provides connections and sources of learning for me. Until I discovered Kate’s blog, I saw little acknowledgement or discussion of changes and the impact on archives or records.

Starting to read Kate’s blog in 2008 gave me much needed nourishment (on my intellectual side) and hope (on my emotional side) for the future. It also enabled me to stretch, grow, and move off of a plateau on which I had rested (without realizing I was) for a long time. I needed to start walking forward and she helped me do that. Part of that was learning why the future of archives–and discussing archival and records issues–needs to be collaborative.

Years ago, I posted on the Archives & Archivists Listserv about facilitative leadership:

“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.’”

Kate’s blog caught my eye in 2008 because she offered a thoughtful perspective on the past and present and a visionary view of the future. I learned from her about technological and people issues. Part of that learning was understanding and learning from my own mistakes.

Yes, I’m thinking of how I handled comments I wrote under a guest post by Kathleen Roe at Archivesnext in 2009. Making mistakes doesn’t have to result in blaming others. If others involved give you space–and you take the gift of space and use it to reflect on what happened–you can learn from your miscues. Shaming rarely results in learning but safety and shelter can.

Since 2009, I’ve come to admire Kate and Kathleen, both. Kate, Jeremy Young, and other bloggers (Maureen Callahan, Rebecca Goldman, Lance Stuchell) influenced me in deciding to blog. Some of the things I feared as I debated whether to start my blog in 2010 played out as I thought they might. (They don’t involve the National Archives.) But I no longer worry about them.

Much of my blogging these days reflects the joy I feel in reconnecting with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). I greatly admire people whom I know at NARA, from Ferriero down through the ranks. I loved meeting Ashley Stevens of NARA Philadelphia during the Society of American Archivists (SAA) conference last August. But the most moving moment for me was watching Kate Theimer receive the SAA Spotlight Award. Yes, I shed a few tears from my seat in the second row–happy ones.

In the workplace, there are managers, executives, facilitators who work to bring out the best in a very diverse workforce. (That’s aspirational, of course. I’ve seen and known supervisors who do that well and others who face challenges in these areas.) Especially in large organizations, it really does “take a village.” People in different functional units work to share knowledge with the public.

Cultural heritage organizations such as the National Archives have formal recognition programs. That’s my friend and former colleague Rod Ross at left. I featured him in my last blog post, in which I wrote about the Archivist’s Lifetime Achievement Award. But as David Ferriero has noted, what employees seek is highly individual. And recognition need not be formal and public.

The virtual world doesn’t have the structure the best physical workplaces have. Part of making one’s way through life online involves determining or deciding how much you can be yourself. I admire Kate now even more than I did before she put up her blog post on Friday. I’m a glass-half full person. But I work in Washington. I walk towards the light but understand Fedland in all the elements that affect it. I especially appreciate Kate’s conclusion because I’ve been here, too:

“….I’m working through my issues and fully expect to be back to my ‘normal’ enthusiastic, energetic, positive online (and in person) self pretty soon. But I’m not good at faking enthusiasm, so I think it’s better to own up to my problems and try to sort them out rather than forging ahead in a half-assed way. I’ve got the luxury to do that. For anyone who’s going through something similar who doesn’t have that luxury and still has to show up at work and fake being excited about being there, you’ve got my sympathy. I hope things get better for you, and I hope spring comes to all of us as soon as it possibly can!”

We’re all human. When we use multiple platforms, content matters as much as the technology. Lonnie Bunch has observed about history that you have to tell people what they need to hear, not just what they want to hear. The same is true for information professionals. When it comes to archival and records issues, we need to create spaces to have those conversations. Kate has been a model in showing the way.

An article on the website of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals points to the human side of information management. Clive Holtham describes in “Information management: the fundamental philosophy” qualities that I’ve observed in effective leaders.

“An information management literate executive has a number of qualities:

a) they are sceptical of information and the people and technologies that provide it

b) they know that the information on the paper or on the screen is not reality. It is a model of reality. The map is not the territory.

c) they know that systems can and do fail. They know that projects can and do fail. They know that information about systems and large projects needs to be treated particularly sceptically.

d) they are particularly aware of their own lack of information and knowledge

e) they take active steps to compensate for their own deficiencies

f) these people are genuinely curious about what they don’t know. If you have ever sat next to a really senior executive on a plane, you will be interrogated for the whole journey. They are hungry for difference, for the novel perspective, for the nugget that fits into some bigger pattern

g) they spend much time listening. Technology promotes the production and transmission of ideas. But what differentiates, for example, Nobel Prize winners from those equally good at scientific publications who don’t get a prize? I have had the good fortune to meet just one Nobel Prize winner, Arno Penzias, who was at Bell Labs. He told me that a study done at the Labs had shown that the only distinguishing characteristic was the large amount of time the winners spent with junior staff in other departments. They were actually listening, they were passing on their advice, and they were (not necessarily consciously or instrumentally) building a personalised network of support that might in turn help them in the future.”

David Ferriero read one of my posts on the Archives & Archivists Listserv in 2010 and sent me a note (via the Listserv’s message function) which included the phrase, “Still on a steep learning curve regarding NARA’s history!” I found that refreshing and admirable. However, it took me a while to recognize the great significance as it relates to archives, records, change, and management. The value of intellectual curiosity!

Open leadership stands out because it requires new skills. And it is not easy because it requires being human in a way that helps others move forward. Kate reminded me on Friday that part of being a source of light is acknowledging dark moments. And that truly is golden.

Leave a comment

Posted in archival issues, People issues

Eyes on the people

Posted on February 20, 2015 | Leave a comment

I sat in the McGowan Theater at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) on November 19, 2013 and listened to film director/producer Steven Spielberg talk to Ken Burns on stage. Spielberg told Burns that as a child he enjoyed Cecil B. DeMille type spectacles when he went to the movies. But as he grew older, he came to understand that there was little about people’s inner lives in such films. He was drawn to how human beings related to each other and wanted to show how they thought and acted.

Photographs taken at the Gala at NARA show Spielberg looking at Supervisory Archivist Trevor Plante with interest as he discusses documents during a tour of the Vault. Also present (left to right) are Ken Burns, National Archives Foundation executive director Patrick Madden, Foundation chair A’Lelia Bundles, and AOTUS David S. Ferriero.

187974078_ML_7044_91077973122EB4D971AF52459AD9ECC4 50 pc

Ken Burns, Steven Spielberg, Patrick Madden, A’Lelia Bundles, David S. Ferriero. Photo courtesy Foundation for the National Archives. Photographer Michael Loccisano/Getty Images North America.

Ken Burns, Steven Spielberg, Patrick Madden, A’Lelia Bundles, Trevor Plante. Photo courtesy Foundation for the National Archives. Photographer Michael Loccisano/Getty Images North America.

Wednesday evening, all eyes were on Dan Rooney, head of NARA’s motion pictures branch, as he spoke at the lectern in the Archivist’s Reception Room. The room was filled with members of the Young Founders Society (YFS) of the National Archives Foundation, I among them. (David Ferriero is a member of the YFS, too–he joked on Wednesday that he is its oldest member. David is my contemporary so I’m probably the second oldest!)

Dan gave a beautiful overview of archival films at NARA, including ones made for the United States Information Agency. He also discussed preservation work and accessibility of historic footage. Dan told the guests that the Oscar that Charles Guggenheim received for “Nine from Little Rock” is on display in the lobby of the McGowan Theater.

I’ve often come to the Theater to view films, some expertly restored by National Archives’ specialists. For shorter films the events sometimes include discussion by an expert panel after a screening. As film makers such as Guggenheim and Spielberg show, the best films (documentaries, feature films) take us into the lives of others. They provide perspective and insights. They expand a viewer’s vision.

Having a good understanding of how human beings relate to each other requires a high degree of Emotional Intelligence. I was very pleased this week to see many thoughtful responses on the Archives & Archivists Listserv to an inquiry about “job search advice.” Among the people responding was Abe Miller, an information professional (and Certified Records Manager) skilled in archives and records management. I nodded as I saw Abe write that

“….one of the skills that I thought of as undervalued in school was management. If you have project management skills and people management skills, sell those! Sell your emotional intelligence! I keep a copy of Emotional Intelligence 2.0 on my desk. It reminds me sometimes to step back and think about what I am thinking and how I am communicating. When I am hiring a candidate, even if the job description doesn’t specifically mention management or communications, these soft skills will put a candidate over the top for me.”

Not everyone is in the same place, professionally, economically, temperamentally. I’m aware of that when I tweet about my joy at visiting NARA. Or send congratulations to someone who has just tweeted that they have landed a job while others I know still are searching. Surely seeing some of those congratulatory messages is painful for those still searching for work as information professionals. I think about that also when I blog or tweet about the joy of sharing knowledge and the transcendence of the archival mission.

Navigating professional forums and Social Media exposes people to some of the same issues as they see in the office. Paint by numbers doesn’t work. David Ferriero was right when he said in 2008 that you have to listen and to try to discern needs:

“….recognition is individual-driven; each person has different needs for recognition. For some, public recognition is important, but for another person it might be something as simple as an email. The new staff services office we’ve implemented is focusing on the individual in many ways, including acknowledgment, so one way we are addressing the need for recognition is by asking our staff, ‘What is meaningful to you?’”

One of the most meaningful official awards at NARA marks career achievement at the agency. Tim Mulligan, my longtime and cherished friend, received the NARA Lifetime Achievement Award during the Archivist’s Awards Ceremony in November 2006. A wonderful moment! (My photo shows Tim and Bonnie Mulligan after the ceremony.) Last year, I was happy when David Ferriero awarded my former colleague and friend, Rod Ross (I took the photo in 2011), the Archivist’s Lifetime Achievement Award.

The number of awards given out is limited, of course. But the contributors to agency mission are many. As in most archival organizations, a large number of deserving people make major, sustained or special contributions every year. I’m pleased to see that in working through its strategic goals and objectives, NARA is focusing on people as much as it is on technology and processes. Some of the same soft skills described in the Handbook help us online, as well. Among the signs of Emotional Intelligence are discernment and customized communications.

As David Ferriero observed when he worked at the humanities library at MIT in 1982:

“It is vital to the individual’s feelings of self-worth that he/she feel an integral part of the organization. Both performance and attitude suffer when you have no voice in how things are done and when you are unclear about your role in the organization. Participation in the management process and role clarification by individuals and organizations are positive approaches to improving the psychological environment.”

At home, in the workplace, online, you’re always in the picture yourself. You’re applying filters, biases, the results of your life experiences. Your wishes, yearnings, frustrations can influence how you see things. Sometimes without realizing it. The challenge–and it can be a big one–is to step back and think about what you’re doing in relation to others, as Abe Miller tells us.

Miller and Ferriero both point out that library school doesn’t focus enough on management–of projects, of people. But in a time of tight budgets, traditional Return on Investment and offering intangible benefits within the workforce both are critically important. Moreover, many information professionals do not work in cultural heritage organizations. So marketing their functions internally is a key part of doing the job. You can’t offer solutions effectively if you don’t understand the workplace culture, strengths and weaknesses, both.

On Wednesday, I walked to the reception at NARA after work. The forecast called for snow squalls between 6 and 6:30 p.m. Midway through the reception, I looked out the window and saw a small snow shower. As I photographed it from the Archivist’s Reception Room, I saw in the window the reflection of the chandelier behind me. But it wasn’t until I looked at the photo on my computer at home that I realized that the layered images included an inadvertent mirrored selfie.

Self-awareness, other-awareness, sensitivity while maintaining mission focus and bringing out the best in people are themes that I like in the new Supervisors Handbook that Ferriero’s team developed at the National Archives last year. Yes, I know. NARA has a lot of ground to make up on people issues. But there are many good officials of all ranks working to improve what they can. And you have to start with yourself.

“Successful supervision can require a level of self-awareness, humility, and introspection that may, at first, feel uncomfortable. Know yourself, and your strengths and weaknesses. Critique your own decisions both before and after you make them. Push the boundaries of your comfort zone and put the time in on your ‘personal homework.’ Anticipating and reflecting on the effects and responses to your own decisions, and how you communicate will help you to improve.”

I’m aware of the fact that I’m older than many of the people I follow on Twitter. I’m there to learn from others as much as I am to share my experiences, which I mostly save for my blog. I’m close to the end of my career path, for better or worse. Most of my friends on Twitter are starting out or mid-career. The job market is much tighter than when I started. Moreover, new skills are in the mix along with the traditional ones.

I’ve had my share of highs and lows in Washington. Washington is a complicated place, much more so than any news story you read ever will convey. I can’t change what happened, my career has played out as it has. (I’m about to reach 42 years federal service) Although some things that happened years ago affected me profoundly, for a number of reasons, I don’t dwell on them much any more. I cherish my connections to NARA and am in a good place these days.

I savor moments of brightness, extraordinary and ordinary, both. Looking up at the sky as I walk. Seeing people I know in the virtual world or real life do cool things. Enjoying thoughtful tweets and conversations. Reading blog posts that inspire me. Seeing people describe moments of joy in their personal or professional lives. Or make their way through challenges with fortitude and resilience. And most of all, seeing generosity of spirit. People paying it forward. Striving to help others succeed.

You never know what someone else is going through. And what you can offer others by engaging with them. You can’t know what others may take away from seeing what you do (positive or negative). There are so many random moments where people connect, directly, indirectly. Being aware of soft skills, developing them, recognizing them in others, helps us keep our eyes open for opportunities.

Abe is right, such skills matter. And we need to discuss them in library school. Valerie Enriquez wrote an eloquent blog post in August 2011 about the gap between graduating and finding a job. She observed:

“Chances are, the ‘just pay the bills’ gigs are what helped me get into school in the first place. If you’ve ever worked in food service, retail, customer services or technological support, you’ve already got an arsenal of skills to choose from. Can you talk down someone who is yelling at you or is otherwise clearly frustrated with what they feel is a failure in you or your company in providing them with the goods or services that they need? Can you unjam a printer? Can you reset a wireless router? Can you string words together in a way that is meaningful to the person who is reading or hearing those words? Are you able to collaborate on a project with people without getting sidetracked about the weather and sticking to an agenda at meetings? Of course, we discussed the importance of things like this in class, despite the fact that interpersonal and communication skills aren’t necessarily something taught in library/archives school.”

These are skills that show up online, as well. We’ve had and will have our share of debates on Twitter and blogs. Our interactions ebb and flow, as issues come to the fore and recede again. We collaborate, go into observer mode, come together again. We’re out there talking, debating, encouraging, learning, teaching, cheering, and, yes, disagreeing, too. In private. And also in public view.

In engaging with each other, we have choices. One choice, the one I like, is developing and learning. Even from the Twitter backchannel! As NARA states in its new Supervisors Handbook,

“Constructive feedback makes us better at everything we do. Giving, seeking, and receiving feedback are skills that can be developed. In addition to reflecting on your own decision making, ask for feedback from your manager and your team. Providing feedback is a challenging practice. It’s worth putting in the work.”

Continual learning. And you’re never done!

Leave a comment

Posted in archival issues, People issues, Workplace issues

If we had talked to them

Posted on February 18, 2015 | Leave a comment

A few more thoughts about my recent blog themes–the importance of embracing complexity, the counter-intuitive value of admitting what you don’t know, and the gift of crafting reflective responses to systemic and emerging issues. This morning’s post is a follow up to “Giving face to the faceless” and reflects what I saw after I published my post about dehumanization.

On January 27, I posted a message to the Archives & Archivists Listserv explaining why I had just asked for offlist feedback from college and university archivists about some records issues in the news. That’s not unusual. Years ago, I posted a message encouraging people to reach out to us offlist in Fedland when stories hit the news. I then noted that I wanted to learn from them as much as I wanted to share my take on Fedland issues.

Individual perspectives are just that–individual. But the more views you gather, the less likely you are to go off track. Or shoot from the hip in public on a complicated matter.

That’s not to say we can always share everything we know. Certainly not in public. And sometimes, not even privately. No more than can information professionals who work in other settings.

I have numerous contacts in Washington, some in the executive branch, some in the other two branches of government. At times, all you can do is tell others that there are many sides to stories and wait for them to play out. And try to wave others off of jumping to conclusions. This doesn’t just apply to those of us in government, it applies to the academy and corporate settings, too. Of course, that means that a wide range of news stories becomes “part of the record” and the more complicated reality behind some of them is not archived for future research.

I noted in my January message that as a Fed, I’m well aware of the burdens of information asymmetry. “The impact of seeing outsiders discuss, often with the best of intentions, occasionally for other, more complicated reasons, complex issues without knowing key facts.” I added,

“…although I don’t dwell on it much any more, my own archival story is complicated. I know from the late 1980s and 1990s what it is like to read news stories about myself and colleagues and always try to keep that in mind when reading reporting about others.”

Yesterday, Kathleen Roe, president of the Society of American Archivists (SAA), explained at Off the Record blog how the professional association handles issues (some the result of news stories) raised by members. In “Addressing Archival Issues: University of Oregon Records Release–and Beyond,” she explained that

“We typically seek further advice, information, and input from committees, working groups, sections, and/or roundtables. It is rarely a simple process to gather accurate and verifiable information. My Council colleagues and I recognize that in each situation there are several options:

• We can make no response. Some may equate this ‘action’ to not being willing to engage, but it may also result from a conscious decision that the issue is not within SAA’s or the profession’s ‘wheelhouse.’
• We can take a specific position. To do so responsibly requires verifiable information (which can be challenging to assemble) and then arriving at a position that we can agree to on behalf of the membership.
• Or we can do as we have in both of the recent cases: Give the matter the best assessment we can with the information available and let members know that we are, in fact, paying attention, but that there is not sufficient information or development for SAA to be making a responsible statement.”

I understand this. Years ago, I posted on the Listserv about different, even clashing, perspectives within the government on how to handle some NARA issues in the early 1990s. I then noted that people with different views on the matter (I only one among them) belonged to SAA. Even when I felt the most alone (1992-1993) I didn’t think it was fair to ask SAA, “save me from this” or “champion my cause.” Sometimes, it really “is complicated.”

That SAA is large and diverse, in terms of institutions and members, both, means its members don’t see all issues the same way. Or have the same degree of situational awareness. (This is the case with other professional groups, as well–ARMA, OAH, AHA.) All the more reason to appreciate Kathleen’s forthright explanation of how SAA seeks information and perspectives. And why gaining a good picture of what is going on with some news stories can be challenging. Sometimes, perhaps not even possible.

There’s room for improvement yet I appreciate SAA’s increasing transparency. Kathleen links to a good column in the January-February issue of Archival Outlook by Frank Boles, former SAA President (2008-2009). Boles now is the chair of the SAA Committee on Advocacy and Public Policy (CAPP). I very much like the candor in his column.

Despite being a well-known expert on archival and appraisal issues, Boles doesn’t hesitate to point to the value of seeking information from others. He describes an effort to look at surveillance records issues:

“Having consulted with the membership, CAPP then turned to the true experts on the matter. The National Archives and Records Administration’s (NARA) External Affairs Liaison and Chief Records Officer of the United States, as well as the NARA staff members who are directly responsible for appraising NSA material, met with CAPP members via teleconference. The conversation was startling–and reassuring.”

The Chief Records Officer, Paul Wester, does a lot of good public outreach. You see him (middle) at a Society for History in the Federal Government event in Washington in 2012. I very much enjoyed chatting with Paul and with AOTUS David S. Ferriero during the reception that preceded the program. Paul attended SAA last summer and spoke last month about records issues at AHA in New York.

Boles observes,

“Throughout our conversation, the NARA staff demonstrated a high degree of awareness of the situation and a mastery of federal law and regulations (and were gracious enough not to point out that a lot of work and anxiety could have been avoided if we had talked to them in the first place!)”

His conclusion reflects well on NARA. And reflects well on Boles, too.

In a post about a public program I attended at NARA in January, I quoted its General Counsel, Gary Stern. Gary noted of matters that might be litigated: “come talk to us” before deciding on such action. That applies in other situations, too.

We in Fedland are subject to simple misunderstanding of some of our actions. And of course, more so than people in other workplaces, we face demagoguery at times, as well. There always will be deliberate or inadvertent enablers of both. And people who yell epithets at Federal officials. Sometimes the frustration (although not necessarily the epithet) is understandable–there are, let’s say, opportunities for improvement. At other times, such epithets clearly are not deserved.

What we most value–and it’s a beautiful gift–is having people partner with us when we say, “come talk to us.” And listen, too. Especially during the information gathering process, when you have an opportunity to change course or reflect on and incorporate new insights.

Opening doors is hard, keeping them open even harder. But worth doing. Applies online as well as in the real world. Which, come to think of it, Fedland is a part of, just as is any other workplace!

Leave a comment

Posted in archival issues

Giving face to the faceless

Posted on February 17, 2015 | Leave a comment

The elderly expatriate, a man who fled Communism in Europe at the end of World War II, looked at me in October 2008 and predicted: “If Obama wins the election, the Blacks are going to riot in Washington.” I thought, “How can you, who fled inhumane, totalitarian forces, have such a wrongheaded, dehumanizing view of your fellow citizens here in the United States?” But I couldn’t argue in that setting.

He was my elder, I only knew him socially. We were standing in the lobby of a church. And I sensed, as we sometimes do, that nothing I could say would reach him. I simply shook my head, said, “No, that’s not what will happen, I don’t see how you can even think such a thing.”

In 2012, the morning after Barack Obama won election to a second term in office, my Mother, also an expatriate, told me her reaction. She said, “I’m fine with Obama winning re-election, many challenges, but he hasn’t done a bad job.” She’s a lifelong Republican, of a type once called an Eisenhower Republican. Sometimes, she sits out elections these days.

Last week, Mom returned to me a book she had borrowed and just finished reading, David Maraniss’s Barack Obama: The Story. As I do, Mom reads a lot of history and biography or memoirs (including Democratic and Republican presidents). And we sometimes borrow books from each other. Books that give faces and provide voices to people who lived in the near and far past.

When I browse history books, I often turn to the acknowledgements. I want to see what sources the author used. Sometimes, I smile with delight when I see a historian thank archivists by name. It’s especially beautiful when I see the names of people I know. Terry Baxter, an archivist with the Multnomah County (Oregon) Records Program, expressed so werll a few years ago what I feel. “Archivists are groovy, in a far out and happening way.” By making access happen, we connect the present with the past.

I thought about Terry Baxter over the weekend as I read Joel Achenbach’s column, “Why science is so hard to believe.” Achenbach, a thoughtful columnist and science writer for the Washington Post, wrote about the “science communication problem” as it relates to a number of public policy issues, including vaccines and climate change. He looked at what motivates and influences people and the challenge of breaking through filters and bubbles. Achenbach observed,

“….along with cable TV, the Web has also made it possible to live in a ‘filter bubble’ that lets in only the information with which you already agree.

How to penetrate the bubble? How to convert science skeptics? Throwing more facts at them doesn’t help. Liz Neeley, who helps train scientists to be better communicators at an organization called Compass, says people need to hear from believers they can trust, who share their fundamental values.”

Neeley shared a story of how she got through to her father, who she said turned to niche news sources for information. She talked to him about scientists she knew personally whose work and methods she found reliable.

“’If you think I’m wrong,’” she said, ‘then you’re telling me that you don’t trust me.’” Her father’s stance on the issue softened. But it wasn’t the facts that did it.”

There’s something to this, not just with science, but history and related issues, too. I say that from lessons learned (and ongoing). From having been on both sides (recipient of unsolicited advice, person offering it) in situations involving people I’ve never met.

As I’ve observed at times on Twitter, the best chance of getting someone to listen is when the advice comes from one of his or her friends, IRL or in the virtual world. Or a member of a group with which he or she self identifies. Or has shared values (intellectual or temperamental).

Consanguinity of spirit can bring people of different political persuasions together, as David Frum noted in writing about Marcel Proust. What matters is that the people connect with each other, whether or not they vote the same way, or not.

What Deborah Tanen calls the argument culture means it’s easy to shut out critics and opponents. Or to live constantly at Defcon 1.

Five years ago, columnist Robert J. Samuelson observed

“Purging moral questions from politics is both impossible and
undesirable. But today’s tendency to turn every contentious issue into a moral confrontation is divisive. One way of fortifying people’s self-esteem is praising them as smart, public-spirited and virtuous. But an easier way is to portray the ‘other side’ as scum: The more scummy ‘they’ are, the more superior ‘we’ are. This logic governs the political conversation of left and right, especially talk radio, cable channels and the blogosphere.

Unlike economic benefits, psychic benefits can be dispensed without going
through Congress. Mere talk does the trick. Shrillness and venom are the coin of the realm. The opposition cannot simply be mistaken. It must be evil, selfish, racist, unpatriotic, immoral or just stupid. A culture of self-righteousness reigns across the political spectrum. Stridency from one feeds the other.”

If you read the comments at newspaper sites, you see the way some people from across the ideological spectrum dehumanize each other, sometimes for political reasons. Or make blatantly racist or sexist judgments. As with the elderly man at church, I rarely argue with them. But I do sometimes lay out the facts as I know them and say of their interpretation, “I disagree.”

On Sunday, one of my favorite writers about tech issues, Social Media, and communications, Alexander Howard, tweeted a link to a New York Times commentary about “The Epidemic of Facelessness.” I’ve been following him on Twitter (@digiphile) since seeing him speak at the McGowan Communications Forum at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in November 2011.

Alex picked out the money quote in Stephen Marche’s column: “Inability to see a face is… inability to recognize shared humanity with another.”

As Marche notes, facelessness even can lead to violent rhetoric and other negative reactions.

“Without a face, the self can form. . . rejection of all otherness, with a generalized, all-purpose contempt — a contempt that is so vacuous because it is so vague, and so ferocious because it is so vacuous. A world stripped of faces is a world stripped, not merely of ethics, but of the biological and cultural foundations of ethics.”

Before I joined Twitter as @nixonara and started this blog in December 2010, my major platform for communicating with information professionals was the Archives & Archivists Listserv. From 1997 through 2010, I often shared my Washington experiences.

I pleaded at times with people to create work cultures where archivists would not get caught in the crossfire due to what was in records in their care. I tried asking people to step out of their established affinity groups (political or ideological) and to ally with partners in the other party to find solutions to records access issues.

It didn’t occur to me how repetitive this became for longtime List subscribers over a decade. I was thinking narrowly. (I repeated parts of my story because I sought to reach new subscribers). That led me to miss the impact of some of my posted messages on the community as a whole.

At one point, Terry Baxter, whom I greatly respect for his professional knowledge and work on diversity and inclusion, said something I didn’t want to be told but needed to hear. We only knew each other from interactions on the Listserv at that point, which, as I recall, was around 2009 or 2010. Terry then told me he enjoyed some of my postings on A&A but would be happy if he never again saw me writing about my Nixon records experiences. Ouch! But a learning moment.

I wouldn’t meet Terry in person until August 2014 at the SAA conference in Washington. But his was a trusted voice for me, someone I felt sought to deal fairly with others. Soon after that, I launched Nixonara. Providing a page at my blog where I provided an overview of my experiences in processing the Nixon records for disclosure meant I didn’t have to keep repeating snippets of them.

Sharing stories and pictures of my colleagues and myself gave me a way of humanizing my archival cohort. Of course, I understand that sharing personal experiences (my own, those of my colleagues, and, yes, my sister) can have a down side, as well. You can’t control what others do.

Stephen Marche pointed to selfies as a way to show the variety of human expressions–to preserve or share faces.

“As exchange and communication come at a remove, the flight back to the face takes on new urgency. Google recently reported that on Android alone, which has more than a billion active users, people take 93 million selfies a day. The selfie has become not a single act but a continuous process of self-portraiture. On the phones that are so much of our lives, no individual self-image is adequate; instead a rapid progression of self-images mimics the changeability and the variety of real human presence.”

There’s something to that. Faces, images, supplement our words, convey our humanity. My family was split asunder at the end of World War II, some behind the Iron Curtain, some (my Mom, Dad, and my twin and I) living in freedom in the United States. For nearly a decade after the end of the war in 1945, my mother and her parents had no contact with each other. They behind the Iron Curtain did not know if she had survived the war. She here in the United States as a war refugee didn’t know if they were still alive.

After my Mother was able to establish written contact with her parents in the 1950s, sharing photos in letters was the only way for my grandparents to see Eva and me (born 1951). We never met. I still have relatives abroad who read my blog and see the Facebook photos I share of Mom and me. Despite everything she has lived through, including never again seeing her parents and brother after the age of 23, Mom has a cheerful, resilient nature.

Just reading history (and the number of people who read it is small as a proportion of the general population) isn’t enough. As I’ve noted in writing about the challenges of being History Communicators, other forces shape how people view past and current events. Which makes it all the more important that we think in terms of how we represent.

In writing about archival advocacy in Many Happy Returns, a book he edited, former NARA Truman Presidential Library director Larry Hackman advised, “Communicate your values.” What Hackman wrote can work in general as well as specific advocacy.

“Among the very best advocacy techniques are for the archives to find ways (a) to impress people, inside and beyond the organization, by hard work, professionalism, and a commitment to improve the program and its services and (b) to demonstrate that the archives is not driven by perks, privileges, and status symbols, especially any that have personal rather than institutional implications. Potential allies and supporters will come to disrespect archivists whom they believe are interested more in their own welfare and comfort than in the larger program and purpose. Archives should look for opportunities to convey the character and motivations of the archives leadership and staff and the internal culture of the archives.”

As I’ve found peace on the issues that led me to start my blog, I’ve moved on to other topics. Studying how people write about history, archives, records, and, yes, the Federal government, has shown how many opportunities there are to communicate our values and who we are. I’m lucky that I know so many great people of all ranks at the National Archives and Records Administration and other archives. People to whom I can point as good models.

When we engage, we give face to arcane issues. From how we process records, to human resource and organizational morale issues. (Trying to analyze survey results from outside can be problematic.) And to the complexity of technological and stakeholder issues. There are real human beings behind all of those subjects. Of course, there is risk in revealing that, about them, about us. But it’s a risk worth taking.

Shine a light! Open the door to teaching. And learning some lessons yourself along the way!

Leave a comment

Posted in archival issues, People issues

In the archives

Posted on February 14, 2015 | Leave a comment

On Tuesday I stopped in at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) during my lunch break. I heard Rep. James Clyburn (D – SC) speak about his memoirs, Blessed Experiences: Genuinely Southern, Proudly Black. I often tweet from such events but could not connect with the WiFi in the McGowan Theater. I spoke to AOTUS David S. Ferriero, who gave opening remarks, after the public program. He told me that a widespread outage in the Federal Triangle area meant the network was down.

Before leaving the building, I walked up from the theater to the Rotunda to look at the Charters of Freedom. Then I walked over to the Public Vaults to look at the some of the displays, including one on the life cycle of records. You see it behind the father and daughter who attended the children’s sleepover at NARA the weekend of January 31-February 1. I shared on Tuesday my support for such outreach activities.

In a video made in 2011, journalist A’Lelia Bundles discussed research on her great-great-grandmother, Madam C. J. Walker (born Sarah Breedlove) who became famous in the hair care business. She had information on the businesswoman and philanthropist after she became famous, but wanted to learn about the early years of her life. A’Lelia made unexpected finds at the National Archives about the plantation on which her great-great-grandmother was born in 1867. She was the first child born there after emancipation. Her parents and older siblings had been slaves on the plantation.

A’Lelia also pointed to the poignancy of some of information in hospital records she examined. She observed,

“One of the wonderful things about the way the American government collected records through the years is that everybody’s family is in the National Archives.”

I’ve heard A’Lelia, whom I know from her work on the board of the National Archives Foundation, talk in person about her research. She once explained why her great-great-grandmother, who worked as a washerwoman when she was young, preferred to be called Madam C. J. Walker after she became a businesswoman. A’Lelia said it was a sign of respect and an effort at self protection.

By using Madam and her husband’s initials she sought to avoid being called names that put her down, such as “auntie” or “Sally.” Sally (a nickname for Sarah) was a generic name (a dehumanizing act) sometimes used by white people in the 19th century to refer to African-American women.

Just over a year ago, in December 2013, I stood in the National Archives and watched as A’Lelia Bundles, businessman and philanthropist David Rubenstein, and David Ferriero cut the ribbon at a ceremony for Records of Rights, a permanent exhibit in the new Rubenstein Gallery. That evening, I told my then 92-year old mother about the impact of the displays documenting the evolution of rights for minorities in the United States. An immigrant who fled to this country after World War II, my Mom raised me to be aware of the importance of legal rights and protections and also of the privileges I enjoyed.

In describing the December 2013 ceremony at AOTUS blog, David wrote that

“The three major sections of ‘Records of Rights’ highlight the struggles of Americans to define and realize their civil rights through the stories of African Americans, women, and immigrants. Through documents, photographs, drawings, and films from National Archives holdings, we explore how our forerunners sought to fulfill the promise of freedom set out in our founding documents.”

FBI Director James Comey pointed to a record from the past when he spoke this week about the Jim Crow era and the struggle for Civil Rights in a speech in Washington:

“There is a reason that I require all new agents and analysts to study the FBI’s interaction with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and to visit his memorial in Washington as part of their training. And there is a reason I keep on my desk a copy of Attorney General Robert Kennedy’s approval of J. Edgar Hoover’s request to wiretap Dr. King. It is a single page. The entire application is five sentences long, it is without fact or substance, and is predicated on the naked assertion that there is ‘communist influence in the racial situation.’ The reason I do those things is to ensure that we remember our mistakes and that we learn from them.

One reason we cannot forget our law enforcement legacy is that the people we serve and protect cannot forget it, either. So we must talk about our history. It is a hard truth that lives on.”

Recent remarks by an Mississippi District Court Judge, Carlton Reeves, at the sentencing of the young men who in 2011 killed James Anderson, an African-American man, remind us of some of the horrors of hate based crimes:

“How could hate, fear or whatever it was that transformed genteel, God-fearing, God-loving Mississippians into mindless murderers and sadistic torturers? I ask that same question about the events which bring us together on this day. Those crimes of the past as well as these have so damaged the psyche and reputation of this great State.

Mississippi soil has been stained with the blood of folk whose names have become synonymous with the Civil Rights Movement like Emmett Till, Willie McGee, James Cheney, Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner, Vernon Dahmer, George W. Lee, Medgar Evers and Mack Charles Parker. But the blood of the lesser-known people like Luther Holbert and his wife, Elmo Curl, Lloyd Clay,John Hartfield, Nelse Patton, Lamar Smith, Clinton Melton, Ben Chester White, Wharlest Jackson and countless others, saturates these 48,434 square miles of Mississippi soil. On June 26, 2011, four days short of his 49th birthday, the blood of James Anderson was added to Mississippi’s soil.”

Judge Reeves, who is African-American, described efforts to move past the abyss of “moral depravity” that results from hate that “comes in all shapes, sizes, colors, and. . . in different sexes and ages.” He concluded his remarks by saying,

“The court knows that James Anderson’s mother, who is now 89 years old, lived through the horrors of the Old Mississippi, and the court hopes that she and her family can find peace in knowing that with these sentences, in the New Mississippi, justice is truly blind. Justice, however, will not be complete unless these defendants use the remainder of their lives to learn from this experience and fully commit to making a positive difference in the New Mississippi. And, finally, the court wishes that the defendants also can find peace.”

Some of the records from the Civil Rights era to which Judge Reeves referred are held in the National Archives. On Thursday, I returned to the McGowan Theater for a Know Your Records program with Dr. Tina Ligon of NARA’s Textual Processing Division. She gave an excellent overview of records in the National Archives (including its presidential libraries) about the Selma to Montgomery, Alabama march and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

She traced stories in the archives as found in records, starting with the death in 1965 of Jimmie Lee Jackson, a church deacon and civil rights activist shot by an Alabama state trooper. The handout for her presentation is here.

The National Archives works to release what it can by law but not all the records she described are open in full. Some deal with the FBI and informants still alive today. As Dr. Ligon explained, and includes in her slides at the link, requests for some files may result in redactions under the Freedom of Information Act.

Among the cases she discussed on Thursday was the murder in 1965 in Alabama by Klansmen of Viola Liuzzo, a white woman from Detroit who had come to Alabama to work on voting rights issues. Dr. Ligon noted efforts to smear Liuzzo with sexual innuendo after her death. One of the men present during the ambush of the car in which an African American civil rights activist was a passenger was an FBI informant.

Last winter, I offered a rebuttal at my blog of New York Times arts critic Edward Rothstein’s review of “Records of Rights.” He criticized the permanent exhibit for making the United States look hypocritical and “unsurpassingly unjust.” He asked whether it was an appropriate framework for which visitors to view the Charters of Freedom on display elsewhere in the National Archives Museum. In 2014, I explained in “Climbing the steps, working the steps,” why I also disagreed with Andrew Ferguson, another critic of the NARA exhibit.

Especially when events are troubling, it is important to preserve the actions and voices in records. That we strive to do so to me is part of our obligations to our fellow citizens as Americans living in a democratic nation.

Many of us start with history degrees but our career choices are individual. Some professions (records manager, archivist, historian) are dependent on others. Years ago, an information professional who worked in the private sector explained a personal choice to move after a brief career as an archivist to working as a records manager.

That the life cycle encompasses temporary records and those of archival value made sense to me in the explanation. I, too, have worked both on appraisal and records management issues and with permanently valuable records. Where we parted company was in the metaphor, one with two definitions, that the information professional used: “RM is at the beginning of the food chain, archives well….”

Presentations such as the one by archivist-historian Tina Ligon this week and author lectures about history books remind me of the importance of releasing to the public archival records of “enduring value.” That is my favorite phrase for describing the end of the records life cycle. And I often refer to the work that archivists do as transcendent because it centers on the sharing of knowledge.

The archival mission of the National Archives is unique because the records it releases speak for themselves. Acquiring, processing and making access available to the public enables researchers to do a national life review of the United Stats. That review includes listening to the voices of some who died before their time, killed as they strove to create a better world not just for themselves but for others. The voices in records that document the struggle to gain and ensure rights and protections.

Edward Rothstein wrote of “Records of Rights” that

“Magna Carta is this exhibition’s promissory note, in more ways than one; its gallery’s promise is also unfulfilled. What are we left with, as we head up to the Rotunda to see the founding documents? No context or perspective; only grim struggles and partially won liberties. What are we to think of Magna Carta, which no doubt accompanied a fair share of baronial tyranny? And what is a visiting class of students to think, except that the United States has been uniquely hypocritical and surpassingly unjust?

This is a peculiar way for an institution that is a reflection of the government itself, to see the nature of its origins, the character of its achievements, and the promise of its ideas.”

As I wrote in my rebuttal to Rothstein in December 2013, I disagree. Humans are imperfect. No nation ever will come anywhere near attaining perfection. Some do better than others. How we deal with challenges and difficult issues shows who we are.

What Rothstein criticizes as problems are what I find to be the strengths of the exhibit that showcases the Magna Carta and records that chronicle the evolution of our rights in the United States. And in preserving and opening the records behind those struggles, we show in sharing the stories, not just our own, but of our fellow Americans, who we are.

Leave a comment

Posted in archival issues, NARA, U.S. History

Monthly Archives: February 2015

Inside, outside archives

Out there and in the community

To be golden

Eyes on the people

If we had talked to them

Giving face to the faceless

In the archives

Recent Posts

Email Subscription

Why Archives Matter

Recent Comments

Blogroll

Archives

February 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« Jan				Mar »
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28