MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1559271439 · doi:10.18438/b8688d

Leadership is Central to the Organizational Success of Libraries

2007· article· en· W1559271439 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
P. Edward Haley

Notice bibliographique

RevueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Administration
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIrishFace (sociological concept)Grounded theorySociologyLibrary classificationLibrary sciencePublic relationsQualitative researchPolitical scienceSocial scienceComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A review of:
 
 Mullins, John, and Margaret Linehan. “The Central Role of Leaders in Public Libraries.” Library Management 26.6/7 (2005): 386-96.
 
 Abstract
 
 Objective – To provide an understanding of the concept of leadership as perceived and practised by a group of international public library leaders, thereby contributing to the existing body of literature on this topic.
 
 Design – Qualitative study employing in-depth, face-to-face interviews with 3 subjects and 27 e-mail interviews based on 30 structured questions formulated from a review of the literature.
 
 Setting – Nottingham and Rotherham, two cities in th Public libraries in Ireland, Britain, and the east coast of the United States during 2003/04.
 
 Subjects – Thirty senior public library leaders.
 
 Methods – Thirty top level library leaders, 50% of whom came from outside Ireland, were selected based on the following rationale concerning their institutions: have a history of providing publicly funded public libraries; are under-researched; and, accessibility for the authors. Irish librarians were chosen based on their national profile, geographic convenience to the researchers, and availability/cooperation. Only library leaders or deputy leaders were considered. Interviews for 27 candidates where scheduled via e-mail and 3 were arranged through face-to-face meetings. Participants were asked 30 structured questions drawn from the current literature on leadership. Responses were recorded electronically and later transcribed for analysis via a grounded theory approach that categorized the data. This method of analysis endeavours to provide theory based on research observations that begin from qualitative data and then go through a process of sifting and categorization, which leads to a hypothesis.
 
 Main results – Nine broad categories emerged from the "grounded theory analysis." The paper deals with only 1 - the central role of the library leader. In response to queries by the authors, 67% (20) agreed that leadership took precedence over all other factors as a determinant for organizational success. Ten (33%) disagreed and were evenly split as to their reasons. Five said it was an important factor, and five felt leadership did not take precedence over other drivers of success. The study reveals that leaders do have an impact in determining organizational culture, with 63% saying the leader determines the culture, and 37% stating the leader only contributes to the culture of an organization. National cultural differences affect this point of view, for example 73% of the Irish public librarians, 60% of the British public librarians, and 40% of the American public librarians stated that it is the leader rather than the staff who determine organizational culture. Another core finding reveals that not all CEO's are leaders and not all librarians are leadership material, which points to the need for more classic leadership training. 
 
 Conclusion – Based on the study's findings, the authors hypothesize that leadership is a central component in the strategic and operational practices and success of public librarianship. Transformational, rather than "leader centric" methods of leadership encourage growth of organizational change and success.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,956
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,933

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,254
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,042
Tête enseignante GPT0,297
Écart entre enseignants0,255 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeMême sujetLibrary Science and AdministrationTravaux en français237 207