The role of influence in city and public library partnerships: an exploratory study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this article is to discuss whether interpersonal influence impacts the success of information technology support jointly managed by public libraries and their corresponding city departments. By exploring various management models of the information technology departments serving Canada's urban public libraries, the role of interpersonal influence in these partnerships is described. Design/methodology/approach – A two-part survey was administered to all Canadian urban libraries to explore which management models exist and to determine current issues. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with exemplary sites. The survey data were used to rank dependence levels of public libraries on their corresponding cities. Using Cialdini's framework of influence, a thematic analysis was conducted on the interview data to note the presence or absence of each principle. Findings – Most Canadian urban public libraries rely on their corresponding cities for a small number of IT-related services; 25 percent have somewhat or highly integrated departmental partnerships. Interpersonal influence, particularly the principles of “authority” and “liking” are important factors in these partnerships. Research limitations/implications – This study is limited to Canadian urban public libraries and explores a single service. It builds on previous studies exploring the role of influence and public libraries, and indicates the utility of further research of city and public library partnerships. Practical implications – The findings may help inform the development of Library Service Level Agreements and other shared policy documents. Originality/value – This is the first study to explore shared management models and the role of influence at the municipal level in Canadian public libraries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it