Marketing Yourself

I recently attended a course entitled "Marketing Yourself" run by Erica Sosna from The Life Project. It was designed to enable library staff to identify their skills and talents and explore different career opportunities in the light of these skills and talents.


Hmm, I thought, I'm looking for ways to make myself stand out in job applications and interviews.  Maybe this course will give me some tips!

So I got the train to London and found room G15 at Birkbeck College (not easy when you're not familiar with Bloomsbury and there are numerous workmen digging holes in the road).  Unsurprisingly, as the event was organised by the M25 consortium of academic libraries, all the other participants were from London.  And what a mixed bunch they were!  Half a dozen from the LSE, who are all leaving at the end of the year due to voluntary severance; a couple from Imperial College and University of Westminster; the rest from West London, University of the Arts and King's College.

So little old me, from Cambridge, out on a limb, wondering what to make of it all.  Will the event be London-centric, due to the participants themselves and the location?  Will they be brash, confident, go-getting librarians?  Will they be quiet, unassuming and sheep-like?  Will the focus be on library jobs in the academic sector, or just jobs of any kind?  Will there be a nice lunch?

Well, the participants seemed nice enough, though on the whole they were a bit on the quiet side.  On reflection, this may be because they didn't know what to make of it all either! 

The course comprised several practical discussions about which skills each participant had, and how the skills could be used in different scenarios.  We discussed how personality types affect these skills and how you use them, taking inspiration from the Jungian archetypes test and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment.

From this discussion, it was discovered that the majority of the people in the room were Idealists closely followed by the Rationalists. These types were predominant in libraries due to Rationalists being good with systems and Idealists being good with people. Some participants were Artisans, those who create, others were Guardians, the managers who like to organise and get stuff done. It turns out that I'm one of the latter (not a great surprise really), with a bit of the Artisan (which explains my creative side). 

Some people claimed an affinity with aspects of all personality types, and couldn't fix on a definite archetype.  Perhaps there was an element of selectivity in their responses.  After all, some of the attributes are less than positive, and we none of us like to admit that an unappealing trait is part of our character.
The purpose of this discussion was to highlight that different personalities are suited to different jobs and working environments, and understanding your type helps you to understand your personal skills.  It also helps you to understand why you react in certain ways to different situations.  It certainly made me have greater awareness of how I am perceived by other people.

Creative Combining helped us to see our skills in a new light, and to think about using these skills outside the world of academic libraries. We had to define different skills we felt we had, then our interests or passions, then decide what the world really needs. The resulting concepts could then be combined to create a brief job description, for example:

Listening + social history + collaboration = Social Historian / Museum Curator / Archivist

Attention to detail + music + compassion = Music Therapist / Composer / Radio Presenter

A discussion about applying for jobs followed, in which it was highlighted that each job you apply for should contain at least 50% of the things you’re really good at, and 80% of the things you really want. We were also encouraged to think of different examples where we have used our skills (not always in a work scenario) that we could use at interview to support our application form or CV. We were also encouraged to think about our own essential criteria when looking for new careers, as it is important to apply for a job you really want to do!

Even though I had recently updated my CV, so theoretically I knew what my skills were, I still found it hard to separate generic skills from library-specific skills.  Erica had said earlier in the session that we had all become institutionalised, and found it difficult to comprehend the differences between Universities and other sectors, both in terms of applying for jobs, the kind of jobs available, and the different working environments in other sectors.  I tend to agree that those of us who have worked in the academic sector for a while become so unfamiliar with the wider world that we only look at jobs with similar employers - I know I do!

The end of the session involved considering career goals, action plans and vision statements as tools for focusing the mind on what you want and when you want it.  Overall it was a useful day, and although I don’t think I learned anything new, it has encouraged me to look at my skills in a different way, and update my CV to better reflect the experiences I have gained both at work and in my studies.  I have now updated my LinkedIn profile to include absolutely everything I am good at, not just my library-related skills.

I have also started considering how I can use my talents in other sectors and business areas.  Do I have to continue working in libraries?  Can I sidestep into IT?  Are there opportunities in the media?  We'll have to wait and see.

Thing 21: Promoting yourself in job applications and at interview

I have found this "Thing" quite useful recently, as I have been applying for new jobs after finally receiving my professional qualification.  It's interesting to take a good hard look at yourself, your strengths, your weaknesses and how you can use these to improve yourself.


Identify your strengths, take a good look at yourself, your tasks at work, your career, your life: what do you like to do?

At work, I do a lot of problem-solving.  Either through helping users to find the information they need, or helping staff track an item or understand a complicated fines issue.  I like to think that I am a quick learner, and retain information, particularly when it's technical in nature.  I used to work with someone whose catchphrase was "don't give me problems, give me solutions".  I receive the problems, and give back the solutions.

I like projects.  And I like being left alone to get on with them.  That way, I know that things have been done to my exacting standards, and that all parts of the project have been completed.

I like to indulge in amateur dramatics outside of work, which involves a fair amount of problem-solving, teamworking and project work.  It's a good outlet for creativity, and when the writing bug comes upon me it means it's time to write a script!  It also gives me a chance to do some teaching and work with children, both of which are challenging, but give you a real buzz when everything goes well.


What do you dislike?

I dislike being bored.  I work quite fast, and am quite efficient, so sometimes I finish things quicker than others expect, and as a result I am left with nothing to do.  When I was a student I actually worked myself out of a temporary job for being too efficient - it appeared there wasn't enough work and they didn't actually need someone in the post.  In actuality, there was plenty of work - it's just that I did it faster than they were expecting and didn't spend a fifth of my working day in the smoking shed like the other secretaries.

I don't like needless bureaucracy - the type that is rampant in middle management in every organisation: where people schedule meetings because they think that unless you have a meeting a decision is not valid; where these meetings go on for three hours because someone thinks they should, not because there is so much to discuss; where you have to wait three months for a decision becuase people are afraid to make them; where there are acres of paperwork when one sheet of bullet points would suffice.

I also dislike most forms of sporting activity, mainly because I am rubbish at them (lack of coordination).  Luckily, the sportiest part of working in a library is getting on and off a kickstool.


Do you remember the last time you felt that feeling of deep satisfaction after creating, building, completing something? What was it about?

I recently completed a serials rationalisation project at my site library.  Basically it was an audit of everything we had, and a drastic reduction in the quantity of print serials held.  Now, it is clear to our users what we hold, the most recent issues are not hidden amongst older volumes, and the collection takes up a third less space on the shelves.  They also appear to be getting more use.  Maybe you can see the wood now the trees have gone.  This was a project that I had sole responsibility for, that I was allowed to just get on with in my own time and in my own way.

It's nice to finally finish something and have people comment on it.  I produce programmes for plays and pantomimes, and it's nice to hear people say how much they like what you've produced, and how professional it looks.

A couple of weeks ago, we had a really good musical rehearsal for this year's village pantomime.  They're not always so satisfying.  Sometimes you feel really frustrated that people aren't picking things up as quickly as you'd like, or you don't have the right people at the rehearsal so you can't teach a particular song.  This particular night, everything was perfect.  If things go well, it validates you as a teacher.  If they don't, there are moments of self-doubt and annoyance.  But you just have to carry on, learn from your experiences, and plan to do things differently next time.

I'm sure once my pantimime costume for Maid Marian is completed I'll feel satisfied about what I've created.  At the moment I have a lot of doubts that it will turn out to look like the image in my head.  But that's the thing about projects, you can't reflect upon them until you've completed them.

I'm glad I've done these things, either as work projects or as personal projects, because completing something, especially if it has been a challenge, is not only a relief, but also a reward for all the hard work you've put in.


What skills do you need to do the things you like?


Communication skills are pretty high up on the list.  When you're working with lots of different types of people, you need to know how to work with them and how to help them.  I think my communciation skills can always be improved.

Time management is another big one.  Sometimes it's difficult to know how long soemthing is going to take, but if you plan all the different parts of the project, and give yourself room to manouevre within your set of deadlines, you can usually complete on time.  Of course, you can't plan for other people, or the unexpected, but you should always have a backup plan.

I need a lot of creative skills for the things I do outside of work.  I enjoy using and updating these skills, and I'm glad that I'm revisiting some of them this year, because I'm really enjoying it.



What next?

I'm attending a course on Marketing yourself and identifying transferable skills.  I'm not always aware of how I can use the skills I have to do other things.  Being able to demonstrate the application of transferable skills will be very useful to me in the search for a professional post.

I'm also hoping to do some voluntary work in a different library to the one I work in.  They need some serials cataloguers.  The experience I could gain will fill an experience gap in my skill set.

Librarians in Fiction - fantasy or reality?

Skimming through the October issue of CILIP Update, I was struck by the article by Andrew Taylor (pp24-25) regarding the presentation of librarians in the media (he doesn't mention The Hollywood Librarian, maybe he's too young).  The gist of his opinion piece is that novelists stand up in public to speak out against library cuts/closures, yet portray librarians in a negative light in their books.

In the literary world, says Taylor, libraries are mystical places, where keepers of knowledge stand guard over a wealth of information inaccessible to the casual reader.  I don't know how widely read Mr Taylor is, but his few examples of librarians in print are hardly representative of the whole literary canon.

The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova (2006) features a vampire librarian.  An unsurprisingly unhelpful character, but not exactly representative of real librarians, as vampires do not exist in the real world.  Making the librarian a vampire is obviously a plot device to add tension and provide danger for our hero.  If you want a positive portrayal of librarians in vampire fiction, I point you in the direction of Rupert Giles from Joss Whedon's TV series Buffy the Vampire Slayer (he unfortunately lost his job as school librarian when he blew up the library at the end of series 3 - however, he did stop the mayor from eating Sunnydale and destroyed hordes of vampires, so it was for the common good).

The Librarian in Terry Pratchett's Discworld series is actually a positive portrayal of a helpful information professional - it shouldn't matter that he is also an orang-utan - he knows where all the books are and actively helps library users.  Again, this is fantasy, not reality. The author's creation has attributes unobtainable in the real world, therefore the representation is perfectly valid in the context of the novel.

Summer by Edith Wharton (1917) - the library is underused and the books are dusty.  Sorry, but quite a lot of people were fighting a war in 1917, so visiting the library may not have been their top priority.  The library represents the protagonist's need for a fulfilling life: it is knowledge and experience personified but unused, another literary device to represent Charity's inner feelings.  Her place of work needn't have been a library, but where else would she meet a visiting architect in 1917?

The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco is set in a 14th century Italian monastery and is quite probably historically accurate.  Medieval libraries were very possessive of the few books they owned (and rightly so, bearing in mind the cost of a book in the 14th century) therefore any librarian would guard his treasures with his life.  Poisoned books aren't that unusual as a form of death in crime fiction.  An episode of CSI:NY involved the New York Library's collection of antiquarian books, one of which was contaminated with radioactive isotopes [Season 5: Episode 2, Page Turner].  May I also point you in the direction of Susanna Gregory's excellent medieval crime series featuring the physician Matthew Bartholomew, in which 14th century Cambridge College librarians play a part.

I admit that I have not read Summer, The Historian or The Name of the Rose, but there isn't enough of a range of genres in these examples to conclusively state that librarians are not positively represented in literature.

Further reading may be necessary.  Perhaps Librarians in Fiction: a critical bibliography by Grant Burns (1998), McFarland & Co. ISBN: 9780786404995, but as it's out of print, perhaps just look at this useful webpage by Laura Cobrinik: Librarians As Characters In Fiction: Biographies, Poetry and The History of Libraries, Including Textbooks For Library Studies.

An excellent play about libraries and librarians is Alan Plater's 1991 comedy-drama I Thought I Heard a Rustling (available from Samuel French) - just as relevant now as it was 20 years ago, and a pretty real representation of the politics of library service closure (it's also rather funny).

My advice to Mr Taylor is to go to his local library and borrow a book that isn't in the historical/fantasy/horror genre and see if any of his choices portray "real" people doing "real" things. Then he will realise that it's not just librarians who are misrepresented in fiction: it's everyone. 

That's why it's called fiction.