College and Research Libraries · The Personality of the Academic Librarian COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIANS tend to be highly intelligent with an outlook on life similar to that of members of other high-level occupations. On the whole, they are self-assured and by no means timid souls. However, they may lack initiative and-with perhaps even more serious consequence-tend to be deficient in supervisory qualities. Lest unwarranted conclusions be drawn from the above statements, it should be further stated that this is a group profile. To describe a group is not to describe each individual in it. This is particularly true of librarians. They form an unusually heterogeneous group in personality make-up. There is no stereotype into which all, or even most, of them fall. These generalizations are based on a personality inventory administered in 1958 to 676 academic librarians in all parts of the United States. The instru- ment used was the Ghiselli "Self De- scription Inventory," a device requiring each subject to choose the adjectives he feels best and least describe him. This relatively simple test has been shown to give a remarkably valid picture of the rna jor tendencies in a group as large as this. 1 Table 1 gives the scores of academic librarians on the personality traits meas- ured, and compares them with the scores made by a representative sample of the general working population. It s~ows, for example, that the average librarian in the survey ranks in the upper quarter of the population in intelligence, in the 1 Edwin E. Ghiselli, "Self Description Inventory" (University of California, 1957), p. 7. See also E. E . Ghiselli, "The Forced-Choice Technique in Self-De- scription," Persa;nnel Psycholvgy , V.II (SumPier ~95,~). 201-08. . . . . . SEPTEMBER 1963 BY PERRY D. MORRISON Dr. Morrison is Librarian of Sacramento State College. upper third in occupational level, and in the lower half in initiative. That the intelligence scores should be high is not surprising. It is virtually impossible for a group to have sur- mounted the educational hurdles re- quired of academic ·librarians without being rich in intellectual ability. There is, however, an ironic twist to this: be- cause intelligence is so abundant among these librarians, other, less ·common qualities determine the likelihood of an individual rising in the hierarchy of the profession. Let the reader make of this what he will, intelligence does not, on the aver- age, distinguish the executive from the ordinary librarian. Both groups are com- posed of persons of superior intellect. Initiative, on the other hand, is rela- tively scarce among academic librarians and it does tend to distinguish the chiefs from the Indians. According to the com- piler of the inventory, Edwin E. Ghiselli, persons with initiative are able to act independently, to develop "novel ap- proaches to old problems," and to as- sume the risks involved.2 In all fairness, it must be said that many library posi- tions do not require a great deal of ini- tiative, but the tempo of change is quickening. What was adequate in the past may not be so in the future. For example, in the future it may not be sufficient for only h~lf · of the major executives in librarianship to possess a better-than-average measure of initiative. Similarly, the · nonexecutives will be 2 Ghiselli, "Self Description Inventory.'_';, P· 3: 365 TABLE 1 MEAN SCORES ON GHISELLI SELF-DESCRIPTION INVENTORY EXPRESSED AS PERCENTILES OF THE ADULT EMPLOYED POPULAIION Trait Major Executives (224) Intelligence 75 Supervisory qualities 54 Initiative . 49 Self Assurance 69 Occupational level 75 faced wi~h the task of putt~ng new pro- cedures Into effect and of dealing with the risks involved in delegating more work to subprofessional people. The self-assured, according to Ghiselli, are those who "attack _ their problems with a substantial· measure of confidence, whereas others hesitate and are irreso- lute."3 They are well adjusted "to prob- l~ms in e:eryday life, especially occupa- tiOnal adJUStment." Academic librarians seem to be rather adequately endowed with. this trait. It is heartening to have a.nin~ication that college and university hbranans are usually 'well-adjusted to their working environment. They are not' usually timid and irresolute, nor chronically dissatisfied with their lot in life. This finding was confirmed by the responses received to an item on the supplementary questionnaire filled out by the respondents. Only 13 per cent expressed any regret at having chosen l~bra~ianship as a career. This propor- tion IS much smaller than that for most other occupational groups. That the scores of the librarians on supervisory qualities should be so low is the most disturbing finding of the su~­ vey. Despite the fact that more often t?a.n. ?ot they ha~e s~pervisory respon- st}?Ihties, academic librarians tend to have a different outlook on life from that q£ highly rated supervisors in other occupations. That the group designated as "minor executives" did not make a I Ibi(l., p. 4. Minor Others All Executives (228) (676) (224) 76 75 76 52 50 52 42 36 41 65 57 64 71 65 70 better showing on this trait is particular- ly discouraging since this group was se- lected on the basis of the number of people supervised. Validation of this finding is contained in the answers to the supplementary questionnaire where only 2 yer cent of the respondents gave supervisiOn or personnel work as a major source of satisfaction in their work. Fur- thermore, among the executives, 20 per cent lound supervision the least attrac- tive aspect of librarianship. The pr~blem of supervisory qualities has a beanng on the recruitment of new librarians. Many of the subjects reported ~hat having worked in a library was an u;nportant factor in their decision to en- ter this profession. If, then, those now sup~rvising student assistants are inept at It or find the task distasteful, the effect will be to discourage able stu- dents from selecting librarianship as a career. All of this does not prove that · aca- demic librarians are poor supervisors. I~ simply mean~ that they frequently la~k a psy~hological bent toward it. By using thetr abundant intelligence, li- brarians can cer~ainly learn to do what does not come naturally. These findings add force to pleas for more formal train- ing in the techniques of supervision and for more careful use of the talents of those who are adept at d,irecting the work of others. For example, Winslow4 suggests . sending "the new assi~tant to a ., Amy Winslow, "Supervision and Morale. " Library Trends, III (July 1954), 48. ' few selected supervisors for initial train- ing .... " At the same time, she wisely points out the need for "avenues of promotion for the staff member whose work merits recognition but who lacks aptitudes necessary for supervision." The occupational level scores on the inventory are much more flattering to academic librarians than those for super- visory qualities. The outlook on life of members of the group is typical of that of other persons on about the same, rather high, occupational level. 5 In gen- eral, the librarians' scores are similar to those of middle managers in other occupations. The following tabulation shows how the median scores of the three groups of librarians compare with those for other occupational categories: Top Management personnel . 44.8 Professional personnel 44.8 AcADEMIC LIBRARIANS (Major Ex- ecutive group) 41.7 Middle Management personnel . 40.9 AcADEMIC LIBRARIANs (Minor Ex- ecutive group) 40.5 AcADEJ\nc LIBRARIANs (Nonexecu- tive group) 38.4 Clerical workers 33.5 Foremen . 33.1 Skilled workers .- 30.1 Semiskilled workers 27 .I Unskilled workers . 24.3 The largest difference among the li- brarians is found between the minor executives and the nonexecutives. Many of the nonexecutive librarians tend to react to the personality test items in ways typical of white-collar workers rather than of professional or managerial per- sonnel. This is not surprising since, by their own testimony on the supplemen- 5 Reiss - estimates the socioeconomic index for li- brarians (all types) as 74. This compares with 8.4 for college presidents and professors, 73 for pubhc school teachers and 70 for professional nurses (NORC Scale). He places librarians in the ninth decile of the population generally.-Albert J. Reiss, Occupations and Social Status (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, c1961), pp. 263 -64. . . SEPTEMBER 196J tary questionnaire, many of these librarians were doing considerable amounts of clerical work at the time of the survey. In the main, however, the academic librarian's view of life re- flects his membership in a highly-edu- cated strata of society. The supplemen- tal data showed that most of the sub- jects came from upper-class backgrounds (sociologically speaking) and are now engaged in an occupation enjoying con- siderable social prestige. A small num- ber of highly articulate respondents dis- cussed the tendency for college and uni- versity librarians to occupy an isolated position in the academic community, but few had complaints about their status in society generally. Results of the inventory go a long way toward finally disposing of the stereotype myth. Although as a group, the subjects show the "central tendencies" discussed above, this does not mean that they all come from the same mold or fit a com- mon pattern. Quite the contrary. Stand- ard deviation coefficients on all but one of the inventory scales show that there is more variety among librarians than among most other occupational groups. This finding is in agreement with those of Bryan and Douglass that heteroge- neity rather than homogeneity is charac- teristic of librarianship!~ There are many factors involved in producing the variety of persons · both needed and, fortunately, found in the academic library profession. Space here permits mentioning only_ a few: Sex: The ladies will · be flattered to learn that, in general, they scored higher on the personality inventory than did the men. Less encouraging is the fact that this tendency is concentrated in the lower ranks. Among the major execu- tives, the _average scores for men and e Alice I. Bryan, The Public Librarian, A Report of the Public Library Survey (New York: Columbia University Press, 1952), p. 43. Robert R. Douglass, "The Personality of the Librarian" (abstract of Ph.D. Dissertation; Graduate Library School, Univer· sity of Chicago, 1957), p. 7. 367 -- ---------------------------------------~--~ women were alike. This may indicate that, in many cases, men with dynamic personality qualities either "go up or out"-i.e .... they either rise in the profes- sion or leave it for some other line of work. Women with vigorous personali- ties, on the other hand, frequently re- main in the lower-salaried positions. Some of these women may not wish to assume responsibility and find the fi- nancial rewards of ordinary library work adequate to the needs of.a woman with- out a family. Others may remain at this level despite favorable personality qualifications because the paths of ad- vancement are simply not .open to women in either the academic or busi- ness worlds. Still others are well quali- fied married women whose husbands' employment determines where they shall live. They must accept whatever library employment is available there. Age: Statistical procedures too com- plex to reproduce here show that per- sonality was a more significant factor in the promotion of older than of younger librarians. This matter warrants fur- ther study to determine whether it is indeed true that, during the post-World- War-n years, a young man with ambi- tion, education, and-especially-will- ingness to move about could become a chief librarian without much account being taken of his personality charac- teristics. Type of library school: A relationship discovered between personality scores and type of library school attended by the librarian is a bit disturbing. At- tendance at a high-prestige library school in a major university tended to out- weigh an unfavorable score on the per- sonality inventory. If this means that superior education has the ability to make effective leaders out of seemingly unpromising material, then it is all to the good. If it means that there has been a, tendency for librarians to be appointed to · high positions O!l tJ.:l~ basis of the prestige of their alma: 'rnaters~ to the ex- elusion of other qualifications, it is a cause for concern. Variety of experience: Mobility-i.e., ability to move to wherever opportunity lies and to acquire varied experience- is crucial to advancement in librarian- ship.7 The number of libraries in which a subject has worked, however, affects, and is affected by, the personality fac- tor. For example, having favorable per- sonality characteristics often compen- sates for a lack of varied experience in those seeking high-level positions. Un- fortunately, the reverse is also true. Tak- en together, an effective personality and a good background of experience in sev- eral libraries is a combination hard to beat for the librarian with a desire to "get ahead" in his profession, in terrris of either salary or position. Conversely, those lacking both personality and ex- perience qualifications are very seldom found in the head librarian's chair of a major university. In summary it may be said that aca- demic librarians are an intellectually talented group whose members are well adjusted in their professional life. While their composite "personality profile" seems reasonably adequate, an ideal profile would show a shorter- "tail" on the clerical end of the occupation-level curve. A better division of labor be- tween clerical and professional staff in libraries awaits a larger supply of li- brarians with the inclination, aptitude, and training required for supervising the work of others. Intellectual ability will most certainly continue to be the one most important asset to the aca- demic librarian of the future, but the complex and rapidly changing library world would benefit greatly by an infu- sion of more librarians with dynamic personality traits. Intelligence can de- vise solutions to P!oblems, but it takes initiative to put them into effect. • • 7 Data from this survey confirms previous research. See John F. Harvey, "Variety of Experience of Chief Librarians," College and Research Libraries, XIX (March 1958), 107-10. 368 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES