Rules for Radicals

I was touched at the thought Jo would try to track down this book. My favorite idea from Rules for Radicals, and one I’ve thought of often over the years, has to do with the change process and how for every two steps forward one should prepare to take one step back. I’ve not only found that to be true, but an idea that “fosters hardiness” as Kouzes and Posner encourage.

That being said, Jo's interest spurred me to track down a quick overview of the book Rules for Radicals. Here’s a link from the Vancouver Community Network:

http://vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook/rules.html

As I read this overview, I thought of the emphasis our leadership thinkers place on ethics, trust and collaboration. Alinsky’s rules are written for those working to change the status quo. As long-established institutions, libraries can unquestionably be seen as part of the status quo. Certainly libraries have had to face some of the tactics outlined by Alinsky:

Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.

How many times has a staff person objected to a new idea using the claim “everyone” on staff is against it? How many times do book challenges come with the implication that many other patrons share the same concern? How much easier have the Internet and social media made it for small numbers to raise a din?

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

I think again of book challenges and the claim, for example, that the library director, or an individual trustee, is a “purveyor of pornography”. I know that one of my previous directors eventually resigned from her job because she became identified personally as the cause of the library’s problems.

I realize Rules for Radicals, like Machiavelli’s The Prince, was written in a specific historical context. However, as I think of the leadership development plan and the commandments Bennis and Goldsmith encourage us to develop, it’s helpful for me to consider specific opposition tactics and strategies I might face as a library leader.

Starting with leadership

Today at long last I listened to Ken's lectures--one on influencing that was prepared for our class and the other the SJSU colloquium on advocacy. There was some overlap; both talks were very effective at stimulating reflection, as well as consistent with Ken's relentless emphasis on research rather than intuition, and planning rather than serendipity. Who would have thought it would be so hard to get people to research and think before they talk?

Considering influence and power is very challenging for me. I like, and have grown accustomed to seeing, that I have an influence on my environment, but find it somewhat harder to accept the implications of that. Seeing different aspects of power and influence named and listed feels uncomfortable; like dissecting something that has worked successfully for me and I don't want to risk losing through over-analysis. My head tells me this dissection is part of self-awareness and good things will come from it. However, I also hear the echo of Ken's "dirty words" label and know that topics like this are part of the so-called MLIS Kool-Aid some community folks warned me about drinking. No one wants to lose their homegrown heroine to the Machiavellian temptations of the big city. Kind of ironic considering that what they want above all is a good public library.

I think fondly of Saul Alinsky's book "Rules for Radicals", where the changes being advocated were unabashedly controversial and difficult. It might be easier to know one's cause was radical, rather than one which suffers the traditional "curse of high public satisfaction." More to risk with the second, or at least there seems to be a longer and more unprecedented distance to fall. On the other hand, it is exciting and energizing to think of library service as radical rather than staid and full of workers who feel victimized. One unique challenge of relationship building in the library world, then, may be to successfully negotiate relationships with those who have a radical view of service as well as those who have a traditional view. Those who are planning for their grandchildren's visit as well as those who want their public library to be an aggressive agent for social change. An excitingly wide range of agendas to connect.