Library Leadership Development Programs (LLDP) Description 56 

derivations. The original impetus for these programs in 1987-88 arose from ALA, under the presidency of Margaret Chisholm, who was aided by Brooke Sheldon in her pursuit of library specific leadership development for professionals (Bonnici, 2001a; Summers & Summers, 1991). While now defunct, the Snowbird Library Leadership Institute, created largely by Shannon and Schreiber in response to the criteria and aspirations of the ALA leaders, was the first of these programs (Schreiber & Shannon, 2001). Much of the content in newer programs has been modelled after that in Snowbird. It was relevant to compare its content and attributes to NELI so that it was evident that NELI was representative of the majority of the formal library leadership development interventions directed at emerging leaders.

Snowbird was based on the work of Bennis from which six critical leadership traits - self- awareness, embracing change, customer focus, collaborative spirit, bias for courageous action and stands to take in the future - were identified (Schreiber & Shannon, 2001). Program components were derived to address the skill areas. Like NELI it was held at a remote location over a five-day period and made use of mentors. Program content was very similar. Snowbird incorporated a personality type test and devoted program time to sections on knowing oneself. Other content included: visioning, change management, risk,

collaboration and working in teams. Like NELI had done in past, Snowbird used daily feedback cards and contained a participant section on giving feedback. Snowbird allocated a significant amount of time to a section on power, influence and responsibility which

addressed advocacy and ethics. As one might have expected with any leadership

development program, NELI has had similar components, albeit not identical in construct. Snowbird had mentor meetings, a celebration dinner and a section called “My Practice My Passion.” These have correlated closely with elements in NELI. The only significant

difference, albeit an important one, was that Snowbird incorporated a great deal of reflective time while NELI traditionally simulated real world experience through stress and time constraints. However, in response to research findings, NELI has incorporated more reflective time for participants (E. B. Ingles, personal communication, January 26, 2011). Reflection is important both to self-awareness and behavioural change (Fleishman, 2005; Lee, 2005).

Synergy has been an annual residential library leadership program administered by the Illinois State Library. Sheehy (2004) identified the program as having been based on the model developed by Shannon and Schreiber for Snowbird. The most significant difference

between Synergy and NELI has been that the participants attended the program in three segments, each for several days, several months apart over the period of a year. Participants have also maintained an enduring relationship with the mentors and have been given a chance to apply some of the leadership skills and knowledge they have acquired in the workplace through the assignment of special projects and tasks (Sheehy, 2004).

The New Jersey Academy of Library Leadership as described by Varlejs (2007)

resembled many of the other programs as it has been modelled on Snowbird. According to Varlejs, it has limited participation to 25 participants who have been selected based on criteria. The content has included sections on leadership, leadership self-assessment, power and influence, presentation skills, risk taking, leading change, conversations with library leaders, my leadership story, creating a culture of commitment, personal planning, ethics, working in teams etc. While defined as a program for early to mid-career librarians it appears that the definition has been applied liberally (Varlejs, 2007).

Aurora is another program that has been developed by Shannon and Schreiber. Like other similar programs, it has been based on a similar philosophy and formulaic approach to leadership development programming. Aurora, based in Australia, has run annually, and has been a six day program which has used a nomination process, mentors and which was incorporated experiential learning (Barney, 2003; Black, 2003).

While there have been other library leadership development programs, many have adopted a similar pedagogy and have followed the same or a similar formulaic approach. However, there have also been programs that have been non-residential, have targeted other demographics or special populations or that have had different philosophical underpinnings. Williamson (2009) described the new in house program developed at the University of

Saskatchewan libraries in response to an extensive needs assessment, employee feedback and a review of best practices, as incorporating reflection, peer coaching and mentoring, as well as workplace assignments and leadership action challenges. Many of these components are similar to those in the "Bennis" based programs. However, there are a couple of

significant differences. First, the target audience has not been restricted to emerging leaders, but rather open to library staff. Second, the program has been offered in six, two day

modules over the course of one year, thereby accommodating practice of leadership skills in the intervening months supplemented by discussion, mentoring and peer support

(Williamson, 2009).

The Horizon Executive Leadership Program, a four month program for information managers in Australia and New Zealand, which incorporated two residential workshops, industry leaders as mentors, extensive tele-coaching, and communities of practice graduated its first cohort of senior library leaders in 2009 (Sayers & Talvé, 2009). While mentoring, coaching, peer support and program content related to risk taking, knowing oneself, conflict, communication, and reflection were typical in transformational leadership or the "Bennis" based programs, the focus on senior leadership differentiated this program from others. Horizon included participants who, as senior leaders, one would have presumed possessed self-confidence in their leadership abilities. However, the program identified an "increase in self-confidence of participants" as an objective (Sayers & Talvé, 2009, p. 514). Horizon was one of the first programs to include the development of self-confidence in the formally stated program objectives.

The Future Leaders Program (FLP) which was crafted in 2006 for experienced college and university information and IT professionals in the U.K., has incorporated three

residential modules focusing on the individual, the team and the organization respectively (Fallon, Maxwell, McCaffrey, & McMahon, 2011). The modules appear to be aligned with the three levels of leadership development defined by Dalakoura (2010) and Day and Harrison (2007). Not unlike the program at the University of Saskatchewan or the Horizon program, FLP has adopted a modular delivery structure. Fallon et al. (2011) have also described the use of projects, reflection and the support through peers in coaching pairs or triads which is common to the other programs. While the program has targeted a more experienced professional than have the emerging leader based programs, much of the content appears to be very similar. FLP has included content on vision formulation, strategic

thinking, active listening, conflict, change, knowing oneself, group work and 360 degree feedback (Fallon et al., 2011).

Of the formal, residential, leadership development programs for emerging or early leaders, the Northern Exposure to Leadership Institute has had the same or similar characteristics as other programs and thus, was a reasonable basis for investigation. The results of the investigation are likely to be useful to the library profession as so many of the programs are similar in nature.

2.9. Library Leadership Development Programs (LDP) - Evaluation and Research