Commitment and Trust in Librarian–Faculty Relationships: A Systematic Review of the Literature

doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2011.11.003

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

Volume 38, Issue 1, January 2012, Pages 13-19

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.11.003 Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective — The goal of this study was to examine the methodologies used to study librarian–faculty relationships and to use the Key Mediating Variable model (KMV) of The Trust and Commitment Theory of Relationship Marketing to assess the quality of the librarian–faculty relationship as it has been portrayed in the literature. Relationship marketing emphasizes customer retention through the presence of positive relationships and is well suited to librarians and the academic community. A focus on communication, shared values and benefits of the relationship has fostered commitment and trust between faculty and librarians, however there is still much to be studied about the relationship.

Introduction

Academic librarians are considerably interested in their relationship with teaching faculty, seeking to develop and strengthen the relationship for collaboration in teaching and research. Librarians see their relationships with faculty as a vehicle for marketing library services and teaching students information literacy skills. In a class taught by the authors at Washington State University Vancouver, Dr. Jane Cote and Dr. Claire Latham, professors in the business department, presented a model of relationship marketing they had used in a research project.¹ In their study, Cote and Latham used the Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing to study the relationship quality between insurance companies and physician billing departments.² Relationship marketing and, specifically, the Commitment-Trust Theory and associated model provide a way for assessing professional relationships of various types.

Section snippets

Relationship Marketing and the Morgan and Hunt Commitment-Trust Theory

Relationship marketing was born out of the globalization of trade in the 1980s and the need for global companies to cooperate in order to succeed in a new type of market. It is based on customer satisfaction and “refers to all marketing activities directed toward establishing, developing and maintaining successful relational exchanges.”³ “Relationship marketing emphasizes customer retention and long term customer relationships;” it does not focus on the product.⁴

Morgan and Hunt posit that

Aims

The authors became curious about how the KMV model might be used to examine the relationship between librarians and faculty. Inspired by the Cote and Latham project, the study presented here sought to answer three questions. First, what methods have been used to assess librarian/faculty relationships? Second, what elements that contribute to trust and commitment are present in the literature about librarian–faculty relationships and finally, what elements that hinder commitment and trust are

Methodology

Knowing that much has been written about the librarian–faculty relationship, the authors decided to turn to the literature for data collection. K. Ann McKibbon's “Systematic Reviews and Librarians” and Light and Pillemer's “Summing Up” were used as guides to conduct a systematic review, illustrated in Fig. 2.⁸ There are two types of review articles: narrative reviews which are broad based informal summaries of the literature on a topic, and systematic reviews which are narrowly focused, use a

Results and Discussion

The results are presented in two sections. The first section addresses this study's research question regarding what methods have been used to assess the librarian–faculty relationship. Data for the first question are from the 304 articles that were analyzed in-depth. The second section addresses the research questions about what contributes to and deters from librarian–faculty relationships. The data to address these questions are from the 13 articles where there was a strong presence of the

Discussion of the Methodology

This study includes two distinct methods. One is the systematic review of a body of literature and the other is the use of a model to analyze data. First, the systematic review allows for a very thorough exploration of the literature on a specific topic which gave the authors a deep look at how the relationship of librarians and faculty has been described over time and across disciplines. It is unlikely that any general literature review would cast as wide a net as one would get with this

Suggestions for Further Studies

It is clear that the relationship with faculty is important to librarians, however librarians who write about the relationship seldom focus on aspects of relationship building. They are far more likely to publish critical opinions of faculty that emerge from frustration. It is unlikely that such publications help to resolve the problems they describe and may weaken the chances of resolution.

According to relationship marketing, taking the focus off the product and putting it on the relationship

Conclusions

The literature demonstrates that the librarian–faculty collaboration is very important to the work of librarians. Collaborations are often indexed as librarian–faculty relationships but little research has actually explored the relationship between them. Relationship marketing emphasizes customer retention through the presence of commitment and trust and is well suited to librarians and the academic community. A focus on communication, shared values and benefits of the relationship would build

Notes and References (36)

Ibid.,...
Jane Cote et al.
Hidden costs of the physician–insurer relationship
Journal of Health Care Finance
(2003)
Robert M. Morgan et al.
The commitment–trust theory of relationship marketing
Journal of Marketing
(1994)
Ibid.,...
Larry X. Besant et al.
Upsize this! Libraries need relationship marketing
Information Outlook
(2000)
Morgan and Hunt, “The commitment and trust theory”,...
Besant and Sharp, “Upsize this”,...
Ibid.,...
K. Ann McKibbon
Systematic reviews and librarians
Library Trends
(2006)
Richard J. Light et al.
Summing up: The science of reviewing research
(1984)
McKibbon, “Systematic Reviews”,...

The databases used to collect data were: Academic Search Complete, Biosis, Business Source Complete, CINAHL, Education...

Irene Doskatsch

Perceptions and perplexities of the faculty–librarian partnership: an Australian perspective

Reference Services Review

(2003)

Lynne Siemens

It's a team if you use ‘reply all’: an exploration of research teams in digital humanities environments

Literary and Linguistic Computing

(2009)

Scherdin Mary Jane

How well do we fit? Libraries and faculty in the academic setting

Portal: Libraries and the Academy

(2002)

Doskatsch, “Perceptions and Perplexities”,...

Julie Still

The role and image of the library and librarians in discipline-specific pedagogical journals

Journal of Academic Librarianship

(1998)

Cheryl Bielema

Faculty and librarian collaborations: a case study and proposal for online learning environments

Research Strategies

(2007)

...

Cited by (42)

Manifestations of deference behavior in teaching-focused academic librarians
2022, Journal of Academic Librarianship
This mixed methods study examined the manifestations of deference behavior in teaching-focused academic librarians in higher education. The study highlights examples of why teaching-focused academic librarians engage in deference behavior particularly when working with disciplinary faculty colleagues in the classroom. Findings indicate that despite being extremely qualified and competent, teaching-focused academic librarians often engage in deference behavior, and yield power to their disciplinary faculty colleagues out of fear of losing their jobs or being regarded as necessary, as well as a strategy to keep their jobs and maintain access to classrooms. Understanding the perspectives of teaching-focused academic librarians is crucial to advancing and sustaining the library profession, in addition to expanding the discourse of how disciplinary faculty can work with their librarian colleagues to dismantle the current structures and systems in place that uphold inequitable practices. Implications for research and practice are provided in order to bring awareness to the underlying reasons for deference behavior in teaching-focused academic librarians, and garner support for teaching-focused academic librarians who continue to navigate rocky terrain with their faculty colleagues.
It's Not Personal, It's Professional: Causes of Academic Librarian Deference Behavior
2022, Journal of Academic Librarianship
This mixed-methods study examined the experiences of academic librarians working in higher education, and explored how academic librarians act in response to disciplinary faculty colleagues. The study uncovers the historical context of the library profession, outlining how stereotypes of academic librarians began and how they continue to be destructive across the academy, especially to those in this profession. Even though academic librarians bring critical skillsets and vast experience to academe, findings indicate that academic librarians exhibit deference behavior when working with disciplinary faculty. This is because of existing perceptions they face that indicate they are solely in positions to support disciplinary faculty, and that disciplinary faculty are more esteemed because of credentials (i.e. doctorate), and academic rank and status. Implications for research and practice are outlined to further explore how academic institutions, and library education more broadly can help to dismantle the flawed and inherently problematic systems that contribute to deference behavior in academic librarians.
Faculty perceptions of librarians and library services: Exploring the impact of librarian faculty status and beyond
2020, Journal of Academic Librarianship
Citation Excerpt :
Findings are in line with those of Dilmore (1996, pp. 282–283) and Oberg et al. (1989, pp. 218–219), who found that frequent faculty-librarian contact and interpersonal communication positively affected attitudes toward the library and the services it offers. Our data also coincide with a more recent extensive review of the literature on faculty-librarian relations performed by Phelps and Campbell (2012), in which they found that mutual perceived benefits, shared values, and strong communication preceded and thus set the stage for trust and commitment, leading finally to faculty-librarian cooperation/collaboration. Feelings about the importance of librarians' campus-wide roles in the academy improved perceptibly over data reported in previous studies.
ACRL recommends that librarians with faculty status have the same privileges and responsibilities as other faculty on campus. A recent study revealed librarians feel that being on an equal footing with other faculty improves the relationship. It is not clear whether disciplinary faculty feel the same way. This paper presents a study investigating faculty perceptions of librarians in two types of institutions: those granting and not granting librarians faculty status. The study found no noticeable differences in perceptions of librarians and library services. However, the authors identified variables other than librarian-faculty-status as important in affecting the relationship between librarians and teaching faculty. These factors can help better understand faculty needs. Effective strategies can be established to meet those needs.
Towards effective collaboration between academics and library staff: A comparative Australian/Vietnamese study
2020, Library and Information Science Research
Citation Excerpt :
Academics often have insufficient understanding of the role librarians can play in academic partnerships and are therefore unreceptive to working with them (Shen, 2012; Yamaguchi & Richardson, 2017). However, it is difficult to be certain of academic views since perspectives of librarians about academics are reported, but not vice versa (Phelps & Campbell, 2012). Where relationships are not close, there can be disconnections between library service provision and faculty needs (Research & Learning, 2015), sometimes exacerbated by the physical and temporal separation between library and faculty (Christiansen et al., 2004).
From the literature it is clear that collaboration between academics and library staff brings benefits. Exactly what enables and constrains such collaboration remains unclear. Using the lens of Giddens' Structuration Theory, constraining and enabling factors during collaboration between library staff and academics in universities in two contrasting countries, Australia and Vietnam, was explored. The analysis of the qualitative data, collected within an interpretivist framework, indicates that structural factors were dominant, for example, those related to governance and resources. Other times the role of agency was evident, for example, in trust building and personal relationships. Efforts on the part of library staff in the Vietnamese university, particularly, overcame structural barriers. The contrast between the universities of the two countries enhanced the clarity of the findings. A model, highlighting factors pertinent to effective collaboration is included.
Factors influencing the faculty-librarian collaboration at the Vietnamese universities
2020, Journal of Academic Librarianship
This article aims to enrich understandings of factors having effects on the faculty-librarian collaboration at Vietnamese universities. A quantitative methodology was used. Four universities in Vietnam were chosen to survey. The questionnaires were sent to three key participants, including (1) administrators (dean/vice dean of faculty, director/deputy director of library), (2) the faculty who is teaching and research in a university, (3) librarian is a library staff working at an academic library. The descriptive statistics and factor loading value were used to analyze the surveyed data. Based on the results of the descriptive statistical data, it was noted that individual dimensions were the highest factor having impacts on the collaboration, followed by Time and space, Roles of faculty and librarian, and resources, Organizational structure, Power, Work culture/environment, Information and communication technology, Collaborative networks, Mission/vision, educational philosophy, and strategic plan, Learning about the collaboration, Incentives policy, Organization's values, and External pressures. On the other hand, there are 11 sub-factors will be removed in the research model because the factor loading value is less than 0.4. This study helps the university's leaders, administrators, faculty members, and librarians find ways to boost factors in supporting the collaboration.
Requesting LibrarianLed Information Literacy Support: Instructor Approaches, Experiences, and Attitudes
2023, Portal

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text