Professional Career Building in the Archival Field: Studying the Archives Leadership Institute
This article explores the ongoing and long-term impacts of programs that support new modes of professional growth, particularly cohort-based programs that focus on the goals of community and network building, through a case study of the Archives Leadership Institute (ALI). This study seeks to understand how and why programs such as ALI assist and support archivists with their professional careers and wonders about the ways in which the profession benefits more broadly from programs like this. Ultimately, this article finds that programs such as ALI often benefit the professional careers of individual archivists, but that the broader impact for the field merits additional consideration and thought. Finally, this article draws together patterns, feedback, challenges, and suggestions for thinking about and developing future initiatives that support the growth of the archival field.ABSTRACT
For the archival profession to advance, grow, and diversify, archivists must have access to professional resources, opportunities, and support.1 Over the past fifteen years, several initiatives have emerged to meet those needs by developing and supporting communities and professional networks as a means for building capacity in archival and related fields. In the United States, these efforts include the SAA Mosaic Scholarships and AERI Emerging Archival Scholars Program (providing funding and network building for archivists from groups underrepresented in the field), the National Digital Stewardship Residency (providing funding and cohort building for digital stewardship), the Archival Education and Research Institute (providing funding and network building for archival educators and scholars), and the Archives Leadership Institute (providing funding for midcareer professional archival leadership training and networking).
This article explores the ongoing and long-term impacts of programs that support new modes of professional growth, particularly cohort-based programs that focus on the goals of community and network building, through a case study of the Archives Leadership Institute (ALI). This study seeks to understand how and why programs such as ALI assist and support archivists with their professional careers and considers the ways in which the profession benefits more broadly from this work. What aspects of such programs do participants find most valuable? How do these programs affect the archival field? Do these programs contribute to a field that is reflective, diverse, and growing in different ways, and if so, how? Is there a tension between career advancement for individual archivists and capacity building for the archival profession? To what extent do these programs build capacity in the archival field? How equitably is that capacity building disseminated across the profession?
Participation in ALI has become an important signifier and professional milestone for US-based archivists who seek to move upward in their careers. ALI is an intensive residential leadership training that takes place over one summer week per year. Supported by the National Publications and Historical Records Commission (NHPRC) and hosted by several different colleges and universities, ALI cohorts stay together in provided housing and have an intensely shared group experience to promote bonding and foster connections. In 2015, ALI won the Society of American Archivists Distinguished Service Award, which recognizes exemplary contributions to the archival profession.2 From 2008 through 2018, more than 270 participants attended the intensive leadership institute. Because of its growing stature and influence in the field since 2008, ALI is an effective case study for understanding and exploring the nature of formal and informal professional development in the archival field.
This study explores 1) the outcomes that applicants to the institute hoped to gain from the experience of applying and attending ALI; 2) what cohort members have taken away from their experiences since their initial participation at ALI; 3) some of the impacts of ALI on applicants, ALI personnel, and the field more broadly. Additionally, this study asks: what are some of the needs across the profession that applicants identified and that are not being met in other ways?
Through answering the above questions about ALI, this study explores its core questions of 1) what role can programs such as ALI play in fostering professional development capacity more broadly, and 2) what is the relationship between advancing individual careers and building professional capacity? The goal of this study, however, was not to assess the performance or quality of ALI. The intent was to focus on understanding professional needs, collecting data, and revealing challenges and opportunities for the archival field.
This article first provides a brief review of significant professional development initiatives over the past few decades to situate ALI in the evolving discussion of professionalism and the mission of the archival field. The article then describes the methods used for conducting this study of ALI and how data from this study were extrapolated to yield insights on capacity building in the archival profession more generally. This discussion of methods includes an exploration of why ALI is an effective case study for this exploration. This is followed by a review of the study's findings and its implications, and it concludes with a brief exploration of further research opportunities that could emerge from this study.
Literature Review
Discussion of professional community and arguments about direction, development, and strengths in the archival field are not new, but they continue to evolve. More than thirty years ago, in the mid-1980s, this conversation centered on the challenges facing the profession, particularly in articulating a societal mission and gathering the resources necessary to address and accomplish that mission. For example, archival scholar Richard Cox advocated for strengthening the profession by articulating and evaluating five attributes relevant to (then current) discussions about the archives profession, including debates about whether this group constitutes a profession: specialized knowledge; community sanction; professional cohesion or organization; professional culture; and institutionalized altruism.3 The (then contemporary) discussion and turmoil about how and where professionals are educated is reflected in Gerald Ham's 1985 article, “Planning for the Archival Profession.”4 In 1990, the president of the Society of American Archivists, John Fleckner, delivered his address as a series of three letters to an intern. Relevant to this discussion about professional knowledge sharing, Fleckner describes in his second letter what he calls an “extended apprenticeship,” where he became an archivist who was mentored by experienced colleagues. However, in the third letter, Fleckner makes the case that by joining a professional community, he had tied self-interest to the well-being of a larger society. Going further, he makes the claim that by doing so, our profession moves beyond that of a “self-interested clique” to a group that makes a legitimate claim on behalf of the greater public interest and to a shared commitment to the archival mission.5 Drawing out how archival knowledge and practice is shared and supported by professional networks continues to be a growing area of discussion and development today. However, as Cox suggests in a more recent essay that revisits professionalism, the discipline may be shifting to new tenets, such as sustaining documentary heritage and sharing expertise; archival acknowledgment and empowerment of inclusive, cooperative ownership and rights; and embracing varied forms of records that are more meaningful for religious, cultural, symbolic, and evidential reasons.6 As we ponder how archival practice is changing, considering how we transmit, build, and share professional knowledge requires examination as well.
Social infrastructure and networks are the backbone of societal connection, and they reflect the needs and imperfections of people and decisions made over time. Scholarship about networks and network building in the American archival setting can be divided into three groups: discussions about networked infrastructure, such as networks for the purposes of collective description and retrieval; the development and growing pains of larger institutional and regional archival networks;7 and the construction of professional networks and connections, which has been less explicitly examined in the formal archival literature, but is present as a phenomenon in the profession. This review will focus on the third area, while also noting that these three groups are interrelated. Existing networks for training and education are pathways along which these opportunities are developed, shaped, offered, and understood.
Continuing education and ongoing training opportunities in the archival field have been areas of focused interest and development for decades. Generally, these continuing education activities last only a few hours or days; are developed and offered by either graduate institutions or regional, state, or national organizations; and often are sponsored (or at least partly subsidized) by employers and larger institutions. At the national level, the Society of American Archivists, the Council on State Archivists, NAGARA, and ARMA all offer ongoing continuing education workshops across areas of interest, including digital stewardship, advocacy, records management, oral history, appraisal, and preservation topics. As part of their annual offerings, most of the regional and state organizations for archivists, such as MARAC, MAC, NEA, Society of Ohio Archivists, Society of California Archivists, Society of Southwest Archivists, and others, all offer continuing education workshops of various types. Over the past decade, these have included training related to digital archives, outreach, preservation, advocacy, and more.
The need for ongoing training in a changing information landscape, especially (but not only) with regard to digital records and technological advances, is unsurprising. For many, these continuing education workshops, trainings, and certificates represent the only semiformal or formal engagement that practicing archival workers receive for developing new skills and ideas and engaging in conversations in the field after they complete their graduate education and/or enter the profession. However, the workshops sometimes have alternate, or additional outcomes beyond the delivery of the educational content. As found in the results of a study by archival educators Wendy Duff and Amy Marshall of a 2002 digital preservation institute, while participants were dissatisfied with a perceived lack of practical information, they left the training with increased satisfaction about peer networking, as well as awareness about the significance of digital preservation and more confidence about taking action within their institutions.8 The results from a 2006 study of ERPANET digital preservation workshops by Duff and her colleagues also highlights the explicit benefits of participant exchanges and face-to-face networking as key to the overall success of the workshops and events.9 In her 2011 dissertation, archival scholar Kimberly Anderson affirms social networking as a key aspect of university archivists' learning about appraisal techniques, noting that all participants were engaged within a network of practice, though their networks may be localized or clustered.10 Personal career networks are not a new phenomenon in the archival field,11 and the diffusion of ideas may follow some of the existing pathways of infrastructures and networks.
While general management and leadership training is widely available from many organizations, the organizers of ALI identified a need for specific tools and skills related to archives leadership and management. Recognized leadership development programs for librarians and those in academic leadership, such as the Harvard Leadership Institute for Academic Librarians,12 the Leading Change Institute (previously Frye Leadership Institute),13 and ACRL Immersion14 are examples of different options that offer15 a leadership, management, and time-based cohort experience explicitly meant to develop professional networks as well as offer training and education.
The express intent for concerted professional network building in the archival profession and related fields has been recognized as an important step in professional career development. This need has been formalized in many past and current projects and institutes, including the Archival Education Research Institute, Emerging Archival Scholar Program, National Digital Stewardship Residency.16 Other professional groups also recognize this need, even when their programs are not specifically built for networking, such as the Rare Book School.17 These are just a few examples of many nationally funded programs organized in recent years or decades with a goal of professional network or cohort building, as well as accomplishment of other project aims.
In this context, the first ALI session was held in 2008 with a grant from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC). The University of Wisconsin–Madison was initially awarded the two-year grant to host the 2008 and 2009 sessions, and then a second grant to continue ALI at Wisconsin for a total of five years (2008–2012). From 2013 to 2015, the next funded phase of ALI was held at Luther College and organized by a team of ALI alumni and supporters. Between 2016 and 2018, NHPRC continued to fund ALI, hosted at Berea College. While this study only examines the period between 2008 and 2018, NHPRC has continued funding for the next phase of ALI (2019–2021), which is currently hosted by Purdue University.18
Methods
This section discusses the reasons for selecting ALI as the subject of this case study and reviews the methods for gathering and creating data through surveys and interviews, as well as coding and analyzing the data. The process of this study was organized around four types of work: case study selection, participant recruitment and selection, data collection and preparation, and analysis.
Case Study Selection
Listing one's participation in an ALI cohort can serve as a shorthand professional badge of achievement that has become well known within the US archives community. This made ALI a useful case study to better understand the professional needs and experiences of practicing archivists in the United States, particularly archivists at the midcareer professional stage (broadly defined), from whom ALI seems to have attracted the most participation.
Midcareer archivists are defined for this study as those who have been in the field for at least five years, and who often hold management or leadership positions. Either starting to, or already having the experience of program building in their organization or institution, archival professionals at the midcareer stage are likely to be taking on increasingly larger roles and responsibilities related to a range of management, outreach, and development tasks. Often, their work can directly contribute to building opportunities and strengthening existing programs and relationships within and outside of their employment. Sensibly, as professionals within an information and knowledge field, many midcareer archivists seek outside help and opportunities for their professional development. Programs such as ALI offer a structured way beyond short workshops to locate, learn about, and try new knowledge and skills.
The need and desire for professional development in the archival field at the midcareer level has been discussed in the literature and in the field, which informed the development of ALI. This connects with discussion about opportunities and with the development and growth of professional trainings and certifications. However, due to the tight job market, archivists across the spectrum of professional experiences may also be (and are) seeking additional opportunities for training, skills, and network building.
Data Sources
This study used one initial set of data sources (to provide context and inform analysis) and two main types of data:
First, as context: existing information created by or for ALI leadership (such as interim and final reports to funding agencies, calls for participation, and discussions about ALI in newsletters and forums from 2008 to 2017). An additional report, “Archives Leadership Institute Outcomes Assessment Report,” prepared by Rob Smith for ALI in 2017, was received after this study was already underway.19 However, the report was helpful for thinking about the learning outcomes identified by the ALI steering committee, director, and author of the report. Data for this report were gathered using an online Qualtrics survey that asked program alumni to rate and discuss various components of the leadership institute.
Second, survey data from ALI participants (collected in 2018 for this study using a brief Qualtrics survey)
Third, semistructured interviews of ALI participants, instructors/faculty, and nonparticipants (collected in 2018–2019 for this study)
Participant Recruitment and Selection
Cohort information was drawn from the public-facing ALI website, and a concerted effort was made to contact every program participant from the years 2008 through 2018. I contacted ALI alumni from each of the annual institutes via email with an invitation to complete a brief survey about their ALI experience. Two hundred seventy alumni were contacted directly by email (several people were deceased or otherwise not found); 80 surveys were completed by respondents, for a response rate of 29.6%. Fifteen surveys were initiated but not fully completed, and those results have not been included. By following up with alumni from each program year, the interviews were intended to draw out patterns within and across cohorts. The study goal was to complete interviews with 3 to 5 ALI participants from each of the 10 program years, or 30 to 50 alumni, as evenly distributed across location and year as possible. After completing a survey and consenting to be interviewed, study participants took part in a short, semistructured interview. A total of 53 ALI alumni were interviewed for this study in 2018–2019.
Program faculty were invited to participate in a set of semistructured interviews about how and why the curriculum has evolved over the course of the institute. As with the cohort information, program faculty and steering committee members were drawn from the ALI website and invited by email to complete a brief survey and interview. Interview participants were chosen from the pool of completed surveys. A total of four ALI faculty and steering committee members were interviewed for this study. (Some of these were ALI alumni who joined the faculty or steering committee for later institutes.)
As part of this project, I also surveyed and interviewed several archivists at the midcareer stage who did not attend ALI, to learn 1) what they knew about ALI and if they had applied; 2) reasons for not attending ALI or a similar program; 3) if they had previously applied, what they were hoping to gather from the experience, and 4) how/where they are seeking that out through other venues, programs, and learning experiences. These archivists were recruited via snowball sampling. A total of two midcareer archivists who did not attend ALI were interviewed for this study.
Interviews and Transcription
Semistructured participant interviews were completed between December 2018 and August 2019. Appendix B provides a list of the interview questions. Interviews were between 15 and 60 minutes long and took place via audio conference, using the Zoom software for recording purposes. Interviews were recorded (audio only) with explicit informed consent at the start of each call, and, in some cases, the recording was stopped by request of the study participants. Recordings were created for the purposes of transcription and analysis. Transcripts of each recording were created by a graduate research assistant and personally identifying information (PII) of study participants was removed before data were entered into the analysis software.
Data Entry and Analysis
All interview transcripts were entered in the analysis software (NVivo). Language used within each response was coded according to themes related to the interview questions, as well as themes that emerged during the coding and initial analysis process. When thematic patterns started to become evident, a secondary process of creating memos and examining additional patterns was important for understanding and analysis. The same coding, memo, and analysis process was applied to data collected from survey participants.
Data Management and Privacy
When designing this study, one concern was that participants might be reticent about sharing their opinions and experiences during interviews. Being mindful of our relatively small field, this was a key reason why I decided to use data collected in surveys and via one-on-one interviews and not use focus groups as a method. To minimize potential harms or risks to participants, I have aggregated and de-identified data and will not make individual interview recordings or transcripts publicly available. A Human Subjects proposal was approved via the [institution blinded for review] Institutional Review Board (IRB) process in July 2018.
Positionality
Neither the main researcher nor the graduate student researcher who assisted with this project has attended or applied for ALI. While it is possible that we may have missed some nuance or information by only accessing records, information, and reflections after the events (and in some cases, up to a decade after the participant initially attended ALI), we also hope that bringing the lens of interested outside observers is useful for drawing out themes, ideas, and suggestions that may not have emerged in earlier examinations that were completed by personnel closely associated with ALI.
Limitations
This study relies on the experiences and reflections of individual ALI participants, which may not fully reflect the experiences or feelings of archivists across the profession. Remembered experiences may also change over time. This case study examines data created/contributed by a subset of the attendees, providing a snapshot of experiences and outcomes. I did interview several people who did not attend ALI, but most of the data and patterns discussed here reflect ALI participants and their experiences, as well as the development of the institute over time and location. Only a selected subset of data collected for the study has been used for this article. Future studies could examine the experiences of non-ALI attendees in more detail, as well as the infrastructures and professional development curricula and impacts of other, similar programs.
Findings
This section is oriented around the results of the semistructured interviews and the 2018 survey completed by ALI participants as the central data created for this study. First, the short entry survey is described. Then, the semistructured interview questions and responses are outlined. For organizational purposes, each of the interview questions was assigned a thematic role, and those are also briefly described here as well as revisited in the discussion section.
The 2018 Survey
The intent of the short 2018 survey created for this study was to gather basic data about ALI participant reflections and to generate a pool of potential interviewees for the longer, semistructured interviews, where most data would be gathered. Beyond basic information about years of attendance and willingness to be interviewed, the final survey question asked: “What was the most helpful thing that you gained from your ALI experience?” Participant free text responses were first analyzed for content and theme, then categorized by area/cluster of thematic response (shown in Table 2).
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
The responses were broadly clustered around these areas: affective (empowerment, affirmation, confidence), role in the archival profession (feeling more confident at work, new opportunities, sense of connection), cohort membership (bonding, friendship, shared experience, advice), and curriculum (management strategies, problem solving, specific skills, project completion). Responses related to connection, confidence, and empowerment were most often described by participants. This foreshadowed some of the results of the interviews.
Semistructured Interviews
The semistructured interviews included questions about participant background, definition of leadership, career impact, growth, support networks, engagement, takeaways, and impact on the field. Each interview was organized to include the same basic set of questions; additional questions followed the contours of the conversation.
The following section provides information about the questions and responses gathered from participants, covering the intent of the question and reporting on the data. Note that for this set of data, mentions were read and coded thematically. Themes emerged from analyzing the interview transcripts and are aggregated here unless otherwise specified. Some participants mentioned more than one outcome or theme, and other participants may have omitted a direct answer to the question. For this study, I aimed to capture the sentiment of the participant as closely as possible, and, due to the method of semistructured interviews and the nature of conversations, sometimes that is a little messy. Therefore, the number of mentions may differ from the number of participants.
Why did you choose to apply for ALI?
Given this researcher's understanding of ALI as an experience developed for midcareer archivists, this question was intended to understand the motivations of ALI applicants. It became clear during the interviews that while many were self-classified as midcareer, archivists across a range of career stages/levels participated in the institute and felt that they benefited from their ALI experiences. Responses to this question ranged from career development, wanting a new challenge, wanting to expand their professional network, wanting a new job, being curious about the experiences of their colleagues, wanting to level up.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
What did you expect to get out of participating in ALI?
This question was also intended to understand the motivations of ALI applicants in choosing to apply and attend the weeklong institute. Because it was asked after their ALI attendance, and in some cases almost ten years later, some respondents understandably did not precisely recall their expectations. Surprisingly, many respondents reported that they did not really know what to expect when they chose to attend. Other responses ranged from developing a new network, time away from other obligations to focus on career, learning new skills, or meeting other midcareer and senior-level archivists.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
At the end of your ALI week, what do you think some of your takeaways were?
Pairing this question with the previous one (what did you expect/what really happened) was an effort to understand how the ALI experience worked for different attendees, in service of the expressed goals of the institute and what attendees expected before attending.
Many respondents combined their answers to questions 3 and 4.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
Now that it has been some time since you attended ALI, can you reflect on whether that has changed or whether you have learned additional lessons?
Following from the previous question, this was meant to understand whether attendees felt that they were able to satisfactorily build on their experiences and outcomes over time. At the time of the interviews, it had been between one and nine years since attendees' initial week at ALI; often they spoke of attending reunion dinners, meeting up with ALI friends at SAA or other conferences, and keeping up with colleagues on social media or in smaller peer groups. Responses also mentioned new or expanded leadership roles, job changes (leveling up), and specific skills or exercises from the ALI curriculum.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
One of the key focus areas for ALI is the development of archival leaders. Do you feel like you left ALI with a definition of archival leadership that made sense for you? Can you share what that means for you or how it changed or developed over time?
Because ALI specifically describes the focus of developing archival leaders, this question was meant to delve into what that meant for attendees, including how they understood the concept, and how it had worked for their own professional development. Responses ranged from a particular statement about leadership, an understanding of leading from within instead of above, and leading in the community instead of being a manager or administrator.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
What role has your ALI experience played in your career?
The (spoken and unspoken) intention is that ALI will have an impact on the careers of attendees. This question was intended to elicit what effects the attendees perceived as coming from their decision to attend ALI, and it is paired with questions 3, 4, and 10 to better understand some of the impacts that participants identified as connected with ALI. Only thirteen of the participants directly replied to this question; responses here are excerpted from participant responses. Responses ranged from making connections and identifying personal strengths to gaining new confidence.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
ALI may have had an impact on your personal career. Do you think that it has also had an impact on the archival field, beyond personal career development? How would you describe that impact?
This question was intended to help participants think about impacts beyond their own careers and particularly to think about how ALI might affect others in the archival field. This was a challenging question for study participants, and responses varied widely. Therefore, excerpts of participant responses are provided below.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
Where else do you engage with professional colleagues? Other organizations, cohorts, or meetings?
This question was meant to prompt participants' thinking about their professional networks and engagements. Paired with questions 5, 6, and 9, participants were able to outline their professional participation and how it may have changed or grown as a result of their ALI participation. Responses revealed that some participants identified new areas of professional participation as a result of their ALI experiences, while others noted that they were already active in a range of professional spaces, but ALI may have been a factor in deepening their participation or leadership in those areas.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
What networks do you rely on to support your professional growth?
Understanding how participants characterized their professional support networks after their ALI attendance was the intent of this question. Responses clearly trended to show that study participants were most likely to identify former or present coworkers, their ALI cohorts (or larger ALI community, including steering committee and faculty), their colleagues from graduate school, and their colleagues from professional organizations as the most central to their professional networks.
Citation: The American Archivist 85, 2; 10.17723/2327-9702-85.2.609
Has your ALI cohort (or your ALI mentor) had an impact on your professional career?
The intent of this question was to probe participants' thoughts about what benefits they may have gained through cohort membership and/or mentoring (formal or informal) that they had accessed because of ALI participation. There were distinct variations between the different institute leaderships, locations, curricula, and experiences over the years. To understand whether different trends resulted from these variations, data were sorted by cohort and year, and are aggregated here by location and date for comparison.
Discussion
This section draws together observations and patterns from the coding, analysis, and themes.
Connecting with the Three ALI Outcomes
As a key part of the 2017 Archives Leadership Institute Outcomes Assessment Report, members of the ALI steering committee met and identified three outcomes expected for all participants who successfully complete the institute:20
-
Use knowledge and skills gained from the institute to transform the profession in practice, theory, and/or attitude.
-
Demonstrate increased leadership abilities, responsibilities, and/or roles at their institutions and/or in their profession.
-
Establish and make use of the professional network created by participating in ALI.
While these outcomes were established by ALI leadership based on the work of the institute up to 2017, it seems clear overall that study participants (both in this study and in the ALI 2017 study) believe that their participation in ALI resulted in some effect or impact in one or more areas of their professional careers. We will discuss the second and third outcomes next, and then return to the first.
Leadership, Growth, and Curriculum
Many participants reflected that they left ALI with a definition of leadership that decoupled being an archival leader from being a manager in their organization or institution. One participant (AP01) reflected on leadership:
Well, first of all I guess I—one thing I don't think an archival leader has to be a supervisor, and really, a leader in the archives profession is somebody that empowers others that can bring ideas to the table, and to lead by consensus, and then through that consensus, you know, be really instrumental in developing a plan to carry things out. I think a leader in the archives profession is also somebody that is, like, respectful and kind to their colleagues and thinking about the ways that we can you know, improve diversity in our institutions or, just within the profession at large, also.
Many participants mentioned that they gained a new sense of empowerment to lead change in their communities or regional organizations, even without being formally “in charge.” Some mentioned gaining a sense of strength that helped them to refocus, to feel empowered, and to feel confident in pursuing a plan of action for their careers. From one of the early cohorts, AP40 described this sense:
So, I remember that when I finished my ALI, I felt like I could conquer the world, like, I was like ready to take on, like, you know, “Throw it at me! There's nothing I can't do!” Or that had given me, kind of, like, the tools to think strategically about effecting change in my environment, so that I could be more, instead of like reacting to things and bouncing from one fire to the next, I was more proactive in the way I conducted my work…
Others noted that, while they did not specifically gain leadership training from the institute, they found new inspiration and/or skills that allowed them to work collaboratively across the profession. AP43 conveyed that “the most important to me, I think, was learning about being able to look critically at my strengths and acknowledge the areas that I needed to improve, so it was more about, I guess, my own—my self-perception and awareness and capitalizing on those strengths and working on areas that needed improvement.”
Several participants noted that attending helped them to find a more comfortable space in the field. AP13 said, “I was frustrated in my workplace and I was looking to kind of grow and move on and it was a wonderful experience for that. . . . I think that it was a lot more personal, and we were able to bring our whole selves in that environment, rather than being in kind of a professional, performative setting.”
An early participant in ALI, AP47 said:
I think it kind of planted a seed. It's taken—It's a seed that's taken a while for me to grow. . . . ALI helped me to begin the process of identifying as a leader, and I think it did help me understand what made for effective leaders, as opposed to simply managers. There were a number of sessions I still remember to this day as being really effective, and they were really, you know, you felt like somebody was speaking right to you. There was the presentation on advocacy, there was a presentation on communication, and strategic planning as well—that was less driven by a single speaker than it was about the kind of group discussion that happened afterwards that I found really effective.
Participants expressed particular interest in the following areas of the ALI curriculum: project management; leadership concepts (particularly strategic planning and generative thinking); case studies; learning about advocacy approaches and meeting resource allocators; expanding support for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training; and the value of the practicum project (only available in later cohorts). While the degrees of project completion varied, many participants identified positive effects for their self-confidence, their professional career, and their institution or organization that they attributed to the practicum, even if not fully implemented or finished.
Networks, Cohort Creation, and Being “Chosen”
Cultivating professional relationships and joining new networks was far and away the most discussed benefit and outcome. While many participants described other support networks, including graduate school classmates, colleagues from previous and current jobs, local professional organizations, SAA colleagues, and other personal networks, the network benefit of meeting dedicated colleagues, being part of a specific cohort of archivists, and joining the ALI network was highlighted consistently across the interviews. Participant AP21 said, “I'm still in contact with a large number of my cohort, and they were just such an incredible group, it—really it was, you know, my ability to meet all of these new, really amazing people and amazing thinkers, was my biggest take-away.” Across most of the cohorts and participants, this was a common thread of ongoing connection and network building. Another participant, AP23, stated that
I, at this point, don't make a major professional move without talking to someone in my ALI cohort. If there's something that I am not sure about, or not feeling very secure about, or just questioning whether or not this, like, is genuinely the right thing to do, in terms of archives work, maybe not necessarily in terms of, like, working within the community, but within true archives work, I don't make any moves without speaking to at least one person in my cohort.
Other key parts of the cohort development that were mentioned consistently were the group team building activities and the isolation and intensity of the week in a remote location (implemented in later years to build cohesion). Participants from the earlier years of ALI mentioned this, such as AP43, who said
One of the things that I remember we talked about at ours was that it would be great to have a second one, you know, like for—whether or not it was that same cohort or a mix, but like, the next level of ALI, like ALI 2.0 or something, to take that—to take, maybe, you know, whether or not it's taking our advanced experience in, like in an increased leadership capacity, and you know, what comes after that, so that it continues to grow and build upon the cohort model for people who have already experienced the first cohort. The thing that I—this isn't directly related to your question, but it was something that I wanted to say, like—when we went, the—we talked about this when we were there. We sort of had to make our own social activities together—there were a couple, but it wasn't as tightly knit and organized as some of the later ones were, and that was something we lamented, you know, we wanted more, like, all cohort, all the time!
Later participants, such as AP33, affirmed the increased cohesion of the group:
Developing the professional relationships, or the relationships with other professionals across the country. And, you know, I'm an extrovert, so it's not that hard for me to meet people at conferences and things like that, but being with my cohort members, it's such an intense experience that I feel like those bonds, I think, are forged fairly deep, so that even though I don't have a problem reaching out to anyone and asking for advice or thoughts or anything like that, I do feel like I have a strong connection to my cohort.
Many ALI alums, particularly those who participated in some of the later cohorts from 2014 to 2018, strongly identified with a sense of being “chosen” or the “pick of the litter” for one of the ALI cohorts. Often study participants would mention that they had applied more than once before they were accepted, showing the value that they placed on joining, attending, and becoming part of ALI as a professional activity. As part of the faculty interviews, it was disclosed that approximately 75 to 125 applications were received each year, with about 25 members accepted for each cohort. The number of applicants indicates an ongoing desire or need for this type of professional development program. Steering committee members described the selection process as being very challenging, noting a deliberate process that evolved over time with regard to the holistic composition of the group. The positive feeling of being selected as an ALI cohort member was repeatedly mentioned as being a confidence booster for participants, and, while that cannot be isolated as a variable, it seems more likely than not that it has had an ongoing and strong impact on ALI participants viewing themselves and other participants as leaders in the archival field.
The “ALI Effect”
Virtually every ALI alum noted at least one (often many more) benefit to their personal career from having attended ALI, as well as having noticed the effects on the careers of other ALI alums. Descriptions such as the following, from AP21, were a common thread: “I've felt like it was a transformative experience, and it absolutely changed the course, I think, and the trajectory of the work that I was doing. And, yeah, I don't even know if I'd be where I am right now had I not had that experience.”
An emphasis on tracking and using alumni career shifts and “leveling up” was evident as a measurement of effectiveness, and one particular term continued to emerge from interviews with later cohort members—the “ALI effect.” Participants mentioned job changes, promotions, increased leadership opportunities, and particularly an increase in visible elected service in SAA and other archival organizations. One participant from a later ALI, AP01, said
I don't know if I would've gotten the job I have now if I had not gone to ALI, I mean—I may—who knows? I can't really say. But it definitely gave me, you know, more confidence throughout the interview process and all that. And it gave me—and then even just like returning to work it gave me more confidence and skills to take on larger projects and, you know, lead a team of people.
Whether some or all of these effects are attributable to having attended ALI is indeterminate; arguably many of the ALI alumni were already on an active career track, with established networks and opportunities. However, it is likely that membership in an ALI cohort increased their opportunities, skills, and visibility, making it that much easier to climb the next rung of the ladder. It is also likely that cohort members held the belief that their participation in ALI boosted their careers. Within the small archives field, or even in archival-adjacent fields, the “ALI effect”—whether related to networking, leadership training, increased confidence, or something else—may indeed have real power to give individuals an advantage.
Exploring the Impact of ALI
ALI alumni feedback about potential impact of ALI on the profession was somewhat mixed and generally described in particular ways. When asked about broader impact on the field, separate from the ALI impact on individual careers, many participants noted visibility in the profession by ALI alumni, such as election to an SAA office or leadership within a regional archival organization. However, most responses to this set of questions during the interviews centered around individual career development instead of broader changes across the archival profession.
An emerging question that developed during the interview process was around three separate pieces of the ALI experience, namely, what had the most impact? Was it the carefully structured curriculum and facilitation, which often brought dynamic speakers, frameworks for change, and new skill development? Could it be the isolation and structured time away from other responsibilities that made room for thoughtful deliberation about one's career goals and trajectory? Or was it the active work of facilitated cohort building that resulted in new and strengthened relationships and friendships, extending and revitalizing professional networks? One of the challenges that surfaced in the process of this study was that because the network effect was so overwhelmingly identified as being a primary, career-boosting takeaway for participants, what are the possibilities and potential drawbacks for archivists unable to participate in ALI? What are the risks of facilitating small leadership cohorts that are not broadly accessible for a range of reasons? Does it lead to the stratification of an insular leadership group within the profession?
All those pieces were important. But when the question of “what had the most impact” arose with study participants, the benefit most mentioned was the power of expanding, reinforcing, and strengthening professional networks. Most often this was framed within the context of one's personal professional career. More significantly for developing future programs, much of this relationship building can be traced back to comments about belonging and connection. Being able to identify themselves within both a smaller and a larger community, and to see how they were now connected to others, made a difference for the ALI alumni. Gaining a better sense of how the effect of belonging and connection between archivists could be further supported could be helpful for designing new mechanisms for archival development within the profession.
There is a consistent issue with the expansion of these professional networks: ALI only admits twenty-five cohort members per year. Offering broader opportunities to attend a program like ALI has obvious limits with regard to funding, availability, and access. Applicants have roughly a one-in-four chance of being selected for an ALI cohort, assuming that they have the institutional and personal support and funding to apply and attend a weeklong intensive training in a distant location.
Overall, the model that seems to have emerged from ALI is that effecting change in the individual participants leads to a “ripple effect” that leads to change and transformation in the field. This study suggests that, while cohort model programs are successful at building cohesion within a small group, the impact is inconclusive for building capacity across the profession. More research is necessary for considering and measuring the impacts of ALI on the profession. Capacity building recognizes systemic progress that is beyond the success of a single person. The benefits realized by individual cohort members may not translate, or at least may not automatically be conferred, on the archival field at large. What is capacity building and how do we measure whether it has been impacted? This area needs further exploration when thinking about whether frameworks for professional development necessarily transfer to building capacity in the profession.
One opportunity for ALI and similar programs to support the stated objective of transformational change in the field is to consider how the goals of the program are structured: Do they perpetuate individual growth as a metric, or do they support changes that benefit the entire profession? What contributions are program participants making to the field, rather than to their individual careers?
Many study participants offered feedback and suggestions about development and strengthening of local cohorts or ideas for creating other types of programs. These ideas included more programming that could build on the foundation of the ALI concept, designing more intensive and/or ongoing mentoring relationships, and explicit network building work as part of regional and local organizations, both formal and informal. Suggestions about thematic or regional network building could be accomplished with local or institutional partners and using some of the curriculum and team-building activities that appear to have been successful with ALI participants. Does local or regional involvement build capacity in a different way than ALI could or should be reasonably expected to accomplish? What are the limits of institutionally driven involvement, attendance, or initiatives? What negative incentives interfere with the good intentions of capacity building? Again, these are useful questions that could help to guide the development of future programs that may benefit a broader rising of all ships.
Conclusion and Future Work
Programs such as ALI offer a structured way to locate, learn about, and try new knowledge and skills. However, this study has found that curriculum and knowledge development are not the primary benefit for most archivists who participate in ALI or other cohort-based networking opportunities. Rather, the structured framework for developing a new professional network and focused, purposeful, and active participation in a small, dedicated community of practice is the key benefit. When participants leave their initial weeklong ALI experience, they take not only the tools and curriculum, but also the comradeship of approximately twenty-five other archivists who are, at least loosely, invested in each other's success. This is powerful for the individuals and for the network, which continues to grow each year. Now that ALI has existed across four locations, multiple rounds of grant funding, and many cohorts, how is it changing the archival field? What is the impact?
As I developed this study, I was thinking about the experiences of midcareer archivists who did not attend ALI and their needs and professional interests. What are they missing out on by not attending ALI? Are there other opportunities that might fulfill the needs of archivists who are unable to attend an intensive, weeklong residency program such as ALI?
Finally, I wanted to know how the data gathered about the ALI study can be used to think broadly about capacity building and resiliency in the archival profession in the United States. What lessons can we draw from the responses of ALI participants and leadership as well as those from archivists who did not attend? How can these data points help with designing and planning new initiatives?
A clear need exists for further research and exploration related to capacity building work in the archival profession. Among other key points, it is important to examine the development of network building opportunities and to understand how this can fit with the expressed need for midcareer development, training, and continuing education, as well as how this work can successfully interface with different levels of opportunity in the field. While this study focused mostly on midcareer archivists, the results also bear examining across all archival workers at all points of the career journey. Increased, sustained, and targeted advocacy for the importance of professional development, funding, diversity, and capacity can benefit all archivists at all career levels. This study is a step toward the formation of a larger research effort to analyze and synthesize evidence about programs that scaffold, sustain, and catalyze professional growth for archivists to support the design and success of future programs that can build more equitable networks and capacity that work for archivists.
Semi-structured interview questions620 Heather Soyka The American Archivist Vol. 85, No. 2 Fall/Winter 2022
Reasons for applying
Expectations of ALI
Initial takeaways
Takeaways over time
Definitions of archival leadership
Concept of an archival leader
Role of ALI in career
Role of ALI in career
Perceived impacts on the archival field
Engagement with professional colleagues
Professional support networks