Being an expert in information should surely facilitate professional information practices. Librarians are often thought of as experts in searching for information for others, but what about their own ways of finding things out? Given their extensive education in information-related fields, such as information searching and assessment, one might question whether librarians consistently adhere to systematic and planned approaches in their information-seeking, as taught in library schools. Accordingly, we asked 800 Swedish public librarians questions revolving around the kind of information seeking and use they do in their daily work for their own or their work team’s sake. We specifically highlighted that it was not about information seeking for others, such as library visitors. The collected findings from our study have been reported in Swedish, but there is also an article in English.

What stood out among everything we learned? Returning to our synthesis of the literature, the librarians’ professional information practices are mainly enacted individually. At the same time, there is clearly an ideal that suggests this should be done collaboratively. This ideal also dictates that they should work methodically and systematically with their own information seeking, but this was not the case for the participants in our study. It can rather be described as a largely unsystematic activity that takes place continuously, most of the time while at work, and often outside of working hours.

There are several reasons as to why professional information practices are mainly conducted individually. One reason for this is that these impulses or needs often arise in connection to both specific tasks currently being undertaken and one’s specific job-related interests. Rather than being planned and systematic, they are spontaneous and routine. In this regard, they can be described as embedded into other tasks. It’s not a distinct activity in itself, which in turn means it can be seen [sic!] as almost invisible. The routine aspect largely involves developing one’s own ways over time to keep track; one develops preferences for everything from sources to search methods. You simply do it in your own way.

The invisibility can also be linked to the dominant view of what constitutes proper work. According to this view, true library work involves concrete, established tasks such as reference inquiries, media acquisition, cataloguing, book talks and etcetera. To appear inactive, such as just sitting in front of the computer screen for a while, is not obvious. This is aptly expressed by one of those we interviewed, who says that “if you’re sitting in the room and reading a longer text, it feels like… ‘am I doing something?’ or how does this look if someone comes into my room? That feeling might arise'”.

Therefore, it is not given that these information practices get the space during work hours that they require. This is evident, among other things, from the fact that it is widespread to engage in them outside of working hours. Various social media platforms serve as significant channels for keeping track of work-related topics. Several individuals describe how their Facebook accounts have shifted from being focused on the personal to becoming a tool for professional information practices. In this way, one can say that work encroaches during leisure time.

The invisibility partly stems from the fact that for many, these professional information practices do not seem like proper work, which can thus be related to a normative dimension of work. It involves assumptions and expectations about what constitutes library work and when and where different tasks should be performed. But there is also a norm about the how. And that brings us back to the issue of being systematic and planned. Or, more aptly, on the expectations surrounding this. It is generally assumed that systematicity and planning are desirable traits in themselves. After all, people are supposed to be rational. During librarian training, emphasis is placed on, and priorities are given to, knowledge of systematic information searching. Somewhat pointedly, one could say that you are taught that information searching involves using bibliographic databases listing scientific publications. This is probably one of the reasons why, in our study, we note a rather widespread unease. An unease that is difficult to name. It is not quite a feeling of guilt, although it is in liken. For now, let’s just say that there is an unrequested defensive posture when discussing how to search. One that finds footing on the notion that librarians should be good at information searching, and that it should be done systematically; thus, it is often related to a normative dimension, which provokes a sense of guilt.

Among the most important things we have learned is that the activity of keeping up to date – however we choose to name this activity – can take place in a variety of ways. Seeking and making use of information is ubiquitous in librarians’ everyday work life. It is closely linked to current tasks, personal preferences, and routines. Typically, it occurs in the shadows, which, in the context we have studied, can be linked to normative assumptions about how work in general should be conducted. There, professional information practices tend to be obscured and not always regarded, as we have seen, as a fully legitimate task. This is concerning because, at the same time, it seems evident that they form a foundation for librarians’ professional development and thus for the operations of libraries. We think librarians want us to see and value the work they do.

Related publication: Pilerot, O. & Lindberg, J. (2024). Ubiquitous but invisible public librarians’ self-imposed professional information practices as articulation work. Information Research, 28(2).