Abstract / Résumé
While a small number of studies have investigated salary negotiation in librarianship, none have focused on Canadian academic libraries. What are the motivations and barriers that impact employment-offer negotiation? When Canadian librarians negotiate, what subjects are discussed, and do they feel they were successful? This preliminary report is a descriptive summary on the results of a survey we conducted to explore the negotiation propensity and perceptions of Canadian academic librarians when presented with their most recent offer of employment. A better understanding of this topic may encourage negotiation conversations and empower librarians in future employment offer negotiations to improve salaries and working conditions.
Bien qu'un petit nombre d'études aient porté sur la négociation salariale dans le domaine de la bibliothéconomie, aucune n'a porté sur les bibliothèques universitaires canadiennes. Quels sont les motivations et les obstacles qui influent sur la négociation des offres d'emploi? Lorsque les bibliothécaires canadiens négocient, quels sont les sujets abordés, et ont-ils le sentiment d'avoir réussi? Ce rapport préliminaire est un résumé descriptif des résultats d'une enquête que nous avons menée pour explorer la propension à la négociation et les perceptions des bibliothécaires universitaires canadiens lorsqu'on leur présente leur plus récente offre d'emploi. Une meilleure comprehension de ce sujet peut encourager les conversations de négociation et habiliter les bibliothécaires dans les futures négociations d'offres d'emploi pour amélíorer les salaires et les conditions de travail.
Keywords / Mots-clés
negotiation, academic libraries, academic librarians, employment, Canada
négociation, bibliotheques universitaires, femmes, genre, Canada
Introduction
In January 2018, news broke that the Academy Award-nominated actress Michelle Williams was paid less than $1,000 for her reshoots on the film set of All the Money in the World, while her male co-star Mark Wahlberg received $1.5 million for the same amount of work (Mendelson, 2018). The fact that they were represented by the same agency added to the public shaming of an industry already under fire in the wake of widespread allegations of sexual abuse and harassment denounced by the #MeToo movement (Rhode, 2019). While condemnation of the pay disparity was widely reported in the media, the conversation started to shift as Williams herself was criticized for failing to negotiate a deal like Wahlberg's (Menon, 2018). Williams' story opened a conversation among academic staff members in our library, specifically about whether we had negotiated our employment offers. These discussions were both fascinating and frustrating. It was interesting to learn about the range of experiences amongst our small and informal sample.
The more we talked the more questions were raised. Are librarians negotiating their employment offers? When they do, are they satisfied? When and how are they negotiating? What are they asking for? If they do not negotiate, what prevents them from doing so? Would our "feminized" profession be likely to encourage employment negotiation (Harris, 1992)? Beyond gender, are there are other intersectional aspects that impact the process? We conducted a survey of Canadian academic library staff members to explore this subject in our national context.
Literature Review
Very few studies have been conducted on job offer negotiation specific to librarians and none have focused on Canadian academic libraries. Farrell and Geracl have studied negotiation in American libraries to normalize negotiation and improve library worker compensation. Their 2017 survey of 1,541 librarians on salary negotiation found that 54% did not negotiate but, of the 46% that did, the majority reported "positive outcomes, including an increase in salary or total compensation" (p. 45), Surveying a variety of library sectors, 53% of their respondents worked in academic libraries. A common barrier to negotiation is fear that the offer will be rescinded (Apostol, 2016). However, their study found this is a very rare occurrence: Those who did negotiate relied primarily on prior salary, education, and work experience to inform their strategy. The authors indicated their intention to follow up with survey respondents to collect qualitative data to "provide a more comprehensive picture of librarian perceptions and experiences in order to inform an expanded narrative of salary negotiation in the library hiring process" (p. 63).
Continuing their negotiation research. Geraci and Farrell (2019) observed a change of narrative brought about by wider societal discussions attributed to #MeToo movement and ongoing conversations regarding the gender wage gap. They wrote, "These concurrent and sometimes intersecting movements to improve wages and working conditions across industries, occupations, and worksites engage individual and collective negotiation as vehicles and strategies to improve wages and working conditions" (n.p.).
A 2018 study by Silva and Galbraith reported on a survey completed by 1,153 American academic librarians. They found that women were less likely than men to negotiate, and female librarians who did attempt to negotiate a higher salary received on average $825.35 less than their male colleagues. Considering the compounding effect over the course of a career with salary increases and pension, "the losses are substantial" (p. 332). The authors observed that women taking on head, dean, and director positions were more likely to negotiate than other female librarians. They pointed out that this is not surprising, as their overall results indicated the more experience one has the more one negotiates. However, they did not notice the same negotiation gap with men when it came to librarian versus management positions.
Lo and Reed's 2016 study found that 68% of the 414 library workers they surveyed attempted to negotiate their salary and/or benefits. of these, they found "the younger generation are more likely than the older generation to negotiate their first professional job offer," perhaps attributable to increased negotiation information online and training opportunities (p. 6). Nevertheless, 48% of their respondents were not comfortable negotiating. As possible solutions, the authors advocated for more negotiation training during graduate school, at conferences, and through webinars.
The only non-American study we located was conducted in Australia. Duffield, Attar, and Royals (2018) described the experience of collaborating with and using Lo and Reed's study as a model for their own. Their findings were previously presented at a conference in 2017. They surveyed 124 librarians from various library sectors, of whom 90% identified as female. only 39% of their respondents negotiated. of the 61% who did not, 31 % reported they did not feel they were able to negotiate, while 12% feared their employment offer would be withdrawn. When attempting to explain the gap between American and Australian librarians negotiating, the authors theorized that American library-school graduates are encouraged to negotiate and thereby advocated for Australian library schools to cover marketability as a means to increase employmentoffer negotiation.
While access to training and advice are important, negotiation is also impacted by social factors that inhibit self-advocacy: "Because women, more often than men, express discomfort with confrontation and combative styles of communication, it is not surprising that they report less confidence when negotiating to enhance their professional and economic status, and may avoid negotiation all together" (Guthrie et al., 2009, p. 98). In a seminal work on gender and negotiation, Women Don'tAsk, Babcock and Laschever (2007) observed that when women are satisfied with their work, it compounds preexisting notions that they are not entitled to better pay. Furthermore, Leibbrandt and List's 2015 study found that women were less likely to negotiate salary unless it was specifically advertised as negotiable. Even if negotiation is part of the position-for example negotiating contracts with a library vendor-some female librarians "may balk at negotiating for their own pay" (p. 53). one strategy to counteract these notions is to think about negotiation from a communal perspective: When women negotiate for better pay and working conditions for themselves, these actions are likely to benefit women who follow (Sandberg & Novell, 2014).
Beyond libraries and beyond gender, much critical work remains to be done within the broader topic of negotation studies: "While there is a growing body of research exploring the independent effects of culture and race in negotiation contexts, there remains a dearth of research exploring the intersectionality of gender, race and culture" (Toosi et al., 2020, p. 261).
Another important consideration is the inaccurate perception outside the profession that librarianship is a low-stress career option (Sheesley, 2001). This is especially relevant when we consider Ettarh's (2018) concerns about vocational awe, gendered expectations, burnout, and low salaries in librarianship. Kolb and Scaffner (2001) pointed out that the need to "manage information in a challenging environment makes librarianship increasingly relevant," yet the average starting salary remains far lower than other professions requiring a master's degree in areas like business, engineering, and computer science (p. 52). Additionally, the devaluation of "care work" in feminized health-care professions tends to primarily affect women, whereas men benefit from a glass escalator that affords them higher pay, opportunities for advancement, and stability (Dill etai., 2016). Even within librarianship, male-dominated technology roles are often valued more than public service work (Douglas & Gadsby, 2017; MIzra & Seale, 2017; Sloniowski, 2016).
It is also vital to consider the negative impacts of precarious work in the Canadian library context, including "a variety of financial, physical, mental, and emotional stresses" (Henninger et al., 2019, p. 16). As such, negotiation is of central importance to librarianship as we recognize the need for "economic justice" to ensure that library workers are fairly compensated for the demanding and challenging work they perform (Geraci & Farrell, 2019).
Contributing to the limited literature about librarian employment negotiation by examining various aspects of Canadian academic librarian perspectives, this exploratory study seeks to establish a baseline of understanding along with a foundation for further research.
Methodology
To better understand the negotiating behaviours and experiences of Canadian librarians, we created a survey in Qualtrics using primarily multi-choice questions (Appendix A). We focused on respondents' most recent job offer and designed the survey to branch into separate "yes" or "no" streams depending on whether or not negotiation occurred. Demographic questions-including gender identity, sexual orientation, type of appointment, and institution size-were modelled after the 2018 Census of Canadian Academic Librarians run by the Canadian Association of Professional Academic Librarians (CAPAL) (Revitt et al., 2019).
We received ethics approval from the University of Lethbridge Human Subject Research Committee on May 13, 2019. Survey invitations and consent letters were distributed on June 4 and ran until June 30, 2019 (Appendix B, Appendix C). Participants were recruited via list-servs run by various library associations in Canada, including CAPAL, the Canadian Association of University Teachers Librarian's sub-group (CAUT), University of Alberta's School of Library and Information Studies (Jerome-L), and the ontario College and University Library Association (°CULA). These list-servs were chosen as each of the researchers had access to the lists and we hoped they would capture participants from across the country.
Designed to provide a preliminary descriptive summary of Canadian academic librarians' job negotiation practices, the survey was written and distributed in English. Participation was voluntary and 129 complete responses were recorded. The survey targeted both librarians and archivists working in academic settings, though the survey itself did not differentiate between the two; therefore, all references to librarians in this article includes archivists.
Analysis of the results was completed in Qualtrics. For multiple-choice questions that included an "other" option, one of the authors analyzed the responses for themes and grouped similar answers. Unique responses were included in the text. As this paper is an exploratory study, no statistical tests were run.
Results
In total, 129 respondents participated in the study. of them, 83% (n=100) of respondents worked in a university, 13% (n=16) worked in a college, 1.65% (n=2) worked in other academic settings, and 2.45% (n=3) preferred not to answer.
Respondents were asked to indicate the size of the institution in which they currently work, based on full-time student population. Twenty-nine percent (n=35) reported working at a very large institution (34,000+), 23% (n=28) at a large institution (22.001 - 34,000), 17% (n=21) at a medium institution (12,001-22,000), 20% (n=24) at a small institution (4,001-12,000), and 9% (n=11) at a very small institution (less than 4,000).
Demographics
Notably, a large proportion of responses were submitted by participants in the 25 to 34 and 35 to 44 categories: 31% (n=36) and 34% (n=39), respectively. Seventeen percent of respondents (n=20) were aged 45 to 54, and 10% (n=12) were aged 55 to 64. one respondent was under 25. and one respondent was over 65.
Respondents identifying as female totalled 80% (n=93). male totalled 16% (n=18), transgender totalled 0.9% (n=1), and 3% (n=4) preferred not to answer.
The breakdown by province or territory of work (Table 1) had very few responses from Atlantic Canada; no respondents indicated that they work in Prince Edward Island or Newfoundland. Similarly, we received only one response from the territories. Twentyfive percent (n=29) of responses were from Alberta, and 41% (n=48) from ontario. only 3% (n=3) of respondents indicated they worked in Quebec, compared to 20% In the CAPAL study {2018, p. 7). Eleven percent (n=13) worked In British Columbia. Thirteen respondents did not answer the question, which, combined with seven responses of ' preferred not to answer", left us with 20 respondents (or 16%) with no geographical ties.
Education and Experience
Respondents were asked what educational credentials they held and were prompted to choose all that applied. Those holding a Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) or equivalent degree totalled 91 % (n=117); 28% (n=36) held a master's degree in a field other than LIS, and 4% (n=5) held a doctoral degree.
Following CAPAL's classification of appointment types, respondents were asked to identify their type of appointment. The majority was almost evenly divided between tenured at 18% (n=22), tenure track at 17% (n=21), permanent appointment at 20% (n=25), and continuing appointment at 20% (n=24). Two respondents indicated that they were not sure if their contract would be renewed.
When asked how many years of experience working in a library or archives they had when they received the offer for their current position, 3% (n=4) of respondents Indicated they had 25 or more years, 5% (n=6) had between 16 and 25 years, 21% (n=26) had between eight and 15 years, 22% (n=26) had between four and seven years, and 48% (n=58) had less than three years of experience.
In terms of when their current job offer was accepted, 48% (n=58) of respondents had accepted their offer within the last three years. Twenty-one percent (n=25) of respondents had accepted their current position in the last four to seven years, 18% (n=21) of respondents had accepted in the last eight to 15 years, and 10% (n=12) of respondents had accepted in the last 16 to 25 years (10%). Two percent (n=2) of respondents accepted their current position over 25 years ago and 2% (n=2) preferred not to answer.
Negotiation
of the 129 people surveyed, 55% (n=67) negotiated aspects of their most recent job offer, while 45% (n=54) had not entered into any negotiations. A review of responses based on years of professional-level experience in libraries revealed that 57% (n=32) of participants who had not negotiated had less than three years of experience (see Figure 1).
Examining responses by gender showed that 53% (n=49) of women and 78% (n=14) of men negotiated. While this trend is consistent with the findings of other studies (Farrell & Geraci, 2017; Greig, 2008), the pool of male participants was limited.
Respondents Who Negotiated
Participants who negotiated were asked about their general satisfaction with the experience. Twenty-five percent (n=16) were extremely satisfied, and 52% (n=34) were somewhat satisfied. Nine percent (n=6) said they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, while 6% (n=4) were somewhat dissatisfied, and 8% (n=5) were extremely dissatisfied. of those who negotiated, 34% (n=40) identified salary as a motivating factor, followed closely by 30% (n=35) motivated by the idea that one should negotiate any employment offer. other motivations to negotiate included moving expenses, changes to assigned duties, tenure considerations, leave, vacation days, and rank (see Figure 2).
We surveyed our respondents about what they discussed during negotiation. The most popular topics were salary at 29% (n=58), start date at 19% (n=39), and relocation expenses at 11% (n=23). The least-frequently addressed topics included time off or leave at 4% (n=9), tenure also at 4% (n=8), and flexibility in work schedule or location at 1% (n=2). Additional topics, as indicated by respondents in an optional section, were housing, responsibilities on a letter of offer that were unexpected, office equipment, and support through an immigration process.
When asked who initiated the negotiation process, 88% (n=57) of respondents indicated that they did, while only 12% (n=8) had their prospective employer begin the conversation. Forty-eight percent negotiated over the phone (n=41), 38% negotiated via email (n=32), and 14% negotiated in person (n=12). The gender of the party our respondents negotiated with was as follows: male 20% (n=13) and female 77% (n=50).
To prepare for negotiation, respondents used the following online resources: 33% (n=35) consulted collective agreements, 16% (n=17) considered negotiation advice from websites and articles, 14% (n=15) visited faculty associations' and bargaining units' websites, and 7% (n=7) looked at national salary information. other responses included sunshine lists, ontario Salary Disclosure, and social media. Twenty percent (n=20) of respondents did not use any online resources.
While 14% (n=14) of our respondents who negotiated did not seek out additional support or advice, the majority did: 12% (n=12) contacted a faculty association or bargaining unit, 15% (n=15) talked to a mentor, 25% (n=25) consulted a colleague, and 30% (n=30) spoke with friends or family.
During negotiation, only one participant was threatened with the job offer being rescinded, though several other respondents reported that the potential loss of the offer was something they had considered.
Respondents Who Did Not Negotiate
Survey participants who had not negotiated were asked what prevented them from doing so (Figure 3). The most common response, accounting for 18% (n=31), was that they felt lucky to have a job offer. others were not familiar with negotiation (15%, n=25), did not believe that negotiation was possible (15%, n=25), or were satisfied with the offer they received (12%, n=20). Five percent (n=8) stated that they were worried their offer would be withdrawn, with an identical number of respondents indicating they feared they would be viewed negatively. Several respondents noted in the optional "other" category that it hadn't occurred to them to negotiate; they were unsure of how salary and seniority were calculated or what restrictions collective agreements placed on salary negotiation. one felt that negotiation would be stressful and did not have time for it.
Fifty-eight percent (n=29) of our "did not negotiate" respondents received their job offer through a phone call, 26% (n=13) received an email, 8% (n=4) were offered the job in person, and 4% (n=2) received a letter.
We asked those that did not negotiate if they had regrets. The answers were almost evenly split: 33% (n=17) said yes, 35% (n=18) said no, and 31% (n=16) remained neutral. We also wanted to know what they wished they had negotiated. While 13% (n=10) said that there was nothing they wish they had negotiated, other respondents indicated salary (39%, n=28), research support (13%, n=9), flexibility in schedule (11%, n=8), vacation (4%, n=3), and start date (4%, n=3). other optional answers provided by our respondents included relocation assistance, benefits, and a joint appointment in another department.
Comparisons between Age and Experience
To understand factors that might have an influence on the decision to negotiate, we compared responses by the participant's age at time of negotiation and years of library experience.
When considering negotiation response by age range (see Table 2), there was a shift in negotiation response between the age ranges of 25 to 34 and 35 to 44. While 64% of the first group did not negotiate, 67% of the second group chose to negotiate at least one aspect of their offer.
Table 3 compares negotiation response by years of library experience. Having zero to three years of experience did not have a noticeable effect on negotiation behaviour, with "no" responses totalling 55% and "yes" responses totalling 45%. At 16 to 25 years, the "yes" responses increased to 65%, and 69% of those with 25 or more years of experience answered "yes."
Discussion
Examining academic librarians' responses to employment negotiation by age and experience uncovered trends worthy of further discussion. Lo and Reed's 2016 study found that individuals are more likely to negotiate when they have increased professional experience (p. 4). While our comparison of experience and negotiation did not fully support this conclusion due to our small pool, we noted older age groups negotiated more consistently than our 25-to34-year-old group. We wanted to further examine this observed shift in response by age within the context of relevant literature. Although several articles have examined the role that experience plays in negotiation, very few articles looked at age specifically (Hong & van der Wijst, 2013; Lo & Reed, 2016; o'Shea & Bush, 2002).
Though age and experience are important factors in negotiation, gender appears to play a key role. of our survey respondents, 80% (n=93) identified as women and 16% (n=18) identified as men, comparable to Geraci and Farrell's 2017 survey with 82% women and 16% men, respectively. This also aligned with the 2018 Canadian Census of Academic Librarians, where women made up 74% of responses and men 24%. Even though the number of men in our sample was small, the propensity to negotiate based on gender was relatively consistent with previous research in our field, with 53% of women negotiating compared to 78% of our male participants. Silva and Galbraith's 2018 survey tracked negotiation propensity by genderand found that male librarians were 38% more likely to negotiate than their female colleagues. In contrast, Leibbrandt and List's 2015 study that examined gendered responses to negotiation found that women were as equally likely to negotiate as men when there was an explicit mention that negotiation was possible. Considering the gender distribution of librarianship, this poses a concern if the language of job ads or letters of offer are ambiguous or silent about the possibility of negotiation. In the case of the authors, one received a letter that invited her to review and discuss the offer whereas the other author's letter merely mentioned a deadline for acceptance. The language of the first offer was perceived as a signal that negotiation was welcome, whereas the second offer was interpreted as leaving no room for discussion. Although this is anecdotal evidence, Leibbrandt and List's observations were particularly relevant as it mirrored our own experiences.
A major goal of this study was to establish an understanding of the motivations and deterrents to academic librarians negotiating employment. Forthose that did not negotiate, the top reasons cited were inexperience and having a sense that negotiation was not possible. As noted, many participants did not negotiate because they felt that they were lucky just to receive an offer. A recent study was conducted regarding the increasing presence of the "gig economy" in librarianship and the negative effects of precarious work in Canadian libraries (Henninger et al., 2019). The increased number of short-term positions over the course of one's career potentially means new librarians will negotiate more than their predecessors. As such, equipping them with negotiation knowledge and skills is vital. When under pressure to find full-time employment, a natural response is to immediately accept the offer without discussion. This contrasts with those in the survey who had negotiated their last offer. Regarding salary, the belief that one should always negotiate their offer was a motivating factor. As mentioned previously, Geraci and Farrell concluded their 2019 study with a call for library workers to speak more freely about compensation. Extending Sandberg and Novell's notion of communal benefits, negotiation is a practice with the potential power to improve salary and working conditions across the profession (2014). This does not mean it is up to individual librarians to do all the heavy lifting on their own. Considering Leibbrant and List's findings that women are more likely to negotiate when they are invited to do so (2015), employers could encourage negotiation by explicitly inviting it in a job ad or letter of offer.
Shifting the onus of welcoming negotiation to employers is especially relevant when we consider that a common deterrent to negotiating arose from an uncertainty in procedure. Especially for those who are new to the typical academic interviewing process, the question of when and how to start discussing the terms of the job offer can be unclear or daunting. For those that did negotiate, 88% (n=57) initiated that conversation. If one is waiting for an opening to be made, they will likely be left wanting. Likewise, are applicants being given adequate time to respond to a job offer? If the offer is made over the phone, as many were in our survey, do applicants feel pressured to accept right away without negotiating? While there are many online resources relating to the Interview process, little is relevant to the actual job offer. To this end, we created a LibGuide of resources specific to the librarian employment negotiation process (Cardozo & Scott, 2019).
There are several questions that the survey responses raise regarding initiation of negotiation. How do we prepare job seekers to understand the process and procedures that are unique to an academic posting? Additionally, for employers cognizant of the barriers to negotiation, should job postings and letters of offer be explicit that negotiation is possible? Geraci and Farrell noted in their 2019 survey that, although participants received training regarding job interviews in library school, most had not received training in negotiation. Negotiation training is a gap in practice that can be an important step in helping new librarians feel comfortable with the process. Properly equipping reluctant negotiators throughout their careers is key. Thompson found that when inexperienced parties negotiate with experienced parties, they often receive less (1990). In addition, being primed for negotiation can lead to better results, especially for women (Hong & van der Wijst, 2013).
Limitations of Study and Further Research
There were few respondents from several provinces and perhaps an overrepresentation from Alberta and ontario. These numbers may be explained by the targeted list-servs to which the survey was sent. Both the Jerome-list, hosted by the University of Alberta, and the °CULA list are province-specific. We did not seek out similar provincial list-servs In other provinces.
As acknowledged in the methodology section, we did not run the survey In French. In a bilingual country like Canada, this is a limitation of our study, as the inclusion of French academic librarians would have allowed for a better understanding of negotiation behaviours across the country.
There is a critical need for more research on librarian employment negotiation behavior In Canada and globally. Indeed, as our study only focused on academic libraries, further research should include those working In public and special libraries. As such, we have made our survey questions available in Appendix A and encourage other library scholars to replicate or modify them in their own studies as they see fit. While we asked questions regarding race, sexuality, and disability, our response rate was too small to produce noteworthy findings. Studies with larger sample sizes may also reveal more information about how gender impacts negotiation behaviour and success, particularly in connection with additional intersectional factors. Similar to the CAPAL census, the vast majority of our respondents were white female librarians; more research is required to better understand the negotiation behaviours and outcomes impacting librarians of diverse backgrounds.
A longitudinal study-potentially every five years-would build on this preliminary research. Conducting interviews with Canadian librarians regarding employment negotiation propensity and challenges will also add to the conversation. It is hoped that more in-depth conversations will draw out additional information, not only related to gender, but also other intersectional factors that our small sample could not adequately address, such as race and disability. Additionally, other stakeholders have much to contribute to this discussion. These include the administrators negotiating with librarians and the faculty associations representing librarians. Furthermore, having similar studies from countries outside of Canada and the United States will provide a better understanding of librarians' negotiation propensity across the globe.
Conclusion
This preliminary exploratory study of Canadian academic librarians shares similarities with previous American research. Participants' lack of experience and uncertainty about initiating negotiation are barriers to opening these discussions. Despite the abundance of online employment resources, there is a need to equip librarians with the skills to negotiate their employment offers with confidence. However, employers also have an important role to play by inviting negotiation. While advice-based resources will continue to be valuable to librarians' negotiating success, this area needs more evidence-based research. This research must be accessible and incorporated into training and professional development, not only for new professionals, but for librarians throughout their careers.
References
Apostol, S. (2016). Ten top tips for negotiating a job offer. Inside°CULA. Retrieved from http://open-shelf.ca/16Q701-ocula-ten-hot-tips/
Babcock, L, & Laschever, S. (2007). Women don't ask: The high cost of avoiding negotiation and the positive strategies for change. Bantam Books.
Cardozo, P., & Scott, E. (2019). Librarian job offer negotiation resources LibGuide. Retrieved from https://librarv.ulethbridoe.ca/librarvneqotiation
Dill, J. S., Price-Glynn, K. I. M., & Rakovski, C. (2016). Does the "glass escalator" compensate for the devaluation of care work occupations? The careers of men in low- and middle-skill health care jobs. Gender & Society, 30(2), 334-360.
Douglas, V. A., & Gadsby, J. (2017). Gendered labor and library instruction coordinators: The undervaluing of feminized work. Proceedings of the Association of College and Research Libraries Conference.
Duffield, N., Attar, H,, & Royals, J. (2017, November 30). An investigation of the perceptions, expectations, and behaviours of library employers on job negotiations as both employers and as job seekers in Australia. [Conference session]. Research Applications in Information and Library Studies Conference in Adelaide, Australia. Retrieved from https://bit.lv/3IHtfFC
Duffield, N., Attar, H,, & Royals, J. (2018). Putting the 'research' into research librarian. Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association, 67(2), 147-152.
Ettarh, F. (2018). Vocational awe and librarianship: The lies we tell ourselves. In the Library with the Lead Pipe.
Farrell, S. L., & Geraci, A. (2017). Librarians and compensation negotiation in the library workplace. Library Management, 38(1), 45-64.
Geraci, A., & Farrell, S. L. (2019). Normalize negotiation! Learning to negotiate salaries and improve compensation outcomes to transform library culture. In the Library with the Lead Pipe.
Greig, F. (2008). Propensity to negotiate and career advancement: Evidence from an investment bank that women are on a "slow elevator". Negotiation Journal, 24(4), 495-508.
Guthrie, S. R., Magyar, M. T., Eggert, S., & Kain, C. (2009). Female athletes do ask! An exploratory study of gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiation among athletes. Women in Sport & Physical Activity Journal, 18( 1), 90-101.
Harris, R. M. (1992). Librarianship: The erosion of a woman's profession. Ablex Publishing.
Henninger, E., Brons, A., Riley, C., & Yin, C. (2019). Perceptions and experiences of precarious employment in Canadian libraries: An exploratory study. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Researchr 14(2), 1-22.
Hong, A. P. C. I., & van der Wijst, P. J. (2013). Women in negotiation: Effects of gender and power on negotiation behavior. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 6(4), 273-284.
Kolb, D. M., & Schaffner, A. C. (2001). Negotiating what you're worth: In a feminized profession, librarians need some tips to help fight sluggish salaries. Library Journal, 126(17), 52-53.
Leibbrandt, A., & List, J. A. (2015) Do women avoid salary negotiations? Evidence from a large-scale natural field experiment. Management Science, 61(9), 2016-2024.
Lo, L. S., & Reed, J. B. (2016). "You're hired!" An analysis of the perceptions and behaviors of library job candidates on job offer negotiations. Southeastern Librarian, 64(2), 1-13.
Mendelson, S. (2018, January 10). The cruel reason Michelle Williams earned 0.07% of Mark Wahlberg's pay for 'All the money in the world1 reshoots. Forbes.
Menon, V. (2018, January 10). Mark Wahlberg's windfall and Michelle Williams' ripoff remind us: It pays to push. Toronto Star.
Mirza, R. & Seale, M. (2017). Who killed the world? White masculinity and the technocratic Library of the future . In Schlesselman-Tarango, G. (Eds.), Topographies of whiteness: Mapping whiteness in Library and Information Science (pp. 175-201). Library Juice Press.
o'Shea, P. G., & Bush, D. F. (2002). Negotiation for starting salary: Antecedents and outcomes among recent college graduates. Journal of Business & Psychology, 16(3), 365-382.
Revitt, E., Magnus, E., Schrader, A., & Wright, J. (2019). 2018 census of Canadian academic librarians. CAPAL.
Rhode, D. L. (2019). Metoo: Why now? What next? Duke Law Journal, 69(2), 377-428.
Sandberg, S. & Novell, N. (2014). Lean in for graduates. Alfred K. Knopf.
Sheesley, D, F. (2001). Burnout and the academic teaching librarian: An examination of the problem and suggested solutions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(6), 447-451.
Silva, E., & Galbraith, Q. (2018). Salary negotiation patterns between women and men in academic libraries. College & Research Libraries, 79(3), 324-335.
Sloniowski, L. (2016). Affective labor, resistance, and the academic librarian. Library Trends, 64(4), 645-666.
Thompson, L. (1990). An examination of naive and experienced negotiators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(1), 82-90.
Toosi, N. R., Semnani-Azad, Z., Shen, W., Mor, S., & Amanatullah, E. T. (2020). How culture and race shape gender dynamics in negotiation. In M. olekalns & J. A. Kennedy (Eds.), Research handbook on gender and negotiation (pp. 260-280). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Appendix A
Negotiation Survey
Professional Demographics
1. What is the full-time student population at the institution where you are employed?
* Very small (less than 4,000)
* Small (4,001 to 12,000)
* Medium (12,001 to 22,000)
* Large (22,001 to 34,000)
* Very Large (34,000+)
* Prefer not to answer
2. What type of institution do you work at?
* University
* College
* other (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
3. How many years of professional-level experience in libraries or archives did you have when you received the offer for your current position?
* 0 to 3 years
* 4 to 7 years
* 8 to 15 years
* 16 to 25 years
* 25+ years
* Prefer not to answer
4. How many years ago did you accept your current position?
* 0 to 3 years
* 4 to 7 years
* 8 to 15 years
* 16 to 25 years
* 25+ years
Prefer not to answer
5. What is your educational background? Select all that apply,
* MLIS or equivalent degree
* other Masters degree
* PhD or other doctoral level degree
* other (please specify)
* Prefer not to answer
6. Why type of appointment do you have?
* Tenured
* Tenure track
* Permanent appointment
* Continuing appointment
* Probationary
* Contract (renewable)
* Contract (nonrenewable)
* other (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
Branching Question
7.Did you negotiate any aspect of your most recent job offer?
* Yes
* No
Yes Branch Question
8a(i). What motivated you to negotiate your most recent offer? Please check all that apply,
* The salary was too low
* The start date did not work for me
* I required more support for research and/or professional development
* Work-life balance considerations
* I feel that I should negotiate any employment offer
* other (please specify)
8a(ii). How did you receive your job offer?
* Phone
* In-person
* Letter
* other (specify if you wish)
8a(iii). What topics did you discuss during your negotiation? Please check all that apply,
* Salary
* Start date
* Academic career years
* Rank
* Tenure
* Support for research and/or professional development
* Benefits
* Time off or leave
* Flexibility In work schedule or location
* other (please specify)
8a(iv). Who initiated the negotiation process?
* I did
* The employer did
* other (please specify)
8a(v). How did you negotiate? Please check all that apply.
* Phone
* In-person
* Not listed (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
8a(vi). Did you use any of the following online resources to aid in your negotiation? Please check all that apply.
* Faculty association/bargaining unit's website
* Collective agreement (salary grids, benefits, other information)
* National salary information (CAPAL, CAUT, etc.)
* "How to negotiate" advice from websites and articles
* Not listed (specify if you wish)
* I did not use any online resources
* Prefer not to answer
Ba(vii). Did you seek out advice or support from any of the following? Please check all that apply.
* Mentor
* Colleague
* Friends of family
* other (please specify)
* I did not seek out any advice or support
88a(vin). If you know the gender identity of the person you negotiated with, please select:
* Woman
* Man
* Nonbinary
* Transgender
* Two Spirit
* Not listed (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
8a(ix). How satisfied were you with the outcome of your negotiation?
* Extremely satisfied
* Somewhat satisfied
* Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
* Somewhat dissatisfied
* Extremely dissatisfied
8a(x). Was there a threat of the job offer being rescinded during your negotiation?
* Yes
* No
* other (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
8a(xi). Did you already know the person you were negotiating with?
* Yes, I was already working with them or had worked with them previously
* Yes, but not through work
* No
* Prefer not to answer
8a(xii). What was the position of the person you negotiated with?
* University Librarian/Dean
* Human Resources
* other (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
No Branch Question
8b(i). What prevented you from negotiating? Please check all that apply,
* I was satisfied with the offer
* I was new to the profession
* I felt lucky to have a job offer
* I was worried the offer would be withdrawn
* I was worried that I would be viewed negatively
* I was uncertain of how or when to initiate the conversation
* I was not familiar with negotiation
* I did not think that negotiation was possible with this offer
*ther (please specify)
8b(ii). How did you receive your job offer?
* Phone
* in-person
* Letter
* other (please specify)
8b(iii). Do you regret not negotiating?
* Yes
* No
* Neutral
8b(iv). What do you wish you could have negotiated? Please check all that apply,
* Salary
* Start date
* Professional development opportunities
* Flexibility In schedule
* Research support
* There is nothing I wished to negotiate
* other (please specify)
8b(v). Did you already know the person who made the job offer?
* Yes, I was already working with them or had worked with them previously
* Yes, but not through work
* No
* Prefer not to answer
8b(vi). What was the position of the person who made the job offer?
* University Librarian/Dean
* Human Resources
* other (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
Personal Demographic Questions
9. In which province or territory do you work?
* Alberta
* British Columbia
* Manitoba
* New Brunswick
* Newfoundland and Labrador
* Northwest Territories
* Nunavut
* ontario
o Prince Edward Island
* Quebec
* Saskatchewan
* Yukon
* Prefer not to answer
10.What is your age?
* Under 25
* 25 to 34
* 35 to 44
* 45 to 54
* 55 to 64
* 65+
* Prefer not to answer
11. What is your gender identify?
* Woman
* Man
* Nonbinary
* Transgender
* Two Spirit
o Not listed (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
12. Do you consider yourself to be:
* Bisexual
o Gay
* Lesbian
o Straight/Heterosexual
* Not listed (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
13. I identify my ethnicity as (select all that apply):
* Asian
* Black
* Indigenous
* White
* Not listed (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
14. Do you consider yourself to have a disability?
* Yes
* No
* Prefer not to answer
15. What is your country of birth?
* Canada
* other (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
16. What is your current relationship status?
* Single
o Marrled/Common-Iaw/Llvlng in a domestic partnership
* Separated
* Divorced
* Widowed
o Not listed (specify if you wish)
* Prefer not to answer
17. Are you an active caregiver to any children or other dependents?
* Yes
* No
* Prefer not to answer
Appendix В
Invitation to Participate: Negotiation Behaviour of Librarians and Archivists
Did you negotiate your last job offer? Why or why not?
In orderio learn more about Canadian academic librarians and archivists' negotiation behaviours, we are conducting a survey that aims at determining and understanding:
* If and how Canadian academic librarians and archivists negotiate
* How this relates to the larger body of negotiation research and what unique challenges Canadian academic librarians and archivists face
* Differences in negotiation behaviour and needs of negotiators within Canadian librarianship
The survey will ask you specifically about your last professional job offer in a library or archives setting, how previous experience or lack of experience played a role, and how other factors related to your decision to negotiate or not.
The estimated time to complete the survey is 5 - 10 minutes. We would appreciate your response by June 30th, 2019.
The survey can be accessed here. For additional information please see the attached letter of introduction and informed consent form.
If you have questions or comments please contact...
Thank you and we appreciate your participation,
Authors.
Appendix C
Information Letter and Consent - Negotiation Behaviour of Canadian Academic Librarians
Purpose of the research
In order to become more familiar with the propensity to negotiate job offers, we are conducting a survey of Canadian academic librarians and archivists.
Your participation in this research is important and will help to
* Determine how often Canadian academic librarians and archivists negotiate their offers
* Determine how this relates to the larger body of negotiation research and what unique challenges Canadian academic librarians and archivists face
* Understand differences in negotiation behaviour and needs of negotiators within Canadian librarianship
Description of the research
The survey will ask you specifically about your last experience with negotiating a job offer, how previous experience or lack of experience played a role, and what other factors contributed to your negotiation.
The estimated time to complete the survey is 5 - 10 minutes. We would appreciate your response by June 30th, 2019.
What are the potential benefits of participating in this survey?
Potential benefits relate to the advancement of knowledge in this area as well as a potential indirect benefit to academic librarians nervous about negotiating.
What are the potential risks involved in participating in this survey?
The risks involved in participating in this study are minimal. All appropriate steps will be taken to ensure anonymity and confidentiality. NoTE: Privacy cannot be guaranteed when electronic surveys are used.
Protection of Privacy
The online survey will be administered by Qualtrics Survey Software and hosted on their secure servers. The raw data will be electronically stored on secure servers maintained by the University of...., in password protected folders accessible only to the research team. only members of the research team will have access to the raw data. For more information on Qualtrics' Privacy Statement please visit the following: https://www.qualtrics.com/privacy-statement/
Raw data will be retained and kept on the University of ...'s secure servers (or migrated to another secure server) for a minimum of 5 years. Aggregate data will be deposited to a data repository and will be shared broadly. Destruction of the data may occur at a future time if and when the raw data do not provide any further research potential.
Access to research information
Data will be stored on secure servers maintained by the University of..., in password protected folders accessible only to the research team.
Participation in the survey is voluntary, you may decline to answer any questions and you may withdraw from the survey at any time before submission of the survey. To withdraw close the browser you are using and your responses will not be recorded. Responses may not be withdrawn after the survey has been submitted, as responses are not personally identifiable.
The survey findings may be published or presented in scholarly communications. An aggregate version of the dataset will be released into an appropriate research data repository. If you would like a copy of the survey results/aggregate dataset or have any questions about the survey, you may contact the co-Principal Investigators, Authors. Questions regarding your rights as a participant in this research may be addressed to the office
*f Research Ethics...
By clicking on the 'yes I agree' button below, you agree:
* That the goals of the study have been explained to you and that you have had the opportunity to have your questions answered
* That the survey research team has your consent to use the information submitted to publish or present findings in scholarly communications.
* That the survey research team has your consent to the use of your information as described in this form
* To take part in this study
Do you agree to participate in the Negotiation Survey?
* YES, I agree to participate
* No, I do not want to participate
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2021. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Bien qu'un petit nombre d'études aient porté sur la négociation salariale dans le domaine de la bibliothéconomie, aucune n'a porté sur les bibliothèques universitaires canadiennes. Quels sont les motivations et les obstacles qui influent sur la négociation des offres d'emploi? Lorsque les bibliothécaires canadiens négocient, quels sont les sujets abordés, et ont-ils le sentiment d'avoir réussi? Ce rapport préliminaire est un résumé descriptif des résultats d'une enquête que nous avons menée pour explorer la propension à la négociation et les perceptions des bibliothécaires universitaires canadiens lorsqu'on leur présente leur plus récente offre d'emploi. Une meilleure comprehension de ce sujet peut encourager les conversations de négociation et habiliter les bibliothécaires dans les futures négociations d'offres d'emploi pour amélíorer les salaires et les conditions de travail.