{"title":"How archival studies and knowledge management practitioners describe the value of research: assessing the “quiet” archivist persona","authors":"Jennifer Y. Pearson","doi":"10.1007/s10502-021-09369-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The archivist persona is frequently described in terms of passive, introverted attributes, which are then viewed as contributing to critical concerns for the sector, such as a lack of visibility, perceived effectiveness, and funding. This study is the first to assess the archivist persona through a discourse analysis, examining the usage of words promoting value and positive benefits in archival studies publications. Titles and abstracts from research articles published in five prominent journals between 2015 and 2019 were analysed for a set of 57 words connoting value or valuable benefits, including terms such as “innovative”, “positive”, and “strategic.” An identical analysis of research articles published in five knowledge management (KM) publications over the same timeframe was also completed in order to provide a comparative dataset from an adjacent, yet more corporate-embedded information practice. The results demonstrate that archival studies researchers use value words to promote the benefits of their research, but do so at a significantly lower frequency and density when compared to KM. A qualitative analysis of the results shows that archivists leverage a passive lexicon to promote value and benefits, relying on generic adjectives and indirect claims, whereas the lexicon of KM communicates direct, actionable outcomes that more readily align with business stakeholders’ priorities. These findings suggest practical communications recommendations for the archives sector, which could enhance business stakeholders’ perceptions of archivists and the value of archival work.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46131,"journal":{"name":"ARCHIVAL SCIENCE","volume":"22 1","pages":"95 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ARCHIVAL SCIENCE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10502-021-09369-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
The archivist persona is frequently described in terms of passive, introverted attributes, which are then viewed as contributing to critical concerns for the sector, such as a lack of visibility, perceived effectiveness, and funding. This study is the first to assess the archivist persona through a discourse analysis, examining the usage of words promoting value and positive benefits in archival studies publications. Titles and abstracts from research articles published in five prominent journals between 2015 and 2019 were analysed for a set of 57 words connoting value or valuable benefits, including terms such as “innovative”, “positive”, and “strategic.” An identical analysis of research articles published in five knowledge management (KM) publications over the same timeframe was also completed in order to provide a comparative dataset from an adjacent, yet more corporate-embedded information practice. The results demonstrate that archival studies researchers use value words to promote the benefits of their research, but do so at a significantly lower frequency and density when compared to KM. A qualitative analysis of the results shows that archivists leverage a passive lexicon to promote value and benefits, relying on generic adjectives and indirect claims, whereas the lexicon of KM communicates direct, actionable outcomes that more readily align with business stakeholders’ priorities. These findings suggest practical communications recommendations for the archives sector, which could enhance business stakeholders’ perceptions of archivists and the value of archival work.
期刊介绍：
Archival Science promotes the development of archival science as an autonomous scientific discipline. The journal covers all aspects of archival science theory, methodology, and practice. Moreover, it investigates different cultural approaches to creation, management and provision of access to archives, records, and data. It also seeks to promote the exchange and comparison of concepts, views and attitudes related to recordkeeping issues around the world.Archival Science''s approach is integrated, interdisciplinary, and intercultural. Its scope encompasses the entire field of recorded process-related information, analyzed in terms of form, structure, and context. To meet its objectives, the journal draws from scientific disciplines that deal with the function of records and the way they are created, preserved, and retrieved; the context in which information is generated, managed, and used; and the social and cultural environment of records creation at different times and places.Covers all aspects of archival science theory, methodology, and practiceInvestigates different cultural approaches to creation, management and provision of access to archives, records, and dataPromotes the exchange and comparison of concepts, views, and attitudes related to recordkeeping issues around the worldAddresses the entire field of recorded process-related information, analyzed in terms of form, structure, and context
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
