David Benjamin, Alison Clemens, Elena Colón-Marrero, Rosemary Pleva Flynn, Mary Manning, Jessica C. Neal, Kelly Revak, Jill Severn, Helen Wong Smith, and Linda A. Whitaker 2021-01-21 13:29:34
Research on age diversity in archives remains much less developed than research on race and gender diversity. Age diversity is often excluded from conversations about diversity and is an overlooked aspect of our intersectional identities. In any organization, multigenerational diversity among employees affords the benefit of seasoned experience and knowledge combined with tech-savviness and innovative approaches. However, the intersection of age with other aspects of identity (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality) also creates barriers. Exploring age diversity in the archival profession and its relation to workplace experiences is an essential step in understanding how age affects archivists, our work, and how we build meaningful intergenerational relationships with our colleagues.
The authors of this article created a panel entitled “Young, Old, Seasoned, Green: Assessing Power Dynamics in Multigenerational Archives” at the 2019 Joint Annual Meeting of SAA and the Council of State Archivists. Our primary goal was to create multigenerational and cross-cultural dialogue related to power dynamics regarding age and experience in the archival workplace. We used the following questions to guide the session’s conversations:
What challenges/opportunities do multigenerational archival workplaces face?
How do age and experience relate to other aspects of diversity and power dynamics?
How is institutional knowledge transferred?
After the session, we emailed a follow-up survey link to archives groups, principally SAA’s sections and regional archives organizations, to reach a broader audience. The survey included the above questions, plus the following:
What else do we need to know about age and experience levels to build an optimal multigenerational profession?
Personal reflections: We invite you to share a personal story, reflection, or anecdote related to any of the above.
There were 255 survey responses. The respondents’ ages ranged from their 20s to 70s, with the largest percentage in their 30s and 40s. Experience levels ranged from less than one year to more than thirty-one years, with the largest percentage from those employed in the archival field for eleven to twenty years.
We refer to both survey respondents and session participants as “respondents.” Throughout this article, we have used the respondents’ word choices when directly quoting them. In our discussion, we use “younger” and “older” when we are discussing age differences. We have used the term “early career” to describe archivists that are newer to the profession. We use “senior” to describe an archivist with many years of service in an organization. In some organizations, “senior” is also used as part of job titles and descriptions to indicate a position has certain knowledge requirements or has increased levels of responsibility or supervision, but we did not include this granularity in our survey.
Next, we conducted a thematic analysis to examine common topics and responses shared by respondents. Shared themes between the session and the survey were evident. The most salient themes in the data centered around race, employment precarity, stereotypes, age-related power dynamics, the intersection of age with other identities, communication, change, and gatekeeping. What follows is a general thematic overview of the top three topics raised most frequently by respondents. We hope that these perspectives introduce complexity to current thinking around age and diversity in the archival profession and spark further exploration and analyses.
Language and communication are rooted in differences. At times, these differences lead to differing perceptions, viewpoints, stereotyping, and microaggressions. Some respondents described microaggressions used by people of one age group to diminish people’s worth from another age group. Examples included saying, “you are young enough to be my child,” “you are old enough to be my parent,” and “when are you going to retire?” Additionally, younger respondents, especially those of color, often feel unheard or discouraged by coworkers from speaking about work-related issues. Young archivists of color responding to the survey expressed that when they do speak up, they feel that their coworkers do not value their knowledge and views. One respondent noted that it is “easy to feel dismissed as a young person of color, especially if it comes from older white male colleagues.”
Equally, some older archivists expressed frustration that they felt stereotyped. One of these respondents commented,
"[At] some places having age and experience is looked upon with great disdain . . . I had someone recently tell me that it’s time for the ‘old white guys’ to get out of the way. As someone who is technically an ‘old white guy’ (though I’m not white or a guy) it kind of hurt—especially as I am trying to stay abreast of changes in the field and understand the need to have the experience of the elders and the energy and the dynamics of the new professionals."
Archivists across age and experience would benefit from eschewing assumptions about each other and seeking opportunities to challenge power dynamics that interfere with meaningful dialogue and deliberation.
Change and resistance to change were dominant topics. Many archivists new to their organization recalled being told by senior archivists some version of “that is the way things have always been done.” Indeed, many respondents across the range of age and experience levels attributed resistance to change by senior archivists in leadership positions to a fear of losing power and privilege. However, some older or senior archivists’ responses suggest this guarding may also derive from a perception that younger or newer archivists would not value rationales for keeping past practices or traditions. Other respondents noted that aversion to change affects willingness to collaborate and impedes advancement in social justice, diversity, and equity work.
Resistance to change can permeate into other aspects of the workplace environment. This resistance is most visible in the unwillingness to transfer institutional knowledge. This unwillingness creates a barrier to better understanding workplace culture and the ability to use institutional knowledge as a tool to reimagine future possibilities of the work.
Respondents commented on the importance of institutional memory and expressed frustration that organizations often do a poor job of encouraging this knowledge transfer. When asked how their organization transfers institutional knowledge, approximately 20% responded with variations of “it doesn’t.”
What seems clear is that there are varying interpretations of what constitutes institutional memory in archives, and this shapes perceptions about what is worth transferring or jettisoning. These differences often interfere with archivists’ ability to move forward together. As one respondent remarked,
A shared cross-generational commitment to documenting, celebrating, [and] remembering institutional history can go a long way toward ensuring that all, regardless of length of tenure, understand their own responsibility for stewardship of unrecorded but invaluable local lore.
Gatekeeping comes in many forms. Respondents described age and experience as a factor in hiring as gatekeeping, often compounded by race, ability, and gender. For example, respondents reported ableist and ageist language, such as “hiring for fit,” in job advertisements. This language obscures an employer or hiring manager’s preference for a particular candidate pool. A respondent stated that “hiring archivists keep picking straight cis women and men over racialized and marginalized people and aren’t advocating for changes in hiring practices.” A second respondent echoed this sentiment, noting: "Age and experience are used as a form of gatekeeping that ultimately keep marginalized people out or in the margins of the field. Age and experience are weaponized by job postings to keep young and emerging archivists out of permanent positions."
Another respondent indicated that there was “an expectation to adopt/effect white culture in order to advance the field.”
Based on responses in both the session and survey, age and experience are significant factors shaping assumptions and behaviors in archival workplaces. For many, the assumptions and behaviors engendered by notions of age and experience are harmful and demand reparative work. However, these assumptions do not act in isolation but are part of a broad complex of ideas about ethnicity, sexuality, and class that intersect.
As mentioned by one respondent referencing sociologist Patricia Hill- Collins’s matrix of domination, “any issue impacted by age is also impacted by other identity-based issues.” Therefore, equity, diversity, and inclusion efforts must address all these assumptions and recognize how they intersect.
Although much of this report focuses on the frictions and frustrations of many currently working in multigenerational archival workplaces, the data also suggests that these environments can become hubs of diverse talents, experiences, and ideas if archivists embrace difference and work collectively to eradicate systemic racism, sexism, ableism, ageism, homophobia, and transphobia that serve as barriers for marginalized folx within our profession.
Self-awareness, vulnerability, bravery, and empathy are necessary to grow, make mistakes, apologize, and rectify harm—all essential in creating inclusive, thriving, diverse, multigenerational workplaces. We hope that this article galvanizes archivists to produce research, dialogue, and programming that addresses how age and variable experience levels affect collegiality, the dynamics of power relationships, and the role that power plays in shaping responses to change.
©Society of American Archivists. View All Articles.