New proposed Mission Statement and Core Values

In light of our country's political climate, might we consider removing the word "diverse" from our mission statement? I believe that underscoring unity despite our differences may be a healthier direction to lean at this time.

I generally agree with the new values, but I think that there should be more discussion for how we choose to phrase new potential core values.

In one of my MLIS classes I had to read "Transforming Our Image, Building Our Brand: The Education Advantage" by Valerie Gross, and she recommends against using the word "entertain" in strategic planning vocabulary, as it "invites diminished funding" because it falls into the "discretionary" category. I'm not sure if this would ever be an issue for Metro, but I wanted to bring it up just in case.

"Fun, engaging, enticing, and captivating are excellent alternatives for entertaining in many instances", and as we already use the term "engagement" throughout Metro, maybe "entertain" could be swapped for "engage" in the mission statement?

I think that you've hit on a key point, if our funding ever became an issue which it probably will not, the word entertain sounds like something that OK County tax payers may find nonobligatory if ever brought up in a future-funding public vote.

I believe that the focus should be on what we all have in common. But, I also believe that it is very important to emphasize that, while we share many things, we are also unique and, yes, diverse, individuals, who are working towards unity.

Diversity by no means excludes unity. In my mind, diversity is a key ingredient to unity in thought and being.

I think people appreciate having some of our library employees who look like them ( a Customer shared this sentiment with me last year). So, however it is stated, I hope that this is what we mean by diversity as well. The library is a mini melting-pot and I hope it continues to be so in all of our functioning areas.
Darcus

I like the conciseness of the proposed core values. I do think it's worth including some version of "freedom to learn," though, unless we are restricted to 5 items. It might be argued it's inferred from the others or obvious, or that it's not something we necessarily engage with explicitly every day, but I think it's important to highlight that the library values and protects the community's right and freedom to gain knowledge / information.

It is part of our core culture and values (and that of public libraries in general) and informs all of our decisions and how we operate: We strive to provide broad and unfettered access to resources and information (and the spaces to use and share them), maintain individuals' privacy, and highlight that commitment through our policies and events like Banned Books Week.

To quote the post: "Our most recent efforts to update the Strategic Plan have included multiple sessions with five stakeholder groups: The Commission, Customers, Leadership Team, Staff, and the Strategic Focus Group (selected staff and managers providing the planning process with feedback). Each group of stakeholders has been consulted throughout the strategic planning revision process and has provided valued input that has resulted in the latest iteration of the Mission Statement and Organizational Values."

While we are discussing diversity/inclusion/unity, this portion of the post struck me. Various groups of people were consulted, but what was the demographic make-up of the groups that were consulted? Many of us don't even hear about these things until well after they happen. Many organizations are beginning to show their work, and beyond a blanket statement of unity or diversity are outlining the steps they are taking beyond simple words. While I don't expect all of that to be outlined in a core values/mission statement, that information would be valuable for the staff and staff morale. We can say we have a commitment to just about anything, but it is a stronger statement if we can back it up. And I'm not saying we can't, I'm just saying that the information isn't proactively shared, and perhaps it should be.

I would also like to ask how we're defining the idea of "inclusion." Often times, that word is used and then only pursued along a few standard dimensions such as race, gender, or age. But the word "diverse" implies a myriad of differences, which in turn gives us a myriad of dimensions along which to show inclusivity. Personally, I think this is an area where we could stand to improve. In seeing it listed as the top value, I'm really curious as to how the library will define that value and then what steps it will take to help its staff embody this value along all those dimensions?