The director of the library where I work, Carol Dickerson is retiring in just a few short weeks. Also retiring with the end of this academic year is Paul Keurbis, a long-time professor at Colorado College and more recently the head of the teaching and learning center.

We held a nice big party for them today, and I had the chance to grab the mic and present them with a small gift–blank books bound in the original orange carpeting from our library. (Long story, inside joke, you had to be there.)

But before presenting the gift, I couldn’t resist a short speech. Here’s more or less what I said:

Carol and Paul, thank you so much for your work here. I have learned a great deal about leadership from both of you. First, I admire the way you treat all your colleagues with trust and take joy in working with us. Second, I admire the way you keep our mission in mind at all times: to support and enable teaching and learning at this college.

I could have gone on more about this, but I think what I said gets at the heart of what I think a good leader does. With trust and a clear sense of mission, there’s no need to mirco-manage. No need to claim credit or appeal to your own authority.

There’s more to making a good leader than trust and mission, but I’m not sure you can lead without those qualities. They are qualities I hope to cultivate more in myself.

From the November 11, 2011 TLS review by David Finkelstein of Michael J. Everton’s book The Grand Chorus of Complaint: Authors and the Business Ethics of American Publishing:

In the nineteenth century, American publishers were rarely viewed positively. They were vilified as thieves and predators engaged in the systematic business of “cutting each other’s throats,” to quote a late-century commentator. Yet contemporary publishers saw themselves less as villains than as merchants of culture and civility, using self-serving rhetoric that linked culture and competition, moral virtue and economic wealth.

. . .

Everton offers an unusual perspective on this issue, focusing on the bombastic debates over natural and moral rights that took place in American circles at mid-century. His perspicacious conclusion is that in this case, opponents of unethical publishers used language as a weapon to cast authors as persecuted moral authorities in a land dominated by crass commercial interests.

Yes. Some of the issues are different this time around, but let’s just substitute “libraries” for “authors” in that last paragraph and see how far it can go.

From “The Digital Shift,” Librarians Feel Sticker Shock as Price for Random House Ebooks Rises as Much as 300 Percent:

New prices for Random House’s ebooks took effect on Thursday, and as the details emerged a number of librarians across the country expressed dismay at the doubling and tripling in prices they are seeing.

“We’re very concerned. These are tough times for libraries. It’s very tough here in Louisville,” said Debbe Oberhausen, manager of collection services, at the Louisville Free Public Library. “We want to provide this service, but this kind of pricing is really going to take a huge chunk of our budget,” she said.

. . .

“We believe our new library e-pricing reflects the high value placed on perpetuity of lending and simultaneity of availability for our titles,” said Stuart Applebaum, a Random House spokesperson. “Understandably, every library will have its own perspective on this topic, and we are prepared to listen, learn, and adapt as appropriate,” he said.

“Simultaneity” here means that Random House’s titles are available to libraries on the same date the retail edition is put on sale. It is not referring to simultaneous, multiple user access. The model remains one book, one user.

I don’t know that you need any commentary from me about this. It’s just part of the pattern. Publishers are completely lost as to what they should do anymore. If they weren’t lashing out and hurting readers, libraries, and authors, I’d feel sorry for them.