As you perform archival work—either operational or project-based—it’s essential to evaluate your workflows and procedures as a continuous part of your duties. Conducting check-ins provides opportunities for assessment and reevaluation.
For archival staff, this process could occur in meetings where the team discusses the current state of their department. For lone arrangers, marking a day or an afternoon quarterly for a “step back” and self-reflection allows you to gauge your systems without distraction. If you’re working on a project, you may also wish to perform more formal evaluations at critical points during the project lifecycle, such as at milestones.
Areas to Assess
You should assess the following areas:
Are workflows efficient, or do bottlenecks occur?
What changes can you make to improve the methods and procedures you’re using?
What can you do to work more effectively?
What’s holding you back? What obstacles do you perceive?
Are your procedures well-documented?
Are your guidelines being followed?
Are measures of quality being met?
What activities have a minimal impact? If you stopped doing them, would anyone notice?
Conversely, are there activities that you should start doing that will make a difference with your stakeholders and users?
What’s frustrating you? What’s keeping you from doing what you know you should be doing?
Reviewing the Archival Program
In addition to workflow evaluation, archivists should periodically review the effectiveness of the archival program. This activity is especially important when the scale of the program expands or when there are new hires. Workflows that function well for small projects or departments may prove inefficient for larger ones, and processes may need to be streamlined to maintain an acceptable level of productivity.
If you’ve been in your position for a while, or work with colleagues who have, it’s easy to continue with outdated or overly complicated procedures because you have always performed work in that manner. “That’s how it’s done here” or “we tried that once, but it didn’t work” are unfortunately common refrains. Traditions run deep and change management—the activities to prepare and support individuals, teams, and institutions in making organizational change—is difficult. However, critically reviewing your program and how it can be improved by doing things in new ways is worth the effort. So much of the work that archivists do is invisible to our patrons. We need to ensure that we are expending energy on doing the most highly valued and recognized activities. How can we streamline archival work?
More Product, Less Process
For instance, if you’re conducting a digitization project, your metadata practices may be streamlined over time by placing less emphasis on detailed description so that items may be processed quicker. Perhaps you could readjust the metadata strategy you created at the start of the project for maximum information communication and speed. Embrace the “more product, less process” philosophy expressed by Mark A. Greene and Dennis Meissner that advocates minimal processing as a means of eliminating backlogs and maximizing access to materials. You may need other strategies for improvement, including training new staff members and reassigning existing ones to take on new duties.
Here to Serve Our Users
Aim to maintain an attitude of flexibility and customer service. Realize that policies and procedures change over time and be willing to adjust when needed. Integrating evaluation and assessment into your work will make it easier for you to do your job easier and find and correct issues before they become problems. In an environment where archivists must do more with less, concentrate on the activities that will have the most impact with the minimum investment of time, cost, and resources. You deserve it, and your users will see the difference in their experience with your archival repository.
The blog was originally published on Lucidea's blog.
With shrinking resources and increasing demands, archivists cannot afford to view budgeting as an afterthought. A carefully developed budget is a strategic tool that connects an archives’ mission to its daily operations. It demonstrates accountability, supports advocacy efforts, and provides a framework for decision-making.
Archives often operate in environments defined by scarcity of space, staff, time, and funding. In these conditions, every decision carries weight. Without a plan, archives risk spreading their resources too thin, responding only to immediate crises, and missing opportunities for growth and impact. Strategic planning serves as a lifeline, providing archivists with a structured approach to prioritize, allocate resources, and communicate the value of their work to stakeholders.
Archivists have long recognized patterns of limited funding that shape their institutions, yet they have consistently responded with creativity, commitment, and innovation. Even when resources are scarce, archives continue to find ways to build and maintain essential infrastructure and strengthen public engagement. Each challenge underscores the importance of archivists’ labor and provides an opportunity to advocate for the central role archives play in their communities.
Archives safeguard treasures, including objects like the founding documents of a nation and photographs of defining cultural moments. These holdings inspire a sense of connection to the past, and at the heart of that work are archivists whose expertise brings these collections to life.
No archives is an island. Especially in resource-constrained environments, collaboration through shared infrastructure provides a lifeline. Consortia models turn scarcity into opportunity by spreading costs and expertise across multiple archives. By pooling resources, institutions achieve more than they could alone.
Well-resourced institutions have developed archival best practices, including comprehensive finding aids, climate-controlled storage, and digital preservation systems. For small or resource-constrained archives, these standards can feel out of reach. The danger is that the profession’s ideals may discourage institutions from taking action, leaving records vulnerable. The solution lies in paring down practices and procedures without abandoning principles.
Many archives exist within environments of chronic underfunding. Community archives, small historical societies, or lone arrangers may work with little more than donated materials, a handful of volunteers, and minimal budgets.
However, these institutions remain vital, safeguarding the histories of communities often absent from mainstream narratives. Scarcity shapes their reality, yet it can still allow meaningful work.
Humanity produces more digital content than at any other point in history. Every click, message, and post contributes to an expanding universe of data that represents the cultural memory of our time. At the center of this transformation stand archivists, the professionals uniquely trained to ensure that memories survive in the future. However, even as the scale of the challenge grows, their voices risk being sidelined in public conversations about digital preservation.
In recent years, the concept of “slow librarianship” has emerged as a thoughtful response to the accelerating pace and pressures placed upon library professionals. Drawing inspiration from the broader slow movement, it emphasizes care, reflection, ethics, and people-centered work over speed and efficiency.
The archival profession is characterized by dedication to public memory, cultural preservation, and service. However, beneath this noble mission lies a troubling reality: the increasing reliance on gig and contract labor.
Written documents have long occupied a privileged position in archives as the most authoritative memory source. However, this excludes vast repositories of knowledge that reside outside the written word, especially within Indigenous communities, where memory is often preserved and transmitted through oral traditions, performance, storytelling, ceremony, and embodied practices.
Archival description is often treated as a neutral or technical task: summarizing contents, assigning subject headings, and organizing metadata for retrieval. However, description is actually far from neutral. It shapes how users interpret records, which narratives are centered, and whose voices are made visible or erased.
As the archival profession reckons with the legacies of colonialism, more institutions and practitioners are turning toward Indigenous and decolonial approaches that reframe traditional archival practice. Central to this shift is recognizing cultural protocols and community-defined rules governing how knowledge is created, shared, accessed, and preserved. Cultural protocols are foundational to ethical, respectful, and reciprocal relationships between archives and Indigenous communities.
In recent decades, Indigenous communities and archivists have challenged the dominant frameworks that have long shaped archival practice. Traditionally, Western archival models have prioritized state authority, institutional control, and the presumption of neutrality. These models often fail to reflect Indigenous worldviews, community needs, or the rights of Indigenous peoples over their records and heritage.
As archival practice shifts to meet the challenges of the digital age, the ethical use of born-digital materials has become one of the most pressing concerns for archivists. These materials—emails, websites, text messages, digital photographs, spreadsheets, social media posts, and more—are created and stored digitally from their inception.
The fundamental principles of archival preservation focus on the agents of deterioration, preventive conservation, and essential preservation strategies applied in archival settings.
The monetary appraisal of archives and manuscripts is a critical yet underexplored intersection of library science and financial valuation. This article addresses the persistent knowledge gap between archival assessment and fiscal valuation and provides an overview of the monetary appraisal process in the United States. It focuses on concluding the fair market value (FMV) of noncash charitable contributions, a process governed by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). By documenting practices and terminology, the article serves as a resource for archivists navigating the complexities of donor relations and institutional stewardship. It advocates for increased fiscal literacy within the archival profession, suggesting that an integrated understanding of market dynamics and stewardship costs is essential for the care and financial substantiation of collections.
Proper archival storage is one of the most critical aspects of archival preservation. In addition to housing collections in a dedicated archival storage room, using suitable storage materials and enclosures helps protect archival collections from environmental damage, physical wear, and chemical deterioration.
One of the core challenges archivists face is determining the appropriate description level for materials in their collections. From broad collection-level overviews to granular item-level details, descriptive hierarchies play a crucial role in conveying the context and structure of archival materials.
Description is a cornerstone of archival practice, providing the means for users and archivists to understand, access, and interpret materials.
Mixed-media archives, which contain physical and digital records, present unique challenges for archival arrangement. These collections require archivists to develop strategies that address the different needs of physical and digital materials while maintaining the collection’s coherence and accessibility.
Digital records have introduced new challenges to traditional archival arrangement practices. While the principles of original order and provenance remain relevant, the nature of digital materials requires archivists to adapt these principles to new formats and technologies.
Archival arrangement organizes and structures archival materials to ensure efficient management, access, and preservation.
Redaction in archival work—obscuring or removing sensitive information from records—has become a central concern in contemporary archival ethics. As archives increasingly acquire born-digital records and digitize historical collections for online access, archivists must grapple with data privacy, access, transparency, and potential harm.
Archives have traditionally focused on preserving historical records, ensuring access, and maintaining the integrity of collections. However, in the digital age, the moral responsibilities of archivists have grown more complex.
Archives have long been viewed as bastions of memory, preservation, and historical accountability. However, archivists must confront ethical questions in an era of digital surveillance, data harvesting, and global information flows.
As archival institutions evolve from custodians of information to facilitators of memory and meaning-making, emotional engagement has become a vital, though often overlooked, dimension of archival design.
Archival reading rooms have long been the centerpiece of public access to collections. They are where researchers engage with historical documents, where discovery becomes tangible, and where the institutional identity of an archives is most visibly embodied.
Archival discovery tools, such as catalogs, finding aids, search interfaces, and digital repositories, are often the first point of contact between users and collections. These tools serve as maps and compasses, guiding users through vast and often complex holdings.
Archives often find themselves competing for limited resources within larger institutions. Universities prioritize teaching and research, nonprofits focus on programs and services, and corporations channel funds toward revenue-generating initiatives.