Interview with the Author: Joy Perrin on How Process Management Can Transform Librarianship

Joy M. Perrin is the author of the forthcoming book Efficiency by Design: Transforming Libraries and Archives through Process Management. My interview with her is below.  

Please introduce yourself to our readers.

I am a librarian who started working in database management, then physical processing, and then moved to managing a high-volume book digitization lab. I earned my master’s degree in library science at University of North Texas (UNT) and worked in library research and development before becoming the head of the Digital Resources unit at the Texas Tech Libraries. 

How would you briefly describe Efficiency by Design?

This book offers library and archives professionals a comprehensive guide to optimizing processes, with a focus on improving efficiency, speed, effectiveness, and reliability while also addressing burnout. By integrating process management techniques with the specific needs of libraries and archives, the book bridges the gap between theory and practice, providing actionable strategies to streamline workflows. Ultimately, Efficiency by Design contributes to making library and archives management more productive, sustainable, and mindful of the challenges professionals face today. 

Why did you write this book?

When I was starting my career, I found valuable insights in books about process management. Most of these were written for businesses and engineers. While these books helped me rethink my approach and make meaningful changes within my organization, they were not written with libraries and archives in mind. That meant I had to sift through a lot of irrelevant content to extract the useful parts. I wanted to distill the key insights into a more accessible, practical resource specifically for library and archives professionals.  

Additionally, process management is usually framed as a top-down initiative imposed by administration. My experience was the opposite. I applied these principles directly to my own work and saw better results than I would have under a rigid, hierarchical approach. I wanted to show what is possible when professionals take a self-guided, self-directed approach to improving their workflows. 

What inefficiencies have you seen in the library profession?

From what I have observed, there are three major areas of inefficiency. 

The first is rooted in vocational awe, a concept written about by Fobazi Ettarh. Vocational awe creates the belief that library work (and other similar work) is inherently good and beyond critique. This mindset leads professionals to overcommit, set poor boundaries, and ultimately burn out. While all of this creates inefficiencies, the vocational awe also causes people not to want to address the problems because they feel like they are suffering for their profession. When people give too much of themselves to the job, they often struggle to step back and evaluate whether their work is effective or if it should even be done at all. 

The second is the culture of busyness, where people feel their work only has value if it is difficult. Because of this, people tend to make decisions that unintentionally increase the complexity and difficulty of their tasks simply to feel a greater sense of contribution. If I told an engineer that the machine they built would occasionally add features to the product randomly, just to make itself feel better, that engineer would panic. Yet, in libraries and archives, it is common to see workflows become unnecessarily complicated for similar reasons. 

The third is perfectionism. Many library and archives professionals aim for an undefined “high standard” rather than focusing on what’s truly needed for a given situation. Perfectionism often stems from a fear of failure, which leads people to design processes that are impossible to mess up or fail, even when allowing minor mistakes would actually increase overall efficiency. 

These three factors (vocational awe, the culture of busyness, and perfectionism) create “scar tissue” in workflows. Inefficiencies persist because people rarely stop to question why things are done a certain way or whether there is a better approach.   

What do you hope all readers take away from your book?

I hope readers take away two key ideas. First, business and engineering process management concepts are not complicated. We can apply these principles to everyday library and archives work without requiring a specialized process management professional. Anyone can use them to improve their workflows and make their work more efficient. 

Second, library and archives professionals have more agency over their work than they might assume. They have the power to reshape their processes in ways that make their jobs easier, improve outcomes for patrons, and benefit their organizations as a whole. Making small, intentional changes can lead to significant improvements; it is not necessary to wait for top-down initiatives to make those changes. 

Why do you believe efficiency is important?

Efficiency matters because it creates space for growth, adaptation, and creativity. All of these are essential in a field that is constantly evolving. 

Libraries often focus on future-proofing, but real adaptability does not come from rigid planning alone. It comes from giving employees the time and mental energy to learn new things, rethink outdated processes, and experiment. That kind of change is impossible if they are constantly overwhelmed, working at full capacity, and exhausted at the end of every day. 

The key to earning that slack time is efficiency. By making their jobs easier while producing higher quality work, employees free up their brains and their time to invest in their own professional development. Even if leadership is not prioritizing this, individuals can take control of their own efficiency to create more space for meaningful, engaging, and career-enhancing work. 

Libraries are facing complex challenges that require creative, thoughtful problem solving. That kind of thinking does not happen when people are drowning in “busy work”. The more easily and quickly we can do the quotidian work, the more we can harness the intelligence and talents of the professionals working in libraries and archives.   

When did you first recognize the transformational potential of efficiency in your career?

I go into this in more detail in the book, but one of the most important lessons I learned early in my career was just how much agency I had over my work once I questioned the way things had always been done. 

In my first professional job, I was responsible for two repetitive tasks that each took two full days to complete. That meant I spent almost my entire week (Monday through Thursday) on mind-numbing, time-consuming work, leaving only Friday for anything new that could actually build my skills. 

I asked my boss if I could take some time to rethink the process, with the condition that I could not cut corners or increase the error rate. She agreed, and through various methods, I got both tasks down to just thirty minutes each. What used to take four days now took me only an hour on Monday morning. My boss was thrilled. There was plenty of other work to do, and I tackled each new task with the same mindset, continuously finding better, faster ways to get things done. 

That experience changed everything for me. I didn’t just make my job easier. I completely remade it. In doing so, I became a much more valuable employee. More importantly, I gained confidence in my ability to reshape my work instead of passively accepting inefficiency. 

I want others to experience that kind of transformation. I want to help library and archives professionals rethink their processes, challenge assumptions, and take back control of their work.