Why Toxic Dynamics Develop in Academic Libraries

Academic libraries often experience turbulence because you work inside one of the most complex political ecosystems in higher education. Bureaucratic processes, internal power dynamics, and hierarchical decision-making structures shape nearly every aspect of your daily work. The politics of change manifests deeply in the internal dynamics of your library—determining whether your organization remains adaptive, collaborative, and student-centered, or whether it slips into dysfunction, frustration, and burnout.

These political realities influence how decisions are made, how communication flows (or doesn’t), whose voices carry weight, and how quickly your library can respond to new challenges. In environments where bureaucracy slows action, where power is unevenly distributed, or where leaders must constantly negotiate for political capital, it’s no surprise that tensions rise and toxic patterns can take hold. If you feel that pressure daily, you are not imagining it—it is baked into the system.

Change Management

Change within academic libraries is invariably political because it emerges from the complex interplay of leadership dynamics, organizational culture, and institutional priorities. Successful change management requires recognizing that power, influence, and negotiation shape every decision. For transformation to occur, libraries must acknowledge and engage with their internal political structures rather than avoid them—building strategies that align with institutional goals while also protecting staff well-being. This is where intentional frameworks like CALM become essential: they offer ways to navigate the politics instead of being overwhelmed by them.

Leadership and Political Capital

Leaders in academic libraries must manage hierarchical structures and balance the expectations of faculty, staff, administrators, and students. As research shows, directors often struggle to enact change because they must constantly negotiate support from provosts, budget offices, and deans (Aslam, 2019; O’Bryan, 2018).
When political navigation becomes strained, leadership rigidity or defensiveness can set in—fertile ground for toxicity.

Organizational Culture

A library’s culture determines whether people feel safe to innovate.
Odili (2019) emphasizes that collaborative leadership fosters creativity, while bureaucratic or autocratic leadership suppresses engagement—conditions that often produce environments filled with mistrust and frustration (Fought & Misawa, 2018).

Institutional Alignment and Power Struggles

Libraries must justify their physical and budgetary footprint. As Saunders (2015) notes, shifting from traditional spaces to modern learning environments can trigger internal and external power struggles. These negotiations often expose unresolved political tensions that trickle down into staff relationships.

Technological Transitions

Digitization, research data management, and evolving job roles require significant adaptation (O’Connor, 2014; Saarti et al., 2017). When roles shift without communication, training, or clarity, anxieties rise—fueling conflict, resentment, and burnout.

The Political Bottom Line

Toxicity in academic libraries is rarely about “difficult people.”
It is often about difficult systems, unclear expectations, and structural friction.

But these same systems also contain the seeds of transformation.

Defining the Frameworks That Help Break Toxic Cycles

Before applying solutions, the blog defines each key concept.

What Is the CALM Framework?

CALM stands for:

• Communication – clear, transparent, consistent sharing of information
  
• Adaptability – the capacity to adjust behaviors and systems in response to change
  
• Learning – ongoing professional and organizational growth
  
• Management – aligning people, processes, and priorities with integrity
  
  

Developed through library leadership practice, CALM provides a grounded, actionable model for navigating change and reducing organizational harm.

What Is Critical Hope?

Critical hope is not optimism or wishful thinking. It is:

• grounded in the realities of harm and inequity
  
• paired with material action
  
• rooted in care and justice
  
• practiced through persistent, incremental behaviors
  
  

It offers a way to move forward even when institutions feel stuck.

What Is Incremental Relentlessness?

A component of critical hope, incremental relentlessness means:

• small, repeated, consistent actions
  
• that accumulate to produce meaningful change
  
• especially in systems resistant to transformation
  
  

It reframes change as a steady practice, not a dramatic overhaul.

What Is Ruha Benjamin’s Justice Lens?

Drawing from Benjamin’s work in Race After Technology and Viral Justice, her lens emphasizes:

• examining how systems produce harm
  
• making inequity visible
  
• using transparency and care to dismantle harmful structures
  
• building small-scale, justice-centered practices that grow over time
  
  

Her framework helps library leaders understand how daily decisions shape culture and well-being.

Using CALM, Critical Hope, and Benjamin’s Lens to Transform Toxic Dynamics

Now that the concepts are defined, here is how they directly apply to the political dynamics you described.

1. Communication: Making Power Visible and Reducing Confusion

Toxic environments thrive on ambiguity, rumor, and silence.

Using CALM:

• explain the why behind decisions, not just the outcome
  
• acknowledge political pressures openly
  
• establish predictable communication structures
  
• create feedback loops that respond, not dismiss
  
  

This aligns with Benjamin’s idea that opacity protects power; transparency protects people.

2. Adaptability: Changing Culture Through Everyday Actions

You noted how rigid leadership stifles creativity.
Adaptability counters that.

Using CALM:

• model flexibility during transitions
  
• co-design solutions with staff
  
• revise workflows collaboratively
  
• respond to mistakes as learning moments
  
  

This is where critical hope’s incremental relentlessness (Kari Grain) becomes essential: culture shifts through daily, not dramatic, behaviors.

3. Learning: Reducing Fear During Technological and Organizational Change

Your analysis shows how technology reshapes roles and expectations.
Learning mitigates anxiety and reduces toxic fallout.

Using CALM:

• create low-pressure training
  
• normalize questions and experimentation
  
• develop shared vocabulary for digital transitions
  
• provide multiple learning pathways
  
  

Aligned with Benjamin, learning becomes an ethical act—ensuring technology supports equity rather than exacerbates harm.

4. Management: Aligning Purpose, People, and Power

Political tension grows when expectations and priorities are unclear.

Using CALM:

• align library goals with institutional missions
  
• clarify job roles during transitions
  
• document decisions to reduce confusion
  
• base decisions on values, not personalities
  
  

Good management is not about authority—it is about alignment and accountability, reducing the conditions where toxicity takes root.

Critical Hope in Action: Creating Micro-Climates of Health

Even if institutional structures are slow to change, small teams and individuals can create healthier pockets of community.

Micro-climates thrive when staff:

• set clear boundaries
  
• document expectations
  
• support colleagues privately and publicly
  
• use appreciative inquiry in meetings
  
• create shared norms for respectful communication
  

These small actions form the “relentless increments” (Kari Grain's Critical Hope) that reshape cultures over time.

Conclusion: Change Is Political, but Healing Is Possible

Your analysis shows the structural roots of toxicity in libraries: leadership pressures, cultural barriers, institutional alignment, and technological disruption. But with CALM, Ruha Benjamin’s justice lens, and the steady practice of critical hope, academic libraries can transform even entrenched dysfunction.

Change is political—but transformation is practical.
And it begins with clear communication, adaptive leadership, continuous learning, and ethical management.

Toxicity is not a final diagnosis; it is a call to act with clarity, courage, and hope.

Further Reading

CALM Framework

Michalak, R. (forthcoming). Managing Up, Managing Across, and Collaborating with Faculty as a Library Director: Embedding AI Tools using Learning Organization Principles. ACRL Press

Michalak, R. & Dawes. (2024). Introducing the CALM Framework: Navigating Change with Confidence in Academic Libraries. Blog Post. Inclusive Knowledge Solutions. https://www.inclusiveknowledgesolutions.com/2013665_introducing-the-calm-framework-navigating-change-with-confidence-in-academic-libraries

Ruha Benjamin

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code.
Benjamin, R. (2022). Viral Justice: How We Grow the World We Want.

Critical Hope

Grain, K. (2022). Critical Hope: How to Grapple with Complexity, Lead with Purpose, and Cultivate Transformative Social Change. North Atlantic Books.