Who wants to be a knowledge gardener or k-warrior?
Flicking through this week's CILIP Gazette at lunchtime, I noticed a little article entitled "How do we define ourselves:discuss", debating what information professionals should call themselves and whether it's important. Knowledge gardener, k-guardian, k-provider and the alarming-sounding k-warrior (is a Lycra-suit essential to this role?) are apparently all real job titles.
However, no one knows outside the profession what these job titles mean and it seems that when asked what a knowledge gardener actually is most people would revert to using 'librarian' as part of the explanation as there is on some level a generic understanding of what librarian means.
Do job titles matter? Is it our issue as a profession or is it an issue for our users, employers and the media? Perhaps the way we explain what we do is more important than what we call ourselves? That said, I'm off to ask Sue if she'd consider changing my job title to Information Warrioress…