Why does scale matter?

This past Friday was the second Friday where I felt like I'd rather not be at woik. This isn't to say I'd rather not work in Libraries, I'd just rather not work in my own.

Granted, like the previous week, I had run hard on Thursday.

But I'm increasingly finding it difficult to pry myself away from shiny larger scale theoretical things for the small pond of my Library. This is strange - my Library overall is not a bad gig.

It's doubly strange when I consider that I'm pretty sure that administration will scale.

Not to be to Prussian, but regimentation in the organisational sense works. Gareth Morgan puts things vastly more eloquently than I in his Images of Organisation under the Mechanisation Takes Command chapter. Where most of this chapter would prove deleterious when applied to a Library setting, Libraries do tend to adopt some form of scalar command. Further, stuff tends to shake out so that each supervisors is overseeing a handful to a dozen or so employees, as in similar in size to a squad. Medium sized Libraries end up equating to Platoons, with larger ones resembling Companies, to me.

Which is a little frightening, and not because I'm militaristic in my choice of parallel. It demonstrates how small we are. A company is a small enough unit that there's a fair chance you know just about everyone's name after a little while. It's homey. And yet the Libraries we consider vast would usually fit under this aegis...

So this stuff puts words to thoughts that have swum in my head the last few years. Things I knew intuitively are finding rationales. I have a hunch that it just doesn't matter if I were to direct a larger Library, it would just boil down to more of the same, just a little larger. Similar polygons, larger proportions.

If this is uninteresting to me, why is it rewarding to address larger scale problems that blanket numerous Libraries? Isn't the problematique just a bigger polygon of a single Library's (or more likely set of Libraries') issues? Why do I feel like I wouldn't get bored when I look at that spectrum as I do when I oversee the web at a single Library?

I had a blast on the State Aid Review Committee. There are certainly patterns in the data, and I loved looking for them.

It seemed as though there was diversity at the State Level. In dealing with my truly wonderful Region, it seems as though complexity is ever present in the compound environment.

And that complexity, that dealing with the problems of many Libraries simultaneously set off a symphony in my head Friday. I was thinking on why we lobby incorrectly, what we do that's cool that isn't transactional in nature and I just kept getting to Nerdvana. It was excruciating to keep pulling myself out of their problems and force myself to focus on State Paperwork for my lone Library. I keep wondering at benefiting hundreds of thousands of Patrons instead of under 1,500.

Why am I not daunted by large scale management? Why am I not seduced by the lure of helping several thousand Patrons at a larger Library? Why is a single Library grey, when a system or several systems are saturated? I realise the compound nature of things factors in, but I can strike that from the equation since State Aid was sexy yet had to do with just publics. (Much as I tried to stretch to make it more than that.)

So I'll go back to bed thinking of the faucet dripping. It shouldn't matter that the fixture is different or larger, the chaotic drip is present in both. So why does size matter here? Or am I fooling myself?