Cultural Humility

Cultural Humility is a special report published by the American Library Association. The authors define cultural humility as “an approach to [diversity, equity, and inclusion] work that involves an awareness of and a commitment to redressing power imbalances, a practice of honest and nondefensive self-reflection, and an orientation toward the other person that accepts and appreciates their perspective on how important their culture and identities are in any given context and interaction” (p. 2). The concept was originally coined by medical doctors and educators Melanie Tervalon and Jann Murray-Garcia and has since been adapted for use in the library field and other professions. The authors' goal is for readers to gain an understanding of cultural humility, how it can be applied in the delivery of library services, and how it can be integrated into wider organizational culture.

The report is organized into chapters that provide an in-depth introduction to the definition, practice, and application of cultural humility on a multitude of levels, ranging from individual to institutional. Each chapter includes examples from the authors' personal and professional experiences that illustrate how the concept can be adopted in day-to-day practice. The report begins with a preface that unpacks the departure that cultural humility offers from traditional diversity training. The authors propose cultural humility as a useful and pertinent approach for libraries trying to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion within their organizations. The report's introduction chapter identifies why there is a need for cultural humility within libraries, highlighting discriminatory practices that Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) library workers often encounter. Although the authors emphasize the need for everyone, no matter their background, to embrace cultural humility, the prevailing whiteness of the profession underlies the need for those who occupy dominant viewpoints to understand the limitations of their own perspectives.

In the spirit of cultural humility, the authors highlight their own positionalities and experiences, weaving in personal narratives and experiences of growth into the report. Sarah R. Kostelecky (Zuni Pueblo), director of Digital Initiatives and Scholarly Communication for University of New Mexico Libraries, reflects on her lived experience as a mixed Native woman and her background working with the Indigenous Nations Library Program and Institute of American Indian Arts. Lori Townsend (Shoshone-Paiute) is the learning services coordinator and a social sciences librarian for University of New Mexico Libraries. In her research, she focuses on threshold concepts (i.e., concepts that, once understood, change the way that a person thinks about a topic), information literacy, cultural humility, source evaluation, and genre theory. David Hurley is the discovery and web librarian for University of New Mexico University Libraries. Hurley reflects on how his positionality as a white man was often invisible to him when he was growing up—until he was confronted by the limitations of his own perspective. His experience continually impacts his approach to cultural humility, user experience work, reference services, and information literacy.

This explicit disclosure of the authors' positionalities and backgrounds is an active departure from the often “objective” third-person voice that proliferates diversity-related literature. The value of cultural humility—that is, the emphasis on understanding that our own positionalities and personal experiences are not universal—is a quality that makes cultural humility particularly important to adapt within a library and archives setting. In the second chapter, the authors make the connection that the ability to see outside one's own perspective is integral to creating structures and policies designed for a broad scope of people. As the authors note, “if we can see beyond our own experience of the world, we will be less likely to create structural inequities, more likely to recognize those that already exist, and less defensive when ones we didn't notice are pointed out to us” (p. 6).

The third chapter includes a survey of cultural humility in relation to other approaches to discussing diversity, equity, and inclusion in libraries, including cultural competence and critical race theory (CRT). The authors do this not to critique the different approaches but rather to show how cultural humility can build off other principles. When they introduce CRT, for example, the authors acknowledge that they will not be able to provide an in-depth overview of the concept in this report; instead, they highlight a few key ideas from CRT that are particularly foundational to cultural humility. This includes intersectionality, which presents a “model for understanding how multiple facets of one's identity can interplay, including in unique forms of discrimination or oppression” (p. 9). Like cultural humility, intersectionality highlights the need to see beyond our own perspective and to recognize the multifaceted aspects of other's identities. CRT thus provides insights that, in concert with cultural humility, expand and deepen our understanding of how to reduce harm in our interactions with others.

Subsequent chapters in the report dig into definitions of cultural humility and identify key components of practicing the theory, such as redressing power imbalances. In practice, this means acknowledging and actively challenging the presence of structural inequities, particularly those that exist within the context of the library workplace and interactions with library users. The authors present cultural humility as a process that is fundamentally action oriented. Redressing power imbalances is not something that can be done passively—it takes concerted, continual effort. The authors give the example of a collection development librarian taking the initiative to seek out materials that are not available through the usual vendors. Although this may disrupt the normal ordering workflow, it is a necessary step to bring different voices into the collection.

The authors equally emphasize that cultural humility is a continual process with no definable end goal, which stems from the idea that it is not possible to become “competent” in another's culture. As the authors note, “it is impossible to really know either a person's culture or the full context of your interaction with them. . . . What cultural humility offers is a way to sit with your unknowing, to acknowledge the limits of your knowledge, and still move forward to build and maintain the relationships needed to make change” (p. 16). This emphasis on continual self-assessment is deeply aligned with guiding principles for archivists as outlined in Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS), which states that archivists should be fundamentally user centered in the way they provide access to information.¹

This report posits that cultural humility is a learn-by-doing process, with the expectation that developing an understanding of the concept will not be a linear journey. So, how does one actually develop a practice of cultural humility? The authors offer three key components: 1) don't be defensive; 2) recognize other perspectives; and 3) practice critical self-reflection. While these practices are important to integrate on an individual level, there is also a need to apply them at the institutional level. The authors believe that organizations should foster a supportive working environment in which individuals are encouraged to develop a practice of cultural humility. However, it is important to acknowledge the challenges of developing a cultural humility practice from within traditional organizational structures—specifically the limitations of workshops and other educational and consciousness-raising initiatives. While such efforts can certainly provide important learning opportunities, they may also prove harmful for BIPOC and other staff from marginalized backgrounds if not led or structured correctly. While the authors do not necessarily suggest abandoning workshops altogether, they do call on library leadership to commit to developing their own practice of cultural humility, particularly through “deep listening and reflection without defensiveness” (p. 29). Importantly, the authors also acknowledge the limitations of adopting cultural humility from within structures that still uphold and contribute to whiteness. If cultural humility is adopted into organizations where dominant perspectives are the norm, its impact will be diminished. Fundamentally, the practice of cultural humility works to decenter whiteness. Those in the library and archives profession, and especially those in leadership positions, must remain aware of the negative potential of discussions of cultural humility that reinforce whiteness.

Progress can be made at both the individual and institutional levels when a key tenant of cultural humility is put into practice: to redress power imbalances by decentering one's own perspective. The authors acknowledge that BIPOC information professionals may bristle at this suggestion—why would those who are continuously marginalized need to further humble themselves? The authors answer that question with a great deal of nuance, ultimately reinforcing the idea that a practice of cultural humility does not preclude anybody from having pride in the multifaceted identities we have as individuals.

The last chapter in the report offers an Indigenous perspective on cultural humility. Kostelecky and Townsend reflect on their journeys learning about cultural humility as Indigenous people and the parallels they found with Indigenous cultures—particularly the lifelong commitment to continuous learning, decentering of the individual, and accepting the inevitability of gaps in one's own knowledge and understanding.

The conclusion reiterates a fundamental tenet of cultural humility that is echoed throughout the report: that a central goal of cultural humility is to build and maintain positive relationships that actively seek to reduce harm and resist power imbalances. A particularly helpful closing note that the authors offer is that despite best efforts and energies to implement cultural humility at an individual level, if people in power choose not to join us, “we move on to find other partners, leaving the door open for them to learn and grow” (p. 39). This stance leaves room for an essential component of cultural humility—that of experiencing the great joy that diverse perspectives offer us. Given the often defeating, uphill battle of implementing cultural humility frameworks into organizations with dominant perspectives, I find this endnote to be of critical importance.

As someone who has advocated for the implementation of cultural humility frameworks within archives, and specifically in reparative archival description practices, I found this report to be an illustrative and thorough introduction to cultural humility. Although it speaks to a more general library audience than to archivists, there are many takeaways for those within the archival community. The keys to practicing cultural humility that the authors offer resonate particularly with the challenges I have faced while advocating for these frameworks: don't be defensive, recognize other perspectives, and practice critical self-reflection. In my experience of advocating for language remediation, reexamining descriptive practices, and pushing for a “slow archives”² approach to reparative description work, those who would have greatly benefited from cultural humility practices have exhibited varying degrees of resistance. There is a universal need for those in positions of power within the library and archives community to deeply engage in these frameworks and to commit to a lifelong practice of redressing power imbalances and ensuring that dominant perspectives are not the only ones involved in decision-making. On a personal level, I also find following a practice of cultural humility to be essential, both in engaging in reparative description work and my continual development as a colleague and advocate for myself and others in positions of lesser power.

Cultural Humility offers an extensive framework for developing a practice of cultural humility. If we are to move forward as a profession that truly values and prioritizes equity, diversity, inclusion, and access, committing to the lifelong learning of the practices offered in this report is an instrumental first step.