I’m going to be real, I assume this is a small library. I’ve been in library management for over 10 years and have some thoughts.
OP – you seem to be dismissive of any concerns that aren’t people you agree with, and seem focused on the director achieving consensus among staff. I’m going to be completely honest with you – you are in the wrong field if that is the management style you are looking for. You need to move into academic libraries, where departments often do operate based on consensus, and apart from department directors and faculty chairs, tend to have a much flatter hierarchy. Public libraries are technically local government institutions (whether they are separate tax districts, or part of the city/county) and thus have bureaucracy built into their very nature.
Very frequently, though, small libraries are able to sidestep the (often necessary, because of taxes, levies and local governments) bureaucracy because they find a decent director who doesn’t have a lot of actual leadership or management skills or experiences, but is well-liked and uses that amiability (whether they realize it or not) to get people to meet base expectations. This is not effective management though, because it depends *entirely* on people liking you and being willing to do their jobs “as a favor” to you. This sounds very much like your old director’s approach, and is a classic small-town library between 1990-2008 vibe. Post-recession, some small libraries still operate this way, but I’ve noticed it’s becoming fewer and farther in between. (My theory is that the last 10+ years of the far right demonizing libraries has made either actively malicious boards who get rid of “feel good vibes” people; or boards who realize that they have to take things very seriously and get much more professional so that they can withstand increased scrutiny and challenges.)
If it is a library, it’s also concerning to me that the entirety of your letter focuses internally on office politics. How was your director treating the community? Were the staff concerns that the Board took seriously related to the community? How do you see the community and your library, because you only mention vaguely in your first letter about how previous iterations of your organization weren’t well-liked by the community, but you mention nothing to demonstrate that that changed, just that the most recent director was hands-off. Just because your small library has avoided the bureaucracy that can often impede progress, does not mean that your organization couldn’t have swung to the other side where it became a more enjoyable place to work, but didn’t necessarily have any material benefits or changes to your customers/patrons.
It sounds like the current staff is overall far too focused on people wanting to feel like they have some kind of role in the decision making process, but no real reason to feel that way. If it’s just feeling put out because the old manager let everyone do whatever they wanted….well, that has real community spillover, results in inequitable workplaces (librarians are overwhelmingly white, middle-aged, cisgender, straight, centrist females), etc. etc. Additionally, for you directly – in both your original letter and your update, you do not focus on that big picture at any point, but still want your board, your boss and your team to let you have input on that big picture – this is where I feel that the board and your ex-boss likely made the right decision putting you on a PIP and requiring professional development and growth.
The only criticism I have of your supervisor is that from your descriptions, it seems they didn’t have a ton of in-person conversations with staff. Written documentation is important, so I understand the impulse to email, but if I was your director, you and I would have had a very direct face-to-face conversation where I lay out my expectations for someone in your role, how you aren’t meeting them currently and ask how you plan to meet those expectations moving forward. That’s the pre-emptive step of a PIP and it doesn’t appear it was laid out so clearly to you by either your ex-boss or your Board.
You say that alls well that ends well – libraries are libraries, in my experience. That is to say, it’s a small field, and most people in director positions know each other and talk to each other. Many of you all go to school and get your masters’ together. Take my thoughts with a grain of salt, but know that if you get to the end of a lot of interviews with no offers – when you’re in public libraries and have years of experience, it *very* often comes down to soft skills and often the way people find out about soft skills is to ask through the librarian grapevine.
All that said, I might be a touch harsh. I’m in a very large library system right now and there are several people with the attitude of “we’ve gotten by just fine before why are things changing” that are actively making our organizations mission harder; that are making strides in diversifying our profession harder; that are actively creating roadblocks as we try to address unfettered political attacks in a bright red state; and even creating legal liability because apparently “we’ve always done it this way and never gotten in trouble” is an appropriate answer to “you can’t do X – it’s literally illegal”.
Food for thought.