Experts are everywhere. Some experts have academic qualifications. Some don’t. Experts in the medical profession spend long hours studying and training to be physicians. Similarly, the legal profession not only demands a rigorous course of study but also ongoing continuing education courses to continue to qualify as a lawyer. Statisticians in government have a thorough grounding in mathematics. University professors have expertise in the subjects they teach and the research they perform.

Academic prowess, however, is not always synonymous with expertise. A hobbyist may be the world’s expert on philately (postage stamp collecting). An amateur gardener knows the details of plants, particularly those that will thrive locally. Car enthusiasts are the go-to experts on the make, model, and year of the automobiles they love. They may also be expert mechanics, although that’s not always guaranteed. Movie buffs don’t need a degree in film studies to be an expert source about the cinema. And we’re all aware of academic dropouts who became successful in business. Think Bill Gates, Sergey Blin, and Larry Page. Even children can be more expert at video games or toy accessories than the adults around them.

Today’s environment has led to a certain amount of distrust in experts. Possession of a law degree doesn’t mean the legal advice given is expert. Physicians can be mistaken, sometimes with disastrous consequences. Being an expert doesn’t automatically erase bias, even in statistical analysis. We’ve always had individual investors convinced they knew more than investment bankers (and they were sometimes absolutely correct). Skepticism is more pronounced today, however, given the failures in once revered professions. It tends more toward the blanket doubt rather than individual distrust.

What about librarian expertise? Finding information is a key component of our expertise. As information experts, we’ve mastered the mechanics of search, understand the differences in search techniques needed on various platforms, and are skilled at evaluating retrieved data. We bring knowledge of sources that enables us to identify valid information versus outdated, biased, and inaccurate information.

We are also expert at finding experts. We know how to look for experts—not only those who have written authoritative pieces, but also those who are proficient at speaking at conferences, from TED stages, and on webinars. We search for highly cited authors in the scholarly literature. We scour long-tail websites to discover diverse experts, those with expertise not widely heard. We manipulate subscription and free web sources to surface expertise from those who don’t routinely write or speak. We use email and phone calls to go beyond our normal information sources.

Wikipedia has an entry for “Finding expertise.” Wikipedia says it has “multiple issues.” I agree. Nowhere does it mention librarians, although one of its classifications is “Library Science.” An edit would be welcome.

Not all self-proclaimed experts are actually experts. It’s amazing how many parents went from “I don’t understand my kid’s 5th grade math homework” to “I’m an infectious disease expert.” Here again, information professionals bring their expertise to rooting out inexpert “experts.” As a profession, librarians are considered highly trustworthy. Let’s cherish our expertise and trumpet ourselves as the “go-to” experts on research and information.