Resumen oficial (en inglés)
Academic librarianship is characterized by overlapping role expectations that can become unsustainable when demands outpace resources. This conceptual article develops a role-architecture framework for workload redesign that integrates Role Theory (role ambiguity, role conflict, role overload) with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model and Conservation of Resources (COR) theory. The argument is grounded in a narrative, integrative review of research on librarian roles, burnout, and emotional labor, and in a synthesis of pandemic-era evidence from multiple contexts (e.g., Ithaka S+R surveys of 875 U.S. academic libraries, Canadian qualitative interviews with academic librarians (n = 19), and U.K. staff surveys (200+ responses)), alongside European case evidence. Pandemic disruptions are treated as a diagnostic of structural weaknesses in how librarian work is defined, resourced, and evaluated. The framework distinguishes four interlocking layers: core service, scholarly work (where applicable), institutional citizenship, and emotional labor, and identifies predictable fault lines between layers and between professional and non-work roles. Building on this diagnosis, the article proposes five design principles: clarifying role cores and boundaries; aligning evaluation with actual responsibilities (including digital transformation and emotional labor); engineering workload equity; embedding job resources into role design; and pre-planning crisis-mode role shifts. Implications are offered for library leaders and campus partners seeking to redesign roles sustainably beyond crisis periods.