This study examines how American academic library directors evaluate change in the information age and the factors influencing the approaches used. Bolman and Deal's reframing change model provided the foundation for this research (Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. 1st ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass, 1991). An online survey was sent to 1,010 academic library directors in the United States. The response rate was 59%. The qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. The collected quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed using descriptive (frequencies, percentages, means, standard deviations) and inferential (chisquare tests and correlations) statistics. Many directors used single and dual approaches to evaluate change. The human resource approach was the most frequently used single approach. Chi-square test and correlation analysis confirms that demographics, human capital and library variables play significant roles in evaluating change. Correlation results show that directors who are males, or work for a higher academic degree institution, or are at universities with higher enrolment, are more likely to use multiple approaches to evaluate change than their counterparts. Directors who hold more different professional positions, or oversee more subordinates, or work for a higher academic degree institution, are more likely than their counterparts to use dual and multiple approaches to evaluate change. Directors may use the results to reflect on different options of strategies for evaluating change and to balance the weight of the factors' influences. The results may also help librarians better understand various approaches to evaluating change in the information age.