Deidre Lowe, A/Associate Librarian (Information Access) Sandra Jeffries, Manager Client Services

Clothes may disguise a fool, but his voice will give him away: The challenge of smart service delivery for off-campus clients Deidre Lowe, A/Associate Librarian (Information Access) Sandra Jeffries, Manager Client Services September 2004

Overview • Smart service model - components - application to USQ • DocEx implementation

Smart Service? • Environment – understanding of features • Clients – understanding & meeting of needs • Resourcing – effective & sustainable in terms of staff/processes/systems

Environment - Remote Learning & Teaching • Increasing reliance on technology – content, access, delivery, interaction • Increasing competition • Client demands for more flexible approaches • Hybrid delivery

Clients USQ Profile - 80% (20,000) off-campus students Off-campus segment: • 30% (6,000) off-shore • 75% over 25 years of age • > 50% rural/geographically isolated

Client Surveys 2004 • Library Services – focus groups & telephone interviews • Rodski 2003 • USQ’s e-Systems – focus groups & telephone interviews 2002 • Library Website – focus groups • Rodski

Wish List • Clear web pages • Simple interfaces to databases • Everything in one place • eBooks for all texts & recommended readings • Fast response times • Human help • Quotes not just references

Resourcing • Staff – Off-Campus Services Section • Processes – Work process reviews • Systems - DocEx

DocEx • VDX software • Formerly known as “LIDDAS” • Launched as “DocEx” at USQ • USQ focussed on document delivery to off campus students – not ILL initially • Expansion will include ILL and federated searching

Key Benefits of DocEx • Authentication is tied to USQ LDAP system • User database is easily populated and updated from PeopleSoft • It searches across USQ catalogue for easy placement of pre-populated requests • Active links to catalogued electronic resources are displayed • Students can track progress of their requests • Scanned documents can be delivered online

Demonstration

Preliminary Outcomes • Accessibility of library materials is dramatically improved for off-campus users • Turnaround time shortened • Look and feel of the system sits comfortably with other Library systems • Good uptake despite a “soft launch” approach

Resourcing Issues • Significant learning curve for staff • Challenges such as: • differences between staff and student screens • system terminology • workflow changes • system problems • Highlights • automatic email notifications • scanning • user feedback

User Feedback • New system “wonderful” • Eliminates many steps • Saves time • Working beautifully • Linking with catalogue “is beaut” • “Absolutely brilliant” • Scanned document received “immediately” • “User-friendly and saves much typing”

What We’ve Learned • The Good: • Sometimes a “leap of faith” pays dividends • Staff comfort levels evolve • The Bad: • No system is perfect • Dependent interoperability between systems can make life very interesting • The UGLY: • Thorough project planning and testing is paramount in reducing everyone’s stress levels

Future Plans • Rollout of ILL functionality (S1, 2005) • Expansion to include sub-set of significant electronic resources via federated search • Willing to explore all options that will enable us to work smarter and provide smarter systems with the ultimate goal of providing Smart Service for our Clients

Deidre Lowe, A/Associate Librarian (Information Access) Sandra Jeffries, Manager Client Services