Avenues to Library Services: User Preferences Neal K. Kaske, Ph.D .

1. Avenues to Library Services: User PreferencesNeal K. Kaske, Ph.D. The Library of CongressLuminary Lectures @ Your LibrariesWednesday, January 15, 2003 The opinions expressed here are my own and do not imply endorsement by the Library of Congress or the University of Maryland Libraries.

2. Overview of Lecture and Your Participation • Learn what some chat customers are saying • Conduct a brief analysis of customers statements • Examine some assumptions about reference • Explore some service models • Your additions and modifications to the service models • Brief summary • Additional questions and discussion

3. What did they say?Undergraduates reported: • “This service was exactly what I needed and it probably saved me a few hours of drive time for information that wasn’t even available.” • “this is pretty damn cool, that you have a service like this, everyone should do that, it would make things so much simpler.” • “The service provided links I would not have found otherwise, and they were located very quickly. I will certainly use this service in the future. I only wish they could write the paper as well!”

4. Undergraduates (cont) • “I definitely think this is fantastic source I use it all the time. Especially when I’m at home and there’s no librarian to help me with search terms in the database.” • “Very helpful, showing resources I couldn’t find even with my experience with and knowledge of internet searches and the UM libraries website(s)…” • “Very helpful, even when you’re in the actual library. It’s just like speaking with the librarian face to face.”

5. Graduate students reported: • “This saved a lot of time. I would have had to go and explain the situation and wait in line at the library. This is great, now I can just go to the library and know where to grab what I need.” • “A great way to save time and effort in getting simple questions answered. Great idea.” • “1. I really liked that the librarian I first spoke to handed me off to a librarian who specialized in the topic after she/he realized the need to do so. 2. My topic was covered by many fields, so I was a little disappointed not to get more broad a range of recommended resources.”

6. Graduate students (cont) • “This is a wonderful resource! I have used the online chat twice and the librarians have been very helpful. There are so many resources available to us that it is often difficult to identify the right ones for a particular issue. To be able to do this online is very important because it saves me a lot of time. I can continue working at my computer, rather than having to go back and forth to the library or haul all my work to the library and try to work from there.” • “This service rocks!”

7. Faculty members reported: • “Good service, friendly folks. I like the flashing chat box, so I can do other stuff while waiting” • “It was wonderfully helpful to be able to contact a librarian quickly and easily from my desk.” • “The process was extremely responsive, answered all my questions and thus saved me a lot of time in my research process.”

8. Faculty (cont) • “It is a very good service in that it save me on average 1/2 to 1 hour of travel time for maybe a 10 min discussion with a Librarian. This makes my research more efficient. Thanks for providing this service.”

9. So, what did we learn? (based on audience feedback) 1. time saving (for users) 2. unexpected resources 3. convenience 4. multi-tasking opportunities 5. don't have to wait 6. don't have to be in the library to get service 7. helped educate people about the arrangement of the library

10. Customers Who Commented • 99 (27.8%) of the 356 customers provided comments. • Who were the 99 customers? • Undergraduates 27 • Graduate students 43 • Faculty 17 • Other 8 • Staff 4 • total 99

11. Did they get their questions answered? • Undergraduate 27 yes • Graduate students 41 yes 2 no • Faculty 17 yes • Other 8 yes • Staff 4 yes • Total 99 98% yes 2% no

12. Would they use the service again? • Undergraduate 27 yes or definitely • Graduate students 43 yes or definitely • Faculty 15 yes or definitely 2 maybe • Other 7 yes 1 maybe • Staff 4 yes or definitely

13. An hour searching on the Web can frequently save you 5 to 10 minutes at a library’s Reference/Information Desk.

14. Assumptions and Philosophies • The business of libraries • Connecting people and information • Building and caring for collections • Develop and maintain a number of different environments where face-to-face, telephone, email, letters, and online interaction between people and information may take place

15. Green, Samuel S. “Personal Relations Between Librarians and Readers” Library Journal, vol. 1, pp. 74-81, 1876. “The more freely a librarian mingles with readers, and the greater the amount of assistance he renders them, the more intense does the conviction of citizens become, that the library is a useful institution, and the more willing do they grow to grant money in larger and larger sums to be used in buying books and employing additional assistants.”

16. S. R. Ranganathan’s Five Laws of Library Science • Books are for use • Every person his or her book • Every book its reader • Save the time of the reader • A library is a growing organism

17. The Expansion of Reference Services • First, you needed to go to the library. • You could also write a letter to the librarian. • Telephone • Email and TTY • Chat

18. What comes after chat? • Wireless telecommunications and information access systems and services start working together and the general public has access to them. • Chat services with voice overlay will be common place. • Chat services will have the capacity to be two way video. • Automatic answering will play a role too.

19. Reference Customer Defined • A person with a recognized informational need and a willingness to utilize a library (physical or online) to help meet this informational need. • Someone that may be confused by all the complexities of libraries today. • Your modifications and changes to this definition please!

20. Communication Modes Face-to-face Letter (snail mail) Telephone Email Chat Other TTY Fax Advantages/Disadvantages Travel time and expense and interact with people Time to write and get a response Access and limited to just voice Time to write and get a response Real time and at my computer and only written feedback Will not address these today Avenues to Library Services: Customer’s Point of View

21. Communication Modes Face-to-face Snail mail Telephone Email Chat Advantages/Disadvantages High quality feedback /must deal with them now Time to write and locate a response/must write an answer They are not here/only have voice feedback Time to write and locate a response/must write an answer Online interaction and teaching possible/new skills to learn, feedback very limited Avenues to Library Services: Librarian’s Point of View

22. Communication Modes Face-to-face Snail mail Telephone Email Chat Advantages/Disadvantages Current way of doing business/cost of multiple service points It is written down/time intensive to answer and formal Ease of access and multiple access points/does not get the customer in to the library It is written down/time intensive to answer and informal New, could be great PR/New and added costs Avenues to Library Service: the Library Management’s Point of View

23. Factors in the Customers’ Model of Library Service Factors used in selecting a mode of communicating and using with libraries (mode being: face-to-face, snail mail, email, phone, or chat) • Time pressure to find an answer • Value of finding an answer • Current location • Available means of communications • Preferred means of communications with libraries and librarians • Past experience with libraries and librarians meeting information needs • Knowledge of library resources • Expectations of what libraries can deliver

24. More Factors in the Customers’ Model of Library Service Continued…From Audience Feedback 1 Time pressure to find an answer 2 Value of finding an answer 3 Current location 4 Available means of communications 5 Preferred means of communications with libraries and librarians 6 Past experience with libraries and librarians meeting information needs 7 Knowledge of library resources

25. More Factors in the Customers’ Model of Library Service Continued…. 8 Expectations of what libraries can deliver 9 technological skills 10 Age 11 Educational status 12 Knowledge of subject area 13 Library environment (temperature, access, services, customer-friendliness) 14 Public awareness of library resources/services 15 Physical accessibility 16 Prison usage

26. Factors in the Librarians’ and Library Management’s Model of Library Service Factors at play when using different mode of communicating with customers (mode being: face-to-face, snail mail, email, phone, or chat) • Limit of the collections (on and off line) • Hours of operation • Staffing levels and availability • Accessibility of staff • Nature of the support for reference services • Organization’s philosophy of reference service and its policies • Personal philosophy of reference service

27. More Factors in the Librarians’ and Library Management’s Model Continued…From Audience Feedback 1 Limits of the collections (on and off line) 2 Hours of operation 3 Staffing levels and availability 4 Accessibility of staff 5 Nature of the support for reference services 6 Organization's philosophy of reference and its policies 7 Personal philosophy of reference service

28. More Factors in the Librarians’ and Library Management’s Model Continued…From Audience Feedback 8 Technical skills 9 Librarian understanding of the services we provide (expectations) 10 People-skills 11 Funding and cost 12 Organizational politics 13 Understanding and defining your customer base 14 Preconceived values of user/ biases in mode of communication

29. More Factors in the Librarians’ and Library Management’s Model Continued…From Audience Feedback 15 Willingness to be a risk-taker 16 Organizational support for risk-takers and changes in services 17 User demand 18 Anticipation of perceived needs

30. What do some chat operators and supporters think of the service? http://www.vrd.org/conferences/VRD2002/proceedings/ DIG_REF@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

31. “I agree that virtual reference is just reference - - many of the issues are the same no matter how the service is delivered, even by bookmobile or classroom visits by a librarian.” Ginny Browne browneg@OCLC.ORG Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:17:50 -0500

32. “I also take exception to the claim that face-to-face provides the "best" service when I think of the following situations: -Library user is hearing-impaired -Library user feels more comfortable writing than speaking in English -Library user is uncomfortable with the public reference desk environment -Library user is the type of learner who prefers to read instructions on how to do something rather than hear them.” April P. Levy alevy@MAIL.LESLEY.EDU Lesley University Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:52:15 -0500

33. “Digital reference is just one tool, and, like every other tool, it has its place, its strengths, and its weaknesses. It is no more "THE answer" to all reference transaction needs than any other tool.” Rosanne M. Cordell, Head of Reference Services Indiana University South Bend rcordell@iusb.edu Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:41:46 -0500

34. “Let the patron choose how to initiatethe discussion. We professionals can always gently redirect it to the best medium.” Jody Fagan <jfagan@LIB.SIU.EDU> Southern Illinois University Carbondale Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:36:53 -0600

35. “I think what I objected to most in the article was the prescriptive, "librarian-centric" tone. "Let the users come to us, on our terms." If the customer finds utility in chat or instant messaging, then I'm willing to work with them. And I've created new relationships using our live reference service. There are the repeat users who you get to know, and the ones that you meet face to face after chatting with them online. In our service, I've noted that some users even wait for their favorite librarian's shift for help. To say that you can't create relationships online is naive, and shows a misunderstanding of interpersonal dynamics online.” Jana Ronan, jronan@ufl.edu RefeXpress http://refexpress.uflib.ufl.edu University of Florida, Gainesville Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:45:44 -0500

36. “The central concept of reference is the provision of CONTEXT to a user. If context (instruction, explanation, translation, match to information need) were not needed (i.e., the resources and their organizations are equally relevant and obvious in all uses) there would be no need for the reference librarian. Let us not forget the role of context in evaluating the importance of digital reference.” R. David Lankes rdlankes@ERICIR.SYR.EDU Thu, 5 Dec 2002 16:13:07 -0500

37. “Virtual reference complements other forms of reference. Some users prefer face-to-face. Some users prefer telephone service. Some users prefer virtual reference. And an individual user may prefer different forms at different points in time, depending on the context of his or her specific information need.” Bernie Sloan bernies@UILLINOIS.EDU Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:48:13 -0600

38. “One of the elements that I see missing in this discussion is the patron who is now using librarians to help them in their information seeking that have never used a physical library for this purpose. That patron may never have known what resources are available at their local library or even that there is a local library! It isn't only those previous patrons who no longer (we think) come to the reference desk but a whole new patron base whom we have had difficulty in reaching previously.” “In addition, I see collaborative virtual reference services as an excellent marketing tool for physical libraries and reference.” Susan D. Barb 24/7 Reference Staff Supervisor Reference or Metropolitan Cooperative Library Service (MCLS) sue@247ref.org Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:45:47 -0800

39. “Digital, online, chat, etc. electronic delivery of reference services represent simply another way to deliver information. It is another facet of reference service which neither replaces nor 'dumbs down' the whole idea of reference service. It provides more options for the patron.” Laurel Yatsko LaurelY@LSSI.COM LSSI, Web Reference Center Reference Librarian Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:38:41 -0500

40. “Phone reference got going in the '30s, but well into the '50s there were articles in the professional literature discussing the pros and cons of using the phone, discussing whether it was worthwhile and even exhorting librarians to use it and think of it like "real reference. Sound familiar....?” Joseph Janes 206/616-0987 jwj@u.washington.edu Fri, 6 Dec 2002 08:18:04 -0800

41. Summary • Learned what some chat customers are saying and did a little analysis • Examined some assumptions about reference • Service models were offered and modified • Some new insights into chat services were discovered

42. Time for additions questions, ideas, thoughts and opinions.

43. Some additional projects coming from the University of Maryland • Computers in Library Conference “We’ve Come So Far and Have Miles to Go”, March, 2002 http://www.lib.umd.edu/groups/digref/cil.ppt • ALA Conference “An Unobtrusive Evaluation of Online Real Time Library Reference Services”, June, 2002 http://www.lib.umd.edu/groups/digref/lrrt.ppt • Virtual Reference Desk Conference “Who can best Answer Chat Reference Questions? A Survey of Questions Asked”, November, 2002 http://www.lib.umd.edu/groups/digref/vrd_pres.ppt “Evaluation of Chat-Based Reference Service”, November, 2002 http://www.vrd.org/conferences/VRD2002/proceedings/abels.shtm