A friend of mine was recently bemoaning the lack of memorization in education today. She stated that she thought it was quite useful to have had to memorize the Preamble to the Constitution, poems, the Gettysburg Address, etc. I didn't comment one way or the other at the time. I'd supposed memorization was a useful skill but I'm not sure it's as useful for the 21st century where we all must be ready to adapt and thrive in environments of continual change. I'm intrigued by the prospect of memorizing a Shakespeare sonnet only to have the order of stanzas change every few weeks or perhaps occasionally find the nouns in a different language. That seems to be the times we're living in.
This morning, I finished listening to a podcast interview with Helene Blowers on Bibliotech. Helene was one of the developers of the Library 2.0 23 Things training that many libraries used a few years back to introduce librarians and library staff to social media tools. One of the key concepts in 23 Things was that librarians and library staff people needed to take time to play with new technologies. Unfortunately, the concept of playing while on the job was never going to be popular with many in library administration or in our funding bodies. Surely, if you're playing, you're wasting tax payers money.
So, what is a better way to look at the types of learning we need to encourage in libraries? Experimentation? In the podcast, Helene talks about the fact that library staff don't need to and shouldn't expect to be experts in all the new technologies. But it is important that they be willing to approach new devices and questions their patrons bring from a perspective of shared discovery. I may not know a whole lot more than you do about this tablet or e-reader, but let's see if we can figure it out together.
It struck me this morning that the memorization approach or even writing down specific steps of how to get from a to b to c might actually stand in the way of experimentation and discovery. And isn't that our standard approach to technology training? We show people the steps. It may help one feel a mastery of Gadget A, but what happens when someone brings in Gadget B, or even an updated version of Gadget A? We'll probably feel lost and confused and possibly frustrated and angry. I expect those feelings are frequently behind the expressions of "I hate technology" that I hear all too frequently in the library field.
Helene pointed out that her daughter was learning in a different way so that things like Facebook updates didn't upset her. Whereas I hear nothing but complaints whenever Facebook makes a change. Change is much more threatening to people who view learning as mastery rather than exploration.
So, how can we encourage leaning for its own sake instead of strictly for a goal, e.g., certification? Helene and the podcast hosts all felt that the rewards they'd provided for their 23 Things programs were largely unnecessary. Since these programs were voluntary, most of the library staff who attended truly did so for the love of learning.
But what about those who are old style learners and want to feel mastery? Can we find ways to reward experimentation? Just trying different options? For attempting to answer a question, even if they ultimately have to refer it on to someone else? We only really fail when we don't try.
I certainly don't have the answers here but I'd love to hear about what you may be trying in training programs at your libraries. Successes AND failures!
Friday, July 6, 2012
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Information or spam?
I ran across these multiple entries from WebJunction on Facebook today. Actually, these weren't the only entries. There were 3 more before and another 3 after. I did post the one comment that I hoped they didn't mind if I used this as an example of ineffective use of social media.
So what's wrong with this?
The sheer volume of messages certainly comes across like spam. It obviously comes from an automated system that collects posts and spews them out to social media sites at some specified time - around 6am PT so people will catch the updates as they log in in the morning.
The posts are clearly designed for Twitter not Facebook. You see the abbreviated URLs and the @ response tags as well as the # subject tags. These have a purpose in Twitter but are gibberish in Facebook.
It's a pity because I'm sure some of this content would have been of interest to the 1,353 people who've bothered to like them on Facebook. Being a visual person, one of the things I like about Facebook over Twitter is that URLs will generally include a graphic and the initial sentences of the story. And if given slightly more information, I might have been interested in some of these stories. Granted, WebJunction does have more followers on Twitter - 2,530. So perhaps that's why they clearly prefer the Twitter format.
I don't mean to pick on WebJunction, really I don't. This was pretty common a few years ago. I actually blocked Twitter from my Facebook updates because I found it so annoying. But this is proof that there's always a way around. So it's a perfect example of how you really shouldn't try to cut corners with social media. Had they taken the time to share just a few of these posts on Facebook in a Facebook-friendly format, they might have generated some comments - people sharing their own insights and experiences. It could have added to the conversation instead of the overall noise level.
I've come to the conclusion that different types of social media appeal to different people. We need to be conscious of that as we decide how to get our message out. I think Twitter enthusiasts enjoy the sheer volume. Twitter isn't really about interaction. It's about scanning large quantities of information and passing it on. And there's certainly nothing wrong with that. I'm feeling slightly more friendly toward Twitter since I discovered Flipboard on my iPad. It slows down the barrage and makes it into a nice magazine type feel with photos and introductory paragraphs from stories.
But I think Facebook is more about the social interactions. People like to comment on stories, like them and share them, perhaps stop and read the other comments. I really feel cheated of that when I see Twitter posts.
Perhaps we can't do it all but need to choose our medium. WebJunction may choose to focus on Twitter if that's more their style. I don't think we need to be all to everyone. I suspect their Facebook friends would be very happy with a brief update every now and then and perhaps an opportunity to connect.
Which social media sites do you spend the most time on? Are these also where you post the most or comment or interact with friends? Where do your members spend the most time? It's not just about us but where those we seek to engage are as well.
The sheer volume of messages certainly comes across like spam. It obviously comes from an automated system that collects posts and spews them out to social media sites at some specified time - around 6am PT so people will catch the updates as they log in in the morning.
The posts are clearly designed for Twitter not Facebook. You see the abbreviated URLs and the @ response tags as well as the # subject tags. These have a purpose in Twitter but are gibberish in Facebook.
It's a pity because I'm sure some of this content would have been of interest to the 1,353 people who've bothered to like them on Facebook. Being a visual person, one of the things I like about Facebook over Twitter is that URLs will generally include a graphic and the initial sentences of the story. And if given slightly more information, I might have been interested in some of these stories. Granted, WebJunction does have more followers on Twitter - 2,530. So perhaps that's why they clearly prefer the Twitter format.
I don't mean to pick on WebJunction, really I don't. This was pretty common a few years ago. I actually blocked Twitter from my Facebook updates because I found it so annoying. But this is proof that there's always a way around. So it's a perfect example of how you really shouldn't try to cut corners with social media. Had they taken the time to share just a few of these posts on Facebook in a Facebook-friendly format, they might have generated some comments - people sharing their own insights and experiences. It could have added to the conversation instead of the overall noise level.
I've come to the conclusion that different types of social media appeal to different people. We need to be conscious of that as we decide how to get our message out. I think Twitter enthusiasts enjoy the sheer volume. Twitter isn't really about interaction. It's about scanning large quantities of information and passing it on. And there's certainly nothing wrong with that. I'm feeling slightly more friendly toward Twitter since I discovered Flipboard on my iPad. It slows down the barrage and makes it into a nice magazine type feel with photos and introductory paragraphs from stories.
But I think Facebook is more about the social interactions. People like to comment on stories, like them and share them, perhaps stop and read the other comments. I really feel cheated of that when I see Twitter posts.
Perhaps we can't do it all but need to choose our medium. WebJunction may choose to focus on Twitter if that's more their style. I don't think we need to be all to everyone. I suspect their Facebook friends would be very happy with a brief update every now and then and perhaps an opportunity to connect.
Which social media sites do you spend the most time on? Are these also where you post the most or comment or interact with friends? Where do your members spend the most time? It's not just about us but where those we seek to engage are as well.
Friday, December 30, 2011
Libraries - Mobile, Local and Social
Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt said in a September 2011 statement that he saw the future of technology as mobile, local and social. I think these could also be seen as important issues for the future of libraries. So, I've put together some of my thoughts on mobile, local and social and how they might pertain to libraries. I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments.
Libraries of the past could have easily been viewed as static. The focus was on the building with collections and staff that pretty much stayed put. Anyone who wanted to make use of their resources had to come to them. And then, you could only have access to that book or article for a limited time. It really needed to stay in the building. Collections started getting more mobile with the increasing use of ILLs. But now that materials are actually staying in borrowing libraries until they're demanded someplace else, they are truly becoming mobile. Library staff are getting out from behind desks and circulating around the library to find and help people at their point of need. Some libraries are placing books and magazines for checkout and return at subway stations, grocery stores, etc. In short, they're taking them to where people are instead of expecting people to come to them. And let's not forget the increasing availability and use of downloadable audio and e-books. While DRM and publisher concerns make the current implementation challenging, it really does help solve the problem of how to move resources from place to place.
So, I think that librarians have come a long way in making their resources and services more mobile. But there's another side of mobile that seems to be more difficult for us, and that's making our resources and services more accessible to people using mobile devices. Smart phone usage has increased dramatically over the past several years yet many libraries don't offer mobile web sites. Mobile users are forced to try to navigate through complicated drop down menu structures to find simple information like location and contact info. And heaven help anyone who actually wants to search our databases from a mobile device. These are essentially desktop solutions for an increasingly mobile world. Even when there are database apps, they're rarely intuitive and our innate librarian desire to give complete results is not appreciated when you're trying to weed through results on a 4 inch touch screen. And few libraries offer what should be a rather obvious service such as text reference. In short, we seem to have a long way to go to make and keep ourselves relevant to mobile patrons.
Local may be something that we've lost sight of in our rush to find digital solutions. Of course, it makes sense to form consortia for purchasing and maintaining ILS. It also makes sense to pool resources for database and other electronic resource purchases. But as a recent OCLC report From Awareness to Funding: A study of library support in America points out, most public library funding is local. Librarians really need to be able to make their case locally for why their libraries are essential to their communities. While I think these tools are valuable to our overall mission of providing information resources, we might want to ask ourselves whether they are going to help make the case for the essential role of libraries in most locales. Do people associate them with their local library or are they just seen as part of the amorphous Internet?
So what does make the difference? The OCLC report states that a librarian who's seen as a passionate advocate for his/her library makes a great deal of difference in local receptiveness to funding. We also know that a library that's seen as receptive to the needs of the community is viewed as a more important resource. I've done a lot of strategic planning over the past ten years with public libraries. We know what community members want from these libraries. But we haven't always given it to them. What we've given them are the elaborate ILS and database tools they have to learn to use to get at what they want. I think we've often deluded ourselves into thinking that all we have to do is build it and they'll come. But what we've missed is that most people don't want to learn how to use our tools, they just want the results. So, why not give them the results they want? Why not focus on our people resources and make sure that local librarians can do the searches and highlight the books and articles of interest to their community? In this way, they can both satisfy local needs and add local value and branding to the tools. It's just a matter of changing the focus from tools to needs, from technology to personal. We'll never beat Google at the search game but we can provide a human alternative who can tailor results to our interests.
Libraries have been serving social functions for quite some time. They frequently host programs, book groups, classes, etc. And many librarians have tried to get their libraries involved in social media like Twitter and Facebook. I think that's all good but I wonder how we're doing with fostering the kind of conversations that create knowledge and improve society. These are threads from R. David Lankes' The Atlas of New Librarianship. Conversations require openness while libraries have often been seen as promoting the more closed veil of privacy. Don't get me wrong, I believe that the library profession's protection of privacy rights is important. I just feel that we've backed ourselves into a corner where the privacy concerns of the few may be imposed on many who would prefer a more open and sharing environment. Consequently, it's very difficult for us to allow those who may choose to to opt out of some of that privacy to do so in the interest of fostering conversation. Amazon, Barnes & Noble and Kobo all have features where you can share highlights and notes about books you're reading on their devices. While some of these highlights and notes can be shared via common social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter, the majority of the conversations will be limited to other Amazon, B&N or Kobo customers. This is a place where libraries would be useful to bridge the gap between vendors. Besides I'm much more interested in having a conversation about the book I'm reading with someone I know or might come to know locally than with a stranger. And wouldn't it be nice to get reviews and recommendations from people in your community about books/articles you might find interesting? It's a way of building community ties that's currently closed to us because we're not even allowed to opt in to such a social option. I think that's a disservice to our users and our communities. We need to start looking at ways to balance privacy and social discourse.
Libraries of the past could have easily been viewed as static. The focus was on the building with collections and staff that pretty much stayed put. Anyone who wanted to make use of their resources had to come to them. And then, you could only have access to that book or article for a limited time. It really needed to stay in the building. Collections started getting more mobile with the increasing use of ILLs. But now that materials are actually staying in borrowing libraries until they're demanded someplace else, they are truly becoming mobile. Library staff are getting out from behind desks and circulating around the library to find and help people at their point of need. Some libraries are placing books and magazines for checkout and return at subway stations, grocery stores, etc. In short, they're taking them to where people are instead of expecting people to come to them. And let's not forget the increasing availability and use of downloadable audio and e-books. While DRM and publisher concerns make the current implementation challenging, it really does help solve the problem of how to move resources from place to place.
So, I think that librarians have come a long way in making their resources and services more mobile. But there's another side of mobile that seems to be more difficult for us, and that's making our resources and services more accessible to people using mobile devices. Smart phone usage has increased dramatically over the past several years yet many libraries don't offer mobile web sites. Mobile users are forced to try to navigate through complicated drop down menu structures to find simple information like location and contact info. And heaven help anyone who actually wants to search our databases from a mobile device. These are essentially desktop solutions for an increasingly mobile world. Even when there are database apps, they're rarely intuitive and our innate librarian desire to give complete results is not appreciated when you're trying to weed through results on a 4 inch touch screen. And few libraries offer what should be a rather obvious service such as text reference. In short, we seem to have a long way to go to make and keep ourselves relevant to mobile patrons.
Local may be something that we've lost sight of in our rush to find digital solutions. Of course, it makes sense to form consortia for purchasing and maintaining ILS. It also makes sense to pool resources for database and other electronic resource purchases. But as a recent OCLC report From Awareness to Funding: A study of library support in America points out, most public library funding is local. Librarians really need to be able to make their case locally for why their libraries are essential to their communities. While I think these tools are valuable to our overall mission of providing information resources, we might want to ask ourselves whether they are going to help make the case for the essential role of libraries in most locales. Do people associate them with their local library or are they just seen as part of the amorphous Internet?
So what does make the difference? The OCLC report states that a librarian who's seen as a passionate advocate for his/her library makes a great deal of difference in local receptiveness to funding. We also know that a library that's seen as receptive to the needs of the community is viewed as a more important resource. I've done a lot of strategic planning over the past ten years with public libraries. We know what community members want from these libraries. But we haven't always given it to them. What we've given them are the elaborate ILS and database tools they have to learn to use to get at what they want. I think we've often deluded ourselves into thinking that all we have to do is build it and they'll come. But what we've missed is that most people don't want to learn how to use our tools, they just want the results. So, why not give them the results they want? Why not focus on our people resources and make sure that local librarians can do the searches and highlight the books and articles of interest to their community? In this way, they can both satisfy local needs and add local value and branding to the tools. It's just a matter of changing the focus from tools to needs, from technology to personal. We'll never beat Google at the search game but we can provide a human alternative who can tailor results to our interests.
Libraries have been serving social functions for quite some time. They frequently host programs, book groups, classes, etc. And many librarians have tried to get their libraries involved in social media like Twitter and Facebook. I think that's all good but I wonder how we're doing with fostering the kind of conversations that create knowledge and improve society. These are threads from R. David Lankes' The Atlas of New Librarianship. Conversations require openness while libraries have often been seen as promoting the more closed veil of privacy. Don't get me wrong, I believe that the library profession's protection of privacy rights is important. I just feel that we've backed ourselves into a corner where the privacy concerns of the few may be imposed on many who would prefer a more open and sharing environment. Consequently, it's very difficult for us to allow those who may choose to to opt out of some of that privacy to do so in the interest of fostering conversation. Amazon, Barnes & Noble and Kobo all have features where you can share highlights and notes about books you're reading on their devices. While some of these highlights and notes can be shared via common social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter, the majority of the conversations will be limited to other Amazon, B&N or Kobo customers. This is a place where libraries would be useful to bridge the gap between vendors. Besides I'm much more interested in having a conversation about the book I'm reading with someone I know or might come to know locally than with a stranger. And wouldn't it be nice to get reviews and recommendations from people in your community about books/articles you might find interesting? It's a way of building community ties that's currently closed to us because we're not even allowed to opt in to such a social option. I think that's a disservice to our users and our communities. We need to start looking at ways to balance privacy and social discourse.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Will Amazon E-Book lending be the end of libraries?
The social media world is abuzz with Amazon's official announcement of their e-book lending program for Amazon Prime members.
I find Amazon's business strategy intriguing. For one thing, as Beth pointed out on Wired-MT, they offer free Prime memberships to students. How many students, I wonder, are going to like the 2 day shipping, video streaming, and ebook lending and be willing to pay for it after they graduate? And with new devices like the Kindle Fire coming out that will presumably allow really easy use of these services...
I don't think that Amazon is going after library users so much as they're trying to create a really easy and pleasant environment for their customers that will keep them tied to the Amazon marketplace.
A book a month may be enough for their users at least as a start. What they're offering that libraries are unable to is no wait and you can keep it for as long as you want. I've heard a lot of complaints about our two week checkout. And if Kindle customers decide that one book is not enough to sate their reading appetites, they can always buy as many additional titles as they want from the Kindle store.
I think rather than be threatened by this, libraries should watch and learn. We need to be thinking seriously about repurposing our libraries. Seeing our present and future roles as primarily book repositories and lenders digital or otherwise may not continue to be the best strategy.
Monday, August 1, 2011
New Trends in E-books
If you have an iPad, you have a number of choices of where to get e-book content. Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Kobo, Google, etc. all offer iPad apps whereby you can buy their content and read it on your iPad. These apps also work on iPhones and iPod Touch devices as well as Android, Blackberry, etc. Apple recently changed the rules and demanded a cut from in-app purchases. The booksellers responded by removing in-app purchases thus making it a bit more difficult to purchase their content. But the intent remains to make content available across multiple platforms.
Contrary to this, is a trend among some publishers to make e-book apps specific to the iOS platform and sell them as apps via the Apple app store. This may be a trend to be concerned about in and of itself. Will it interfere with competition if a student needs to buy an iPad because content that s/he needs is only available on that platform?
But for now, I'm more interested in the potential and the use of technology to convey more information than is available within traditional books.
Initially, we saw it in kids book apps like PopOut! The Tale of Peter Rabbit. Not only could you have the story read to you but there were images that could be manipulated to make the characters move and make noises. Much like a traditional popup book but with audio included.
Then came books that were really more like movies with text included. Among my favorites in this genre are the Moving Tales books including This Too Shall Pass. These books include a 3D movie that goes along with the story. Reportedly this movie changes each time you watch it but I haven't read any of them enough to say whether or the changes are noticeable and/or alter the story considerably. You can also choose to replace the voice of the narrator with your own. So, the stories can be personalized.
From there we move to The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore. This is not only a movie but one with interactive elements. You can make objects spin and fly. And the character ends up running a library, so what's not to like?
For students, there is an app version of T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land. It includes performances of the poem, perspectives, facsimiles of the manuscript. I wish I'd had apps like this when I was taking English classes, it would have made some works of literature so much more understandable, accessible and relevant.
The final e-book app, I'd like to bring to your attention is Our Choice. This is a quote from the description in iTunes:
Al Gore's Our Choice will change the way we read books. And quite possibly change the world. In this interactive app, Al Gore surveys the causes of global warming and presents groundbreaking insights and solutions already under study and underway that can help stop the unfolding disaster of global warming.
Our Choice melds the vice president's narrative with photography, interactive graphics, animations, and more than an hour of engrossing documentary footage. A new, groundbreaking interface allows you to experience that content seamlessly. Pick up and explore anything you see in the book; zoom out to the visual table of contents and quickly browse though the chapters; reach in and explore data-rich interactive graphics.
It really is an interactive multimedia experience.
So, what does all this mean for libraries? I think that apps like these are fundamentally changing people's expectations about how information is presented. It's no longer enough to just present it but children are being taught that they can interact with a story and change it.
For older students and adults, we're able to customize and personalize our content and our experiences with it. Plus, the entire app store is geared toward instant gratification. You read or hear about a new book, search for it in the app store, purchase and download it to your iPad or iPhone. The entire process takes only a few minutes. And there's the potential for continuous updates and revisions.
Whenever anyone brings up the topic of e-books, there will always be someone who attempts to cut short the conversation by asserting that s/he likes books. I don't think that position has any validity any more for the library community. We have to ask ourselves, what is a book nowadays? And what is our responsibility in providing content? If e-books are moving to multimedia and interactive formats, how do we provide that experience for our users?
Contrary to this, is a trend among some publishers to make e-book apps specific to the iOS platform and sell them as apps via the Apple app store. This may be a trend to be concerned about in and of itself. Will it interfere with competition if a student needs to buy an iPad because content that s/he needs is only available on that platform?
But for now, I'm more interested in the potential and the use of technology to convey more information than is available within traditional books.
Initially, we saw it in kids book apps like PopOut! The Tale of Peter Rabbit. Not only could you have the story read to you but there were images that could be manipulated to make the characters move and make noises. Much like a traditional popup book but with audio included.
Then came books that were really more like movies with text included. Among my favorites in this genre are the Moving Tales books including This Too Shall Pass. These books include a 3D movie that goes along with the story. Reportedly this movie changes each time you watch it but I haven't read any of them enough to say whether or the changes are noticeable and/or alter the story considerably. You can also choose to replace the voice of the narrator with your own. So, the stories can be personalized.
From there we move to The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore. This is not only a movie but one with interactive elements. You can make objects spin and fly. And the character ends up running a library, so what's not to like?
For students, there is an app version of T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land. It includes performances of the poem, perspectives, facsimiles of the manuscript. I wish I'd had apps like this when I was taking English classes, it would have made some works of literature so much more understandable, accessible and relevant.
The final e-book app, I'd like to bring to your attention is Our Choice. This is a quote from the description in iTunes:
Al Gore's Our Choice will change the way we read books. And quite possibly change the world. In this interactive app, Al Gore surveys the causes of global warming and presents groundbreaking insights and solutions already under study and underway that can help stop the unfolding disaster of global warming.
Our Choice melds the vice president's narrative with photography, interactive graphics, animations, and more than an hour of engrossing documentary footage. A new, groundbreaking interface allows you to experience that content seamlessly. Pick up and explore anything you see in the book; zoom out to the visual table of contents and quickly browse though the chapters; reach in and explore data-rich interactive graphics.
It really is an interactive multimedia experience.
So, what does all this mean for libraries? I think that apps like these are fundamentally changing people's expectations about how information is presented. It's no longer enough to just present it but children are being taught that they can interact with a story and change it.
For older students and adults, we're able to customize and personalize our content and our experiences with it. Plus, the entire app store is geared toward instant gratification. You read or hear about a new book, search for it in the app store, purchase and download it to your iPad or iPhone. The entire process takes only a few minutes. And there's the potential for continuous updates and revisions.
Whenever anyone brings up the topic of e-books, there will always be someone who attempts to cut short the conversation by asserting that s/he likes books. I don't think that position has any validity any more for the library community. We have to ask ourselves, what is a book nowadays? And what is our responsibility in providing content? If e-books are moving to multimedia and interactive formats, how do we provide that experience for our users?
Thursday, July 14, 2011
The Apple Store Model
I heard Om Malik talking on TWiT a couple of weeks ago about the Apple stores as models for what Amazon should do in retail. We don't have any Apple stores in Montana but I have visited a few on my travels. And what stands out in particular for me, are their combination of expertise and discovery.
I don't know about Amazon but that seems like a fairly good description of libraries. I started to think about how libraries could plan for the future using this model.
Apple stores have what they call the Genius Bar where you can go for help with and advice on Apple products. Isn't that a lot like our Reference Desks? But I think Genius Bar is a lot catchier and possibly more descriptive of what people want and what we can provide. I don't think most people want to be referred anywhere, they just want answers. And that is what we want them to get. Okay, perhaps we would feel a bit uncomfortable referring to ourselves as geniuses. Maybe we could have an Answer Bar.
The other striking service Apple stores provide is discovery. You can go in there and play around with computers, gadgets, software. I think quite often that's something people want from libraries as well. They want to know what's new and probably even more, what's worth reading, watching or listening to. We do have New Books sections. And if they ask, we can help them with reader's advisory, but what about staff recommendations? Or recommendations from other library users?
I'd also like to see us offer more discovery of new tools and devices. We tend to get caught up in issues like whether or not we should check out e-readers. I think we could do a real service in just allowing people to handle and use them in the library. We need to keep finding ways to connect with current and potential users letting them know about new services available in the library. For those libraries on OverDrive, how many of your non-regular patrons do you think know that you have audio and e-books available that they can check out and download from home?
There is, of course, a big difference between Apple stores and libraries in that they have a limited amount of merchandise they need to promote and be experts on, while ours is much larger. But I think we tend to focus too much on the whole world of information, and thus intimidate many of our users who are looking for answers to much smaller questions.
I don't know about Amazon but that seems like a fairly good description of libraries. I started to think about how libraries could plan for the future using this model.
Apple stores have what they call the Genius Bar where you can go for help with and advice on Apple products. Isn't that a lot like our Reference Desks? But I think Genius Bar is a lot catchier and possibly more descriptive of what people want and what we can provide. I don't think most people want to be referred anywhere, they just want answers. And that is what we want them to get. Okay, perhaps we would feel a bit uncomfortable referring to ourselves as geniuses. Maybe we could have an Answer Bar.
The other striking service Apple stores provide is discovery. You can go in there and play around with computers, gadgets, software. I think quite often that's something people want from libraries as well. They want to know what's new and probably even more, what's worth reading, watching or listening to. We do have New Books sections. And if they ask, we can help them with reader's advisory, but what about staff recommendations? Or recommendations from other library users?
I'd also like to see us offer more discovery of new tools and devices. We tend to get caught up in issues like whether or not we should check out e-readers. I think we could do a real service in just allowing people to handle and use them in the library. We need to keep finding ways to connect with current and potential users letting them know about new services available in the library. For those libraries on OverDrive, how many of your non-regular patrons do you think know that you have audio and e-books available that they can check out and download from home?
There is, of course, a big difference between Apple stores and libraries in that they have a limited amount of merchandise they need to promote and be experts on, while ours is much larger. But I think we tend to focus too much on the whole world of information, and thus intimidate many of our users who are looking for answers to much smaller questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)