Introduction
Public
libraries across North America face a great challenge and opportunity in
redesigning public services to align with diverse and evolving customer needs –
increasingly utilizing digital information sources and personal and social
technologies.
In
May 2010, Edmonton Public Library, an urban public library located in Western
Canada, launched a study into the nature and types of questions received at
service desks (in person, by phone, electronically) and while providing mobile
reference service (“roving”). The principal and sole researcher for this study
was a recently graduated intern librarian hired by Edmonton Public Library to
explore future service directions for reference and readers services. The
internship project was supervised by one of Edmonton Public Library’s directors
of public services. Edmonton Public Library is a seventeen branch library
system located in Alberta, Canada and serving a population of 728,349 (City of
Edmonton, 2009). The purpose of this study was to discover and explore detailed
information about the nature and types of questions customers were asking, with
the goal of informing the redesign of public services to broadly improve
customer service.
This
article describes methods, results, and conclusions of the study, with focus
set tightly on the technology help data subset of the larger study.
Literature
Review
Public Libraries and Technology
The literature speaks widely to the potential
impact, challenges, and opportunity for technology use and technology learning
in public libraries for library customers and library staff.
Scholars
such as Aabø (2005) and Fox, Horne, King, Seely, and Walsh (2008) broadly address the potential for
public libraries to use information communication technologies to impact community
and culture. Based on the results of a survey of Finnish library users and
non-users about the value of public libraries in digital society, Aabø locates the public library’s points of technological
access as possible sites for customers facing barriers, in terms of both
physical access and a range of fluencies, to participate democratically and
inclusively in the maintenance and formation of social and cultural identities.
Fox et al. speak to the potential of emerging technologies to create rich opportunities
for instruction that strengthen and bridge communities (including customers and
for the library profession itself), while also providing a context where
libraries can remain strategically innovative among customers and community
stakeholders.
Lai
(2011) used document analysis, observation, and focus group interviews to
identify various methods and strategies in use by Canadian public libraries to
improve the information literacy skills of both library customers and staff.
Importantly, Lai identified that in a large urban public library an effective
training program incorporated four structural characteristics: advanced
information and communications technology (ICT) structure, provision of formal
training, improvement of staff information literacy (IL) and instructional
skills, and partnerships with local organizations. A key finding reported was
that a significant barrier staff faced as providers of formal and informal
information literacy instruction was a lack of “appropriate guidance in understanding
the theories of IL and adult learning while teaching library patrons” (p. 87).
Bertot (2009) used a
case study of 25 public libraries in the United States (combining interview,
observation, and inventory) to explore the staffing, budgetary, and infrastructural
requirements for supporting public access technologies, and to identify factors
underlying successful provision of public access technologies. Technologies
that Bertot looked at included public workstations;
wireless access; online resources, such as databases and downloadable content;
as well as the library’s more structural services – integrated library systems
and digital reference services. Bertot found that by
providing a combination of public access through hardware and software, public
libraries became points of access supporting use of digital technology by the
public. As Nagy (2011) illustrates in “Next-Generation Service in the Library,”
this use varies in focus and intensity, and is influenced by expectations and
functions present in external web services. Supporting this range of use is
crucially challenging when trying to accommodate the customer use of rapidly
evolving personal devices within the library: USB sticks, mp3 players, mobile
phones, and so on. Bertot found that public libraries
in his case study experienced budgetary and planning pressures when addressing
needs such the replacement and addition of equipment or systems, the lack of
integration between existing and new systems, or the need for upgrading
buildings and networks to support increasing public demand for power and
bandwidth. Bertot noted that public libraries
experienced success when library staff possessed the ability to lead by forming
partnerships to extend access within the community and through the community’s
support. It was also beneficial when library staff could articulate a strong
rationale for why the library was engaged in provision of these services and
why it should be supported financially and politically. In looking at the
provision of public access technologies from a public services perspective, Bertot found that a major factor in success was to have
staff who could understand the spectrum of technologies involved and think
creatively about problem solving across library and technology services.
Of
particular interest within the literature of librarianship and educational
technology are those studies that attempt to analyze customer experience with
library services and spaces, whether through survey, interview, interaction
logging, or other methods of examining usage and experience.
From
the academic library context one of the most interesting studies that
encompasses, but also looks beyond technology services, is documented in the
book Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University
of Rochester. Focusing on undergraduate users, this research team
applied a wide range of ethnographic and anthropological techniques including
interviews, a pilot service adjustment, diary mapping, photo surveys, and charrette-style workshops. In the process of conducting a
diary mapping exercise with undergraduate students, the researchers found that
students surveyed checked computers for communication and information several
times throughout the day across campus and where computer access was provided.
Given that the study was carried out in 2005, students in the survey opted not
to bring bulky laptops along, but preferred to utilize laptops when several
hours of work in one location was anticipated (Gibbons & Foster, 2007b).
A linked finding appeared in the research
project’s charrette-style workshops conducted with a
small group of students, where students were asked to furnish an ideal library
space. Students in this exercise frequently included workspace that would be
suitable for extended work on a mobile device, with many power outlets
available (Gibbons & Foster, 2007a).
Students
in this exercise also revealed interesting perceptions in the staff support element of their designs:
Students
rarely make distinctions between the types of staff needed in the library.
Instead, they include a generic staff person who is expected to provide
reference assistance, check out materials, answer IT questions, and brew a
great latte. (Gibbons & Foster, 2007, p. 25)
Another interesting finding about student
expectations in the use of library technology pertained to perceptions
uncovered in the diary mapping exercise about library computers:
It also was
clear that students do not understand that the computer lab, which is housed in
the physical library building, is not part of the library. It is obvious to
library and computing staff that the two entities are different, but not to
students. We now understand a little better why students are confused,
surprised, and sometimes disappointed when the library computers do not have
the same software and functionality as the workstations in the computer center.
Because of this project, providing access to an identical desktop and suite of
services became a top priority for the library . . . (Clark, 2007, p. 53)
Focusing
on the library kiosk in the public library context, a study of usage and
experience at Thunder Bay Public Library (TBPL) uncovered similar insights
about customer confusion and frustration when trying to access technology
services within the library (Aegard, 2010).
The
2009 study conducted by Thunder Bay Public Library aimed at understanding how
library customers were using library kiosks and at improving that experience (Aegard, 2010). During a ten-day period, Aegard’s
team utilized a combination of kiosk usage statistics that revealed the most
frequently accessed resources, staff survey to collect perceptions and
experiences, and customer survey to determine customer satisfaction with and
perceptions of the library’s kiosks. The researchers found that the library’s
OPAC was overwhelmingly accessed (64.65%) on the kiosk, and the ‘book a
computer’ service was the next most frequently accessed at 9.81%. Further,
attempts to access unauthorized web sites (children’s and adult together) comprised
8.73%. The findings led the team to remove some poorly utilized resources (such
as a mouse tutorial), while in general maintaining the basic functionality for
accessing OPAC and service-related functions. While mostly positive, TBPL’s
customer survey uncovered some customer frustration with the lack of
functionality of the kiosks, for example, the inability to print and the lack
of access to web even when linked through a catalogue record. The researchers
similarly noted some tension in maintaining that functionality and excluding
open Internet access: “It has been challenging to communicate the function of
the kiosks to customers. After all, people walk in, see a computer, and
naturally assume they can use it to get on the web” (Aegard,
2010, p. 18).
Library
literature speaks widely to the changing nature of reference services, but some
studies of note look specifically at reference through using the method of
transaction logging and analysis. Though small in numbers, these studies reveal
interesting insights about how library customers and library staff interact
around the delivery of technology services.
Cavanagh
(2006) conducted an ethnographic study of four branches within an urban public
library system to explore the library and reference activity as a
knowledge-sharing and knowledge construction ecology. Though this study was not
explicitly directed at examining technology use, in the course of observing
reference transactions Cavanagh reported that the computer often “functions as
an explicit knowledge container and as a prop in the interaction narratives”
(p. 14) when customers ask questions such as “What does the computer say about
this book?” Cavanagh located technology help in the sphere of relationship
building activities shared by staff and library customers, when she related a
customer question about access to digital photos on library computers that
ended with personal talk between a customer and a staff member. Cavanagh’s
study provides a unique perspective that considers the user experience of
library information services as a knowledge sharing and knowledge construction
site, rather than focusing solely on staffing or resource design.
Wong
(2009) conducted a study of technology help transactions at an information
commons (IC) at Hong Kong University with the stated purpose to inform training
design for IC staff. By extracting a sample of questions from a larger dataset
spanning four and a half years, Wong categorized technology questions and then
performed further analysis probing at transaction complexity. Importantly, Wong
categorizes questions based on what services library users needed help with,
rather than the resources employed by library staff. Of 1,411 questions in the
technology subset, Wong found that printing and computer assistance questions
dominated, followed by questions regarding scanning and copying functions.
Based on a system of tiering questions by complexity
of staff skills required, Wong found that 82.6% of the technology questions
required help that was manageable by a person without a formal technical
background. The remaining 17.6% of technology questions required help that went
beyond general computer literacy and required a more formal background in
information systems to address.
At
McNeese State University, Finnell and Fontaine (2010)
used a reference transaction study to guide the development of subject study
guides, instructional outreach efforts, and collection development. Based on 6
months of data collection and preliminary analysis through subject classification
coding, the researchers created 11 study guides, purchased new materials, and
created 19 new bibliographic instruction courses. The researchers also
refocused program efforts to liaise with faculty in key subject areas based on
patterns of help requested from students.
Two
transaction logging studies attempted to apply analysis of desk transactions to
the challenge of staffing services with at an appropriate level for skill and
cost effectiveness.
Meserve, Belanger, Bowlby, and Rosenblum (2007) applied
the Warner model for the categorization of reference transaction into tiers of
complexity to transactions logged in Fall 2005 and Fall 2006 with the purpose
of determining appropriate staffing (professional vs. paraprofessional) for
services (in person, telephone, virtual) of a merged academic and public
library. The researchers were able to adjust staffing based on analysis of
frequency of Level 1 (non-resource) and Level 2 (skill-based) questions in
certain services in comparison with the frequency of Level 3 (strategy-based)
and Level 4 (consultation) questions. The researchers also concluded that
question classification and frequency had informed training design, as training
was an important factor in maintaining the quality of service in a tiered environment.
Ryan
(2008) applied content analysis to repurposed reference transaction data at
Stetson University library to determine the cost effectiveness of staffing a
reference desk with library professionals. During 4 collection periods, 6,595
questions were captured and considered in the study. Ryan found that 862
(12.4%) of the queries were information-oriented technology questions and
estimated the dollar cost in staffing for each kind of question. Ryan found
that 89% of the total questions were answerable by non-librarians, and
suggested that staffing adjustments to desk service or alternative service
delivery models should be explored along with further study of student needs
through varying community consultation techniques. The unresolved complexity in
Ryan’s study is based in how the questions were mapped from type to staffing
level.
The
present study touched on areas examined by the literature: composition of
transactions by type, the public library in relation to digital literacy and
inclusion, user experience with library-provided technology, and
service/staffing design implications. It approached the subject of technology
interactions and service design implications by focusing on customer-staff
interactions that center around technology within the public library’s space.
Aims
This
study attempted to address the following questions:
1.
What
is the nature and what are the types of help being requested by library
customers?
2.
What
changes to service design are identifiable and actionable based on these
requests?
Methods
A
question logging form was used to capture the details of interactions between
library staff members and customers. The principal researcher adapted the
question logging form from one originally designed by Edmonton Public Library’s
Acting Manager of Assessment and Research for an internal question pattern
study conducted within Edmonton Public Library to determine staffing levels for
a specialized, permanent, “storefront” service point. The form was
re-structured to capture the following details for each staff-customer
interaction:
·
Date
of question (day, month)
·
Question
details . . .
·
Answered
with . . . (resource or process)
·
Question
location (on desk, roving, on phone, by chat)
The
form was initially tested for four hours at one service point on a high traffic
desk, and minor adjustments were made based on cell space requirements for
fields and in consultation with Edmonton Public Library’s Manager of Assessment
and Research. The final version of the form retained all four data elements
listed above and is included in Appendix B.
Twelve
service points (9 branches in total, with 1 branch containing 4 service points)
were selected from the library system by the principle researcher and the
project supervisor in an attempt to get a varied sample of branch sizes and
locations within the city, as well as variation in the types of communities
served. Variety in size and location were the main factors by which the
branches selected, but it was also decided that the study would include three
service points that were heading into new building projects, the main branch
(potentially heading to renovations), and one branch hypothesized to be
impacted by the opening of a new service point in 2013. The researcher and
supervisor decided on a three-day sample range for collecting interactions
based on the volume of data collected during the four-hour test run and time
considerations to control the scale of the overall project.
Branch
visits for data collection were scheduled in advance, and visit dates were
staggered for each location so the lead researcher could be physically present
to observe interactions. Dates were selected based on convenience and in
consideration of an external requirement for all data collection and analysis
to be completed within the one-year timeline of the internship.
In
pre-visit staff meetings, the lead researcher briefed participating public
services staff at each branch on the study’s purpose and provided instructions
on how to record survey interactions. Staff members were encouraged to share as
much detail about each interaction as possible, but were asked to avoid
applying any classification (e.g., “the customer asked a directional
question”), and were instructed to exclude personally identifying information. The
question logging form was distributed for staff use in paper format, primarily
for the ease of use by staff during the flow of work. Although this public
library has used web forms for other internal surveys, it was anticipated that
staff might provide more detailed information on paper due to comfort and
presence in mind. The lead researcher was physically present in the branches
during data collection to observe a sample of the interactions between staff
and customers.
Once
the data collection stage at each location was completed, the lead researcher
entered the form data into an Excel spreadsheet. Coding was approached by
adapting from the analytical framework of grounded theory, as described in Charmaz’s Constructing
grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative research (2006) and
Corbin and Strauss’ Basics of qualitative
research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2008). The lead researcher coded the data to
develop thematic descriptors (concepts), and sorted those thematic descriptors
into larger categories as they emerged. Thematic descriptors were permitted to
emerge organically in the coding process, and were developed and applied by
considering both what the customer was asking and how the interaction was apparently
resolved, rather than using definitions from the literature.
The code book, which was developed to maintain consistency, is included in
Appendix A.
Limitations
The
data collected in this study has significant limitations:
- The data
collection consisted of only three days at each location, and different
days were sampled at each location. As a result, the findings are
indicative of a snapshot understanding, rather than a comparative or
longitudinal study of activity traffic patterns.
- Data
elements were recorded by participating frontline staff. A follow-up
interview was not conducted with customers, so there is some potential for
the interactions as recorded to be an imperfect or incomplete reflection
of the customer’s actual information need.
- Although
participating staff recorded diligently, the data does not reflect all of
the activity happening in a given branch on a given day. Some interactions
were not included due to factors such as desk volume, forgetfulness, and
desk shift transitions. The researcher observed that roving questions were
misreported as desk questions on occasion.
·
Chat
data was found in two location datasets only, due to
implementation of system-wide chat monitoring occurring after most of the
selected locations had been surveyed.
Results
From
June 2010 to February 2011 a total of 6,099 interactions were recorded by
participating staff from 12 service points during the survey. Of those 6,099
interactions, 1,920 (31.48%) were coded in the Technology Help category. The
Technology Help category became a strong focus of analysis in the study, and
the key findings for this category are presented in these results.
Technology Help in
Context
As can be seen in Figure 1 and Table 1, the codes and concepts that grouped to
form the Technology Help category formed the largest cluster of interactions in
the study at 31.48%. This category was second only to finding books,
multimedia, and information at 25.23%, which included reference and readers
services interactions.
Defining Technology Help
The technology help category included customer interactions involving
computers, printing, photocopiers, wireless, library provided equipment (e.g.,
headphones), and mobile or personal devices. Interactions involving the self checkout stations and self check-in
autosortation units, though strongly related to
circulation, were also included in this category. These interactions were
included as technology help because both systems presented a computer driven
interface to the customer, and because the problem solving strategies in this
area drew heavily upon
instruction and
technical skills.
Figure 1
Percentage of
interactions by category.
Table 1
Description of Figure 1 Category Codes with Breakdown by Raw Number and
Percentage
|
Code
Category
|
Description
|
Raw Number
|
Percentage
|
|
Technology
Help
|
Help
with computers, printing, wireless, photocopiers, website, devices, self checkout
|
1,920
|
31.48%
|
|
Finding
books, multimedia, information
|
Help
finding books, multimedia, and information (readers and information services)
|
1,539
|
25.23%
|
|
Circulation
|
Help
checking materials in or out, checking item status, and using the holds
system
|
1,159
|
19%
|
|
Memberships
|
Help
with new cards, card renewals, fine payments, and account management
|
1,155
|
18.93%
|
|
About
Services
|
Procedural
or logical questions about how the library’s services work
|
1,000
|
16.39%
|
|
About Spaces
|
Help
locating library services and spaces (non-collection related)
|
453
|
7.42%
|
aMultiple
category codes have been applied to each interaction, resulting in percentages
higher than the interaction total.
Figure 2
Technology help subcategories
by number.
The
technology help category is further broken down into subcategories coded for
the object with which help was requested (Figure 2). Interactions involving
computers (1,023), printing (383), and self checkout
stations (224) were the most dominant topics in the technology help category.
Customers
asked for help with connectivity and file management across a broad range of
devices including laptops (21), USB (10), iPad (4),
Kindle (3), iPhones (3), netbooks (2), Sony PSP (2), Kobo (1), Sony eReader (1), Blackberry (1), an unidentified cellphone (1),
Palm device (1), and Nintendo Wii (1).
Defining Help: Instruction and Intervention
Textual analysis of the “Answered with…” portion of the question logging form
provided an insight into how library staff members were resolving technology
help interactions (Figure 3).
The
researchers identified that 671 (35%) of the technology coded interactions were
resolved using instruction, and 387 (20%) were resolved when staff intervened
administratively using workstation management software. In 862 (45%) technology
coded interactions, too little detail was provided for the researcher to
categorize the kind of help provided to the customer.
Technology
instruction interactions ranged in complexity from simple device
troubleshooting (e.g., customer wants to find a place where laptop can be
plugged in to charge) to complex instruction in areas such as file management concepts, networking, document
composition, and online etiquette.
A
number of technology coded interactions were blended with informational needs.
Customers were in the library attempting to accomplish a set task layered with
social meaning and technology instruction (e.g., applying for a job online).
These interactions required staff to instruct in information literacy skills
and to guide in reference mediation of the resource.
Help in Three Areas: Computers, Printing, and Self Checkout
A major finding of the study was that of 1920 technology questions (and of
6,099 questions in total), 1,032 pertained to assistance with computer
workstations and a further 383 questions pertained to printing from the
library’s public workstations. As well, 224 customers requested help with the
library’s self checkout kiosks. It is important to
examine why these three areas appeared so dominantly.
Figure 3
Types of help provided
for technology coded interactions.
Textual
analysis of the technology help data revealed that customers requested help
that varied in complexity with computers, printing, and other key self service technologies such as the self
checkout machines. Some of this help was due to the interplay of task
complexity and gaps in computer or information literacy on the part of
customers (e.g., a customer needed to apply for a job online, but first needed
to receive instruction on email), but help requests were also physically
observed to arise due to critical usability issues with key systems.
One
of the most critical usability issues was located in the unfamiliar interface
presented by software on the library’s Internet workstations. This interface,
while operating atop Windows XP, disrupted customer expectations for the
Microsoft Windows “desktop metaphor” by omitting the Start Bar and Windows
Explorer. Further, the interface forced customers through a third party “application
launcher” that appears in the middle of the screen and involves a vertical scrollbar
for selecting applications. The restrictions applied through the software also forced
customers to access removable media (memory sticks) through the Open File menu
choice in common applications, a process that appeared to be idiosyncratic and
unexpected for customers. Textual analysis and physical observation revealed
this interface to be problematic for computer savvy customers who appeared to
be familiar with the Windows environment. It was also observed to be
problematic as a learning environment for customers who indicated, verbally or
otherwise, inexperience or anxiety with computer use. This is particularly
troubling to consider when it appeared that some of those customers were at the
library for the very purpose of accessing digital literacy instruction in the
form of one-on-one computer tutorials. Although the computer workstations stood
out in the survey results, the self checkout machines
were the third most reported object in technology help requests and all branch
locations surveyed included at least one self checkout
machine. Textual analysis and observation revealed two kinds of help requested
with self checkout machines: the first type of help
requested was when the self checkout would not
perform a specific, expected, user-initiated task, such as checking out an item
or printing a receipt. Textual analysis revealed that this failure sometimes
arose due to a system generated condition (e.g., library policy blocks
checkouts at a $10 fine count, with the idea that customers will approach a desk
and resolve the bill). At other times, the interaction text spoke to problems
where the failure was more mechanical in nature (e.g., a jammed receipt printer
is easy for customers to diagnose and report to the desk).
The
second kind of help requested most often was when customers were unable to
intuit the steps required – or the messages presented – by the self checkout kiosks. For example, the self
checkout will inform customers that an expired library card or a card
that has reached a numerical checkout limit is “invalid.” From observation,
customers would approach the desk, alarmed, thinking the card information might
be “missing” from the system, when in reality the severity of the problem was
far less than signaled by the vague message. Customers were similarly deprived
of useful system messaging when attempting to check out an item with
limitations imposed by type (e.g., reference) or items with an erroneous state
(e.g., still discharged to another customer).
A
third possibility that was observed by the researcher, but did not appear
substantively in the text of the interaction data, may exist in how customers
conceptually link the self checkout kiosks to account
information needs. In the data, 300 instances were recorded in which customers
asked the library for information about the contents or status of library
memberships. Although question analysis revealed many possible causes for this
question, it is notable that customers were, at times, observed to proceed
directly from the self checkout to a service desk in
order to obtain more detailed information about their accounts, or to confirm
the status of an item when the machine messaging or functionality left that
status in doubt. For example, at one branch two customers were observed asking
staff members to verify that items were checked out properly when the number of
items in hand did not match the number of items listed by receipt. The title
and author details on circulated items are not currently presented in a list
format through the self checkout interface, but are
instead accessible through library service “catalogue stations,” which are
restricted in function. The researchers speculate that catalogue stations have
a stronger conceptual link with searching than with account management, but
further study is required.
Textual
analysis revealed that the printing system (383) presented very comparable
challenges to the problem types that customers encountered with the self checkout kiosks. Customers would approach when the
document failed to print as expected, but this involved an added layer of
complexity in troubleshooting for staff and customers because of the additional
number of sources from which the issue could be arising. In some cases,
customers struggled with the layer of print management software used by the
library to release and coordinate payment for prints. The printing software
appeared to disrupt the expectations of customers accustomed to home or office
printing environments by presenting a series of vague messages and unclear confirmation
steps in the form of pop-up dialog boxes. In some cases, customers approached
the desk with a problem that turned out to be insufficient credit for printing
(which is passively indicated by the software through an account balance or a
pop-up dialog box, rather than as active item requiring immediate resolution
and offering steps to proceed), but was sometimes misidentified by customers as
a physical problem such as “the printer is out of paper.” In attempting to
resolve this problem, some staff members indicated that they had checked the
printer immediately, some indicated that they had accompanied the customer to
his/her computer for a closer look at where the customer was in the process and
possible instruction on the software, and some staff members indicated that
they had performed administrative intervention by viewing the customer’s
account details from a staff workstation. In some cases, the troubleshooting
path involved more than one strategy and more than one trip to a customer or
staff workstation to identify and resolve the issue.
Technology in Library Space
Survey data revealed a small class of interactions in which customers asked for
help in spaces impacted by the use of technology, but not with technology
itself.
Textual
analysis and observation revealed that differing activities located in library
computing spaces created tensions among customers with respect to noise,
concentration, and privacy. There were 11 interactions across 5 locations
throughout the data in which customers asked where they could find quiet space
for themselves or for a study group. There were also 16 noise complaints across
5 locations in computing contexts where customers who were engaged in an
individual task requiring concentration (e.g., writing an email or resume)
objected to noise generated by groups of customers also on computers but
engaged in social activities such as viewing social media sites, streaming
media, or playing games.
Among
the category of interactions that included codes and concepts about the
library’s physical space, interactions in which customers asked about the
location of Internet workstations ranked third (56) behind questions about the
washrooms (133) and questions about where to return materials (84). One
potential reason why these interactions arose is because of the apparent visual
similarity between the Internet workstations and some of the catalogue
computers (that are restricted to OPAC and database access) at some locations
(Figure 4).
Figure 4
At Edmonton’s
downtown Stanley A. Milner Library, the stand up
catalogue station (left) appears ambiguous in function, but is at least
distinctive in orientation in comparison to the Internet workstation (centre) and the sit down catalogue station (right).
Discussion
The
survey results indicated that for the technology help interaction category,
customer requests for help with the library’s computer workstations dominated
all other subcategories. Based on three significant areas of analysis arising
from the results, the researcher recommended that the library conduct a
thorough usability review of the Internet workstation interface.
In
particular, the researchers recommended that the library aim to address five
common customer tasks (logging on, launching applications, locating and opening
a document, printing, and downloading/attaching a file with email) recorded in
the survey data, through a change in configuration of the current software or
through a search and evaluation of new software to implement. Further, the
researchers recommended that the library, upon any changes, follow up with a
user study – including a focus group of customers familiar with a Windows
operating environment and at least one webmail service – to test the changes.
The
researchers recommended that the library should explore implementation of a
solution for printing that is easier for customers to use, which requires
minimal steps, presents clear language, and allows for self
service payment.
The
researchers also recommended that the library conduct an audit of service
messages that are commonly presented to customers by key technology systems,
similar to the focus presented by Saarti and Raivo (2011). In that study, the scholars read one public
library’s OPAC as a text and analyzed the social and information literacies
required to decode that text in the larger context of human-computer,
human-information interactions.
Survey
results, especially in regard to the confusing language presented by the self checkout stations, speak to the need for public
libraries to present messages and language to customers that are friendly in
that they are easy to understand, possibly graphically represented, concise and
accurate, and instructive. These qualities serve to create a sense of choice
and power for customers. Public libraries not only need to present friendlier
and clearer messages where possible, but must also communicate that this kind
of user experience is a requirement when they select vendor software and
provide feedback to vendors about existing products. Where self
service options necessarily eclipse in-person contact with staff (e.g.,
system generated holds and overdue notices), messages need to be evaluated with
particular care. Does the tone, language, and visual design of system notices
reflect the library’s mission, vision, and values? Or does the tone and
language shut down communication? System messages – like advocacy and marketing
messages – must facilitate meaningful conversations and action
between public
libraries and communities.
The
researchers additionally recommended that the library adjust desk staffing
strategies and mobile reference practices to increase staff awareness to “rove”
the self checkout machines and the autosortation units, which appeared extensively in the
survey results.
Follow
up study is recommended on the question of co-existing spaces and digital
workspaces that support individual and shared tasks. Interactions in this
subcategory appeared in a limited way in the survey data, and appeared to
require alternative methods of study – as in Gibbons and Foster’s Studying Students project – to be
captured in a systematic manner.
From
a staffing perspective, the volume and complexity of technology instruction
questions (671) and the prominence of technology questions as a whole (1,920)
in the study, suggested that public library customers need public library staff
who see technology as a foundational component of
library work, who feel capable in attempting to help, and who have superb
interpersonal skills. Crucially, given the rate of technological change,
library staff members also require the skills to co-learn and co-instruct with
a variety of different systems, devices, and problem classes. Co-learning,
interpersonal, RUSA reference interview, and strong search skills remain key
elements of any customer service strategy around technology training.
Conclusions
The
study found that technology help is a central customer need within Edmonton
Public Library, and that help requests vary in complexity and are frequently
resolved with instruction. The study also found that technology help questions
are sometimes blended with more complex information needs, and infused with
evolving social meaning (e.g., job search). Internet workstations, printing,
and self checkout are asked about in significant
numbers and present critical usability challenges for library customers due to
issues with interface design and workflow. The researcher recommends that the
library focus on improving ease of use in key systems, on auditing service
messages for clarity and accuracy, and on re-designing some staffing practices
and structures to support technology assistance as a foundational component of
library work.
Given
the strong appearance of technology help in this study, the Edmonton Public
Library has acted to address the need for digital literacy services at a
strategic level in its business plan document: The Way We Share: EPL Business Plan 2011 - 2013. The library has
resolved to position digital literacy services with customers through
programming and partnerships, and to position digital literacy services with
library staff by implementing new positions and training delivery models, with
the ultimate goal of developing the skills and confidence to help customers
with technology. Further, the library is resolved to address some user
experience issues identified in the study (e,g.,
printing) by offering “online services [that] are easy to use – at home and on
the go” and to become “[the] community’s digital workspace” (2011, pp. 14-15).
References
Aabø,
S. (2005). The role and value of public
libraries in the age of digital technologies. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 37(4), 205-211. doi:10.1177/0961000605057855
Aegard,
J. (2010). Library kiosks: A
balancing act. Computers in Libraries, 30(8),
16-20.
Arnold,
J., & Kaske, N. (2005). Evaluating the quality of a chat service. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 5(2),
177-193. doi:10.1353/pla.2005.0017
Bertot,
J. (2009). Public access technologies in public libraries: Effects and
implications. Information Technology & Libraries, 28(2),
81-92.
Cavanagh,
M. (2006). Re-conceptualizing the
reference transaction: The case for interaction and information relationships
at the public library reference desk. Canadian Journal of Information & Library Sciences, 30(1/2), 1-19.
Charmaz,
K. (2006). Constructing
grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
City
of Edmonton. (2009). Municipal census
results. In City
of Edmonton. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/facts_figures/municipal-census-results.aspx
Clark,
K. (2007). Mapping diaries, or where do they go all day? In N. F. Foster &
S. Gibbons (Eds.), Studying Students: The
Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester. (pp. 48-54).
Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012
from http://hdl.handle.net/1802/7520
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research:
techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Gibbons,
S., & Foster, N. F. (2007a). Library design and ethnography. In N. F. Foster & S. Gibbons
(Eds.), Studying Students: The
Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester. (pp. 20-29).
Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012
from http://hdl.handle.net/1802/7520
Gibbons,
S., & Foster, N. F. (Eds.). (2007b). Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University
of Rochester. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries.
Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://hdl.handle.net/1802/7520
Edmonton
Public Library. (2011). The
way we share: EPL business plan 2011 - 2013. In Edmonton Public Library.
Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://www.epl.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/businessplan_2011_final.pdf
Fox,
K., Horne, L. M., King, T., Seely, S., & Walsh,
K. (2008). The librarian as
bridge-builder. Public Services Quarterly, 4(2),
177-185. doi:
10.1080/15228950802203281
Finnell,
J., & Fontane, W. (2010).
Reference question data mining: A
systematic approach to Library Outreach. Reference & User
Services Quarterly, 49(3), 278-286. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://www.rusq.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/RUSQ49n3_10_finnell.pdf
Katz,
W. A. (1997). Introduction
to Reference Work. (7th
ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lai,
H.-J.
(2011). Information literacy training in public libraries: A case from
Canada. Educational Technology & Society, 14(2),
81-88. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://www.ifets.info/journals/14_2/7.pdf
Meserve,
H. C., Belanger, S. E., Bowlby, J., & Rosenblum, L. (2009). Developing a model for reference research statistics: Applying the “Warner Model” of reference
question classification to streamline
research services. Reference & User Services Quarterly,
48(3), 247-258. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://www.rusq.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/48n3/pdf/RUSQ48n3_meserve.pdf
Nagy, A. (2011). Next-Generation
service in the library. Library Technology Reports, 47(7),
8-10.
Radford,
M. L., & Connaway, L. S. (2007, June). Not Dead Yet! Ready Reference
in Live Chat Reference. 13th RUSA New Reference Research Forum, Washington, DC, USA.
Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/synchronicity/resources/20070624-ala-rusa-handout.pdf
Ryan,
S. M. (2008). Reference transactions analysis: the cost-effectiveness of
staffing a traditional academic reference desk. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(5), 389-399. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012 from http://pdn.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiImageURL&_cid=272069&_user=1069227&_pii=S0099133308001006&_check=y&_origin=browse&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=2008-09-30&wchp=dGLbVlV-zSkzV&md5=d9492bcbf4fab85bc74d900ac137ef24/1-s2.0-S0099133308001006-main.pdf
Saarti,
J., & Raivio, J. (2011).
How to communicate with a machine: on reading a public library’s OPAC. Journal of Librarianship and Information
Science, 43(1), 22-29. doi:10.1177/0961000611401258
Wong,
G. K. W. (2010). Information commons help desk transactions study. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36(3), 235-241. Retrieved 1 Feb. 2012
from http://pdn.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiImageURL&_cid=272069&_user=1069227&_pii=S0099133310000637&_check=y&_origin=browse&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=2010-05-31&wchp=dGLzVlS-zSkzk&md5=812007525f9472d549c8352e93a4daa3/1-s2.0-S0099133310000637-main.pdf
2012 Arnason
and Reimer. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share
Alike License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ca/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
