No Need to Reinvent the Wheel

Even as technology drastically changes the way we consume information, the image of libraries is still rooted in books. The 2010 report from OCLC, Perceptions of Libraries, 2010: Context and Community, demonstrates that users still think that borrowing books and movies and visiting the library are important, valuable services. What’s not so clear is if the classic conception of a library (essentially a place where books and librarians live) is still enough for libraries do now. New technologies offer new opportunities for libraries to reinvent themselves, but how much is really necessary?

Overwhelmingly, Americans view the library’s role as a place to get books, videos and music, a role that is as important to them personally as to their community. A place to learn, read and to make information freely available are library roles Americans feel are more important to them personally than for their community. [OCLC p. 49]

Librarians and users both see libraries as much more than just places to check out books. Beyond the actual content of a library, libraries are information hubs, networks of people and information. The library is a place to get Internet access and print media. In the OCLC study, user recommendations for libraries often focused on the space/environment, like extending opening hours, improving the available technology and updating or expanding the amount of popular books and movies in the collection. This appears to have remained constant since the OCLC report was published. A more recent study from Pew Internet, “Library Services in the Digital Age”, shows many of the same trends in the OCLC study: the most important services a library offers are access to books, librarian services and the Internet.

The Pew study has some good information for libraries to draw on, but seems a bit cluttered with some unnecessary questions about new technologies. The “wider uses of technology” questions listed at the head of the study are certainly interesting ideas for utilizing tech, they seem to get away from what users really want from a library:

  • Access to technology “petting zoos” to try out new devices: 35% of Americans ages 16 and older would “very likely” use that service and another 34% say they would be “somewhat likely” to do so.

  • GPS-navigation apps to help patrons locate material inside library buildings: 34% of Americans ages 16 and older would “very likely” use that service and another 28% say they would be “somewhat likely” to do so.

  • “Redbox”-style lending machines or kiosks located throughout the community where people can check out books, movies or music without having to go to the library itself: 33% of Americans ages 16 and older would “very likely” use that service and another 30% say they would be “somewhat likely” to do so [Pew Internet].

Many of these suggested services seem distracting; they look like creative solutions for addressing user needs, but are they really the best uses for a library? The Redbox service, for instance, would help a library fulfill the user desire for books and media, but completely ignores the other, almost equally important function of a library: a space to use the Internet, take classes and read. Resources that could be used in the creation of a Redbox service would be better spent on extending library hours or collection development. Is it feasible for libraries to implement “petting zoos of technology” (a service that already exists for free in any Best Buy or tech store)? Similarly, something like the customized recommendations might only make sense for a bigger library system, like NYPL; if a library’s collection is limited, there might not be enough recommended material for it to be worthwhile for a user to spend the time building up a taste profile. [As an aside, does anybody else get tired of maintaining their read/owned/taste preference information across multiple vendors? I do this for Netflix, Amazon, Goodreads, NYPL, etc. and it is the biggest timesuck.] I am not sure the new technologies suggestions from the Pew study are actually helpful. Libraries would be better served by performing a few functions really well than trying to tack on a lot of different services in order to capture new technology.

Existing brands get reinforced, not redefined, as new alternatives enter a market. [OCLC p. 95]

Although the Pew study suggests interesting alternatives and uses of technology, ultimately libraries cannot get away from the really essential things users want: being open and having good content. Some of that content can be dispersed online, but as pointed out in the OCLC study, “The online library has not become a substitute for visiting the library in person” (p. 97). What libraries need to prioritize is users’ desire for more content and better hours. This appears across all user populations in the OCLC study.

When Pew Internet asked the library staff members in an online panel about these services, the three that were most popular were classes on e-borrowing, classes on how to use handheld reading devices, and online “ask a librarian” research services. Many librarians said that their libraries were already offering these resources in various forms, due to demand from their communities [Pew Internet].

Based on the Pew study, libraries are already doing a lot things users want, it’s just that users don’t seem to know about them. The key to expanding their audience is to focus on keeping their physical and online presences open and up-to-date. In reality, this would mean adding popular books or adding hours of operation. Online, this could be maintaining a Tumblr account or adding ebooks. Many libraries can (and do) connect to users through social media services (so many libraries do this already, that I was surprised the Pew study didn’t ask users about connecting to their libraries via social networking sites). Social media is an invaluable tool for advertising services. It can also promote curated content: users all over the Internet discover digital content through Pinterest boards, Twitter accounts, Tumblrs and Flickr pages. Rather than developing their own apps, libraries can take advantage of platforms like Tumblr, which many of their patrons probably use already (a list of libraries and librarians on Tumblr is unofficially maintained on The Lifeguard Librarian). The “Ask a Librarian” feature mentioned in both studies could be implemented on these sites as well. Maintaining social media sites is a surprising amount of work, but if libraries go where the users are, chances are the users will come to them.

Note: This post originally appeared on a private blog for my Information Technologies class at Pratt SILS.