My Info Quest Launches Text Reference Service Today…07.21.09

From the MyInfoQuest release information:

“…Starting today, patrons of approximately 50 libraries from all over the US will be able to text a question to (309) 222-7740 and a real, live librarian will respond within minutes. The service is free of charge, but standard text messaging rates do apply. Staffed by librarians from around the country, answers are sent to cell phones by librarians in 320 characters or less, or the equivalent of two 160-character text messages…

The hours of service will be Monday through Friday, 8 a.m.-10 p.m. and Saturday 9 a.m.-5 p.m…”

QuestionPoint “Virtual Reference” Service…04.15.09

Though not new, I wanted to investigae further “virtual reference” services. OCLC’s “virtual reference” service, QuestionPoint, is described as follows:

“QuestionPoint is a unique virtual reference service, supported by global network of cooperating libraries worldwide, as well as an infrastructure of software tools and communications. QuestionPoint is also a source of unique centralized knowledge resources built by a collaborative network of member libraries.

QuestionPoint reference management service provides libraries with tools to interact with users in multiple ways, using both chat and email. The Web-based chat tool with co-browsing capability, coupled with the email reference component, enable seamless integration of chat, follow up and referral, as well as one-stop reporting tools for all types of reference services. In addition, libraries may opt to participate in the 24/7 Reference Cooperative to provide live around-the-clock reference service to their community…”

You can see a Flash demo here.

How do your library/information patrons and/or clients deal with information complexity?…04.03.09

Information World Review‘s How do your clients deal with information complexity? article authors Bernice de Braal and Peter Newman  say, “People deal with information complexity by either reducing that complexity or absorbing it. Knowing whether your clients are shrinkers or swallowers is a key insight for information professionals.“

Their interesting article is excerpted here:

“There is a consensus that the world has entered a knowledge era where information is power and rapid learning a necessary condition for success. The concept itself, though, is nothing new: the English philosopher and statesman Francis Bacon is credited with coining the phrase ‘knowledge is power’ in 1597 in his Meditationes Sacrae. And in business, knowledge is now widely regarded as a powerful source of competitive advantage.

But information tends to be complex and, as anybody who has worked in different types of libraries and information services knows, clients from different communities handle information, both simple and complex, in different ways. Someone from the business community, for example, will handle information differently to someone from the academic or medical community.

To be part of a community and to truly belong, you have to be able to understand and process information given to you by other members of that community. Such communities have been described as populations of data-processing agents. The way in which the community’s data-processing agents handle information is one of the community’s key cultural attributes, and different communities have evolved different strategies for handling the complexity of the information they deal with…

The strategic choice of whether to reduce or absorb complexity implies handling abstraction in different ways. Reducing complexity requires a highly structured world model. Crucially, alternative explanations are regarded as competing with each other. The community’s members search for the best explanat ion and the best abstraction, normally on a logical basis.

By contrast, absorbing complexity requires the community to accept co-existing contradictory explanations and so simultaneous alternative abstractions.

This may be second nature to information professionals, but not necessarily to their clients…

There are four distinct institutional types – markets, bureaucracies, fiefs and clans – associated with different types of informational complexity, necessitating different informational strategies. The four types distinguish between open information that is available to everyone and secret information that is accessible only by insiders.

Markets refer to institutions where information is highly codified and disseminated. Relationships are impersonal and everyone looks after their own interests. Market types are open. There are no barriers to entry and exit. Examples include the financial and commodities markets. Market types reduce informational complexity.

Bureaucracies refer to the use of secretive, codified information to achieve co-ordination; the approach is sometimes called hierarchical co-ordination. Bureaucracies are impersonal and secretive by nature. Efficient government agencies resemble bureaucracies, as they possess a strong capacity to structure, refine and make sense of information. Other examples include the military and large corporations. Bureaucracies reduce informational complexity.

Fiefs, unlike market types, are about personal power and charisma. Inf ormation is secret and uncodified. Knowledge resides with a few, making relationships hierarchical and personal. Fiefs are personal and secretive. An R &D department where one prominent scientist leads large projects, aided by assistants, could be a fief. Other examples include cartels and top management teams. Fiefs absorb informational complexity.

Clans are produced by open, uncodified and non-disseminated information. Clan types are personal and open. Examples include family businesses, the top tier of some bureaucracies, and some entrepreneurial startups. Clans absorb informational complexity…

Information complexity provides several key messages for information professionals.

First, information professionals have to understand and react to the needs of their clients, even if those clients do not fully appreciate the nature of their needs and what action is appropriate.

Second, in their roles as information professionals, librarians and information and knowledge managers need to be able to diagnose the strategy that their clients (and client communities) use to handle complex information: are they reductionists or absorptionists?

Third, information professionals may find they need to modify the way they organise their knowledge and their information services (especially their cataloguing and classification) to suit their clients’ reductionist or absorption strategies, and also the way that they present information to their clients.

The nature of the client community’s institutions give some insights into how they handle complex information…”

ACRL Podcast: The Desk and Beyond…Next Gen Reference Service…09.08.08

You can listen to the ACRL Poscast “The Desk and Beyond” about next gen reference service.  Here is the ACRL post [
http://libprofdev.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/acrl-podcast-the-desk-and-beyond/
]:

“In this podcast, College & Research Libraries News editor-in-chief David Free talks with Sarah Steiner and Leslie Madden of Georgia State University, editors of the ACRL publication The Desk and Beyond: Next Generation Reference Services. They are joined by chapter authors Meredith Farkas of Norwich University, Ross LaBaugh of California State University – Fresno, and Jerilyn Veldof of the University of Minnesota to discuss the book along with current and future trends in reference services.

Time: 29:27

  STANDARD PODCAST: HIDE PLAYER | PLAY IN POPUP | DOWNLOAD

Podcast Powered by podPress (v8.7)“

“Resurrecting Reference” Webinar Archived…08.01.08

I would recommend the time it takes to view the archived webinar “Resurrecting Reference” yesterday from George Needham and Joan Frye Williams which is now available on the Infopeople website.  This is particularly relevant in light of the fact that reference questions in academic and reference has continued to decline sharply. The archived webinar is here: [
http://infoblog.infopeople.org/2008/07/resurrecting_reference_the_con.php
]

Reference Interview Problems…07.18.08

In my situation, there usually isn’t much time or no time for a reference interview when inquiries come flying my way from management.  While multi-tasking librarian and marketing tasks, reference questions or research requests usually come at me quickly without notice from a very short email, a short phone call, or a few seconds verbal request from upper management without time to think about the question/inquiry, time to clarify what is wanted/needed, or time to get back to the person with additional questions. Immediate results are expected and management usually perceive of themselves as too busy to take the time the formal reference interview process.  Of course, this leaves lots of room for error in 1) not retrieving what is wanted, 2) getting too much or too little detail, 3) getting the wrong information.  This situation can also lead to misconceptions about my competence up the management chain with little or usually no recourse to explaining why the results may not have been what was expected.  Being a solo librarian, the situation can lead to multiple professional credibility issues.

This issue was brought to the forefront with a particular instance of which I will share here.  Due to the confidentiality of the inquiry, however, I will be unable to share some of the specifics.

The inquiry started a few days ago when I was asked to file on our computer network a few electronic documents from our organization and some news releases/articles I had found on the Internet after an unsolicited search on the topic.  I then received a request yesterday to search for other items related to the news releases/articles I found but from other specific prominent sources which management said existed. 

A thorough search did not retrieve results from the specific sources requested but management insisted they existed although I assured them they did not.  As a result, management turned to our press agent in a large east coast firm to find the articles.

Later in the day, I was told management wanted news releases/articles from the specific sources mentioned above on the topic but not necessarily related to the specific content of the unsolicited ones I found from other sources and not from the same time frame.  They were looking for much older ones from 3-8 months ago. 

Anyway, the result is that I did the refined search and provided the results requested.  However, the ramifications of the experience are yet to be seen. 

I do not know if upper management received the final search results from my search.  Also, I don’t know– and I may never know–the results of the inquiry to our press agency.  I doubt the time, effort, and cost of taking the search outside the organization was necessary or productive.

Reference Questions and Answers Custom Search Engine…07.15.08

Sarah Houghton-Jan posted yesterday about a “…custom search engine in Google [see below] that indexes library sites that post their reference questions, as well as the answers.  The idea is described in a post on the Free Government Information site.  They’re hoping that this project will encourage more libraries to create reference question blogs (each question & answer set gets a post).  Directional and local questions aren’t of much use to a global database, but “those juicy questions that take some time to answer using librarian ingenuity, skill and knowledge” are just what they want.  A good example is this Stanford site.  If your library offers such a thing, let them know (contact info on the CSE page)…”

 

Reminder to Watch for the Digital Divide…07.10.08

There was an interesting and relevant article in the “Families” section of the online edition of The Times yesterday titled “How the Google Generation Thinks Differently.”  Of particular interest is the need to keep in mind the difference between what is termed a “digital native” and a “digital immigrant” when dealing with the younger generation in any context, i.e. patrons, co-workers, students, etc. 

The article [
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article4295414.ece
] reported: “… According to researchers we are in the midst of a sea change in the way that we read and think. Our digitally native children have wonderfully flexible minds. They absorb information quickly, adapt to changes and are adept at culling from multiple sources. But they are also suffering from internet-induced attention deficit disorder…”

I suggest reading the whole article.  Here are more highlights:

“…’Because they have been using digital technology all their lives, our children feel they have authority over it,’ says Rose Luckin. ‘But technology cannot teach them to reflect upon and evaluate the information they are gathering online. For that, the role of teachers and parents remains fundamentally important. You are in the hot seat. They still need you to open that conversation.’

NATIVES v IMMIGRANTS

Digital natives
Like receiving information quickly from multiple media sources.
Like parallel processing and multi-tasking.
Like processing pictures, sounds and video before text.
Like random access to hyperlinked multimedia information.
Like to network with others.
Like to learn ‘just in time’.

Digital immigrants
Like slow and controlled release of information from limited sources.
Like singular processing and single or limited tasking.
Like processing text before pictures, sounds and video.
Like to receive information linearly, logically and sequentially.
Like to work independently.
Like to learn ‘just in case’.”

Virtual Reference Considerations…06.17.08

Although I can’t see us using virtual reference in my library in the sense it is currently used in libraries at the moment, down the proverbial road I can see how it could be most effective if the concept was clearly explained and promoted to my patrons.  It would require vigilance and adequate scheduling by the librarian(s), however, to be effective.

 

I found this post on virtual reference from the Libraries Interact (
http://librariesinteract.info/
) blog interesting and a source to refer back to in the future:

 

“…’Even the most savvy reference librarian needs to learn new skills and develop new habits or behaviors to be successful in the virtual environment – especially when using chat technology or other synchronous communication medium’ Anne Grodzin Lipow

 

VR via instant messaging live chat systems will be most effective if you use the same language and types of words as the user.

 

So if they ask questions using abbreviations and SMS language reply that way and vice versa if someone asks you questions using full English language sentences reply that way.

 

Some rules of conversational behavior do not work in live chat e.g.: taking turns at talking. Feel free to send several short messages in a row rather than typing a one single long response.

 

Non verbal cues are not there – therefore you need to keep replies short and use standby messages like “Searching … Back in a min” to indicate that you still have more to say.

 

Remember that you never get up from the reference desk or put the phone down to go and look something up without telling your user what you are going to do and how long it will take. Just the same for live VR chat. Remember silence in VR is the same as you ignoring a person during a face-to-face reference session.

 

·     Keyboard proficiency and ability to type quickly

·     Familiarity with multitasking in a multiple window environment

·     Obtain the greatest, most precise information about what is needed.

·     Understand at what level the material is needed and how much is required

·     Complete the interview and arrive at the necessary key data in as short a period as possible.

 

Best Practice During a VR Session

·     Greet the user and use his/her name in the conversation if they tell you it.

·     Identify yourself by name. You can use a false name, but use one. This is very important to establish rapport with the user.

·     Use scripted “Cut and Paste” messages for common statements because they’re much quicker than typing. For example: “Hi, this is the State Library. My name is Bob, how I can I help you?”

·     All users aren’t the same. Some will want an answer in 5 seconds, others will be willing to wait 5-10 minutes.

·     Some queries are unreasonable to be answered in a few minutes. Tell the user this and get their email address to send them your search results later.

·     Ask the question – are you in an urgent hurry for this? You need this info to make a judgment on how to deliver an answer.

·     Remember to make contact frequently – “little and often” is the best motto! Tell the user what you’re doing constantly

·     Conduct the reference interview as you would on the phone – ask for clarification to ensure you understand what the user needs.

·     An Internet search may not provide the best answer – remember the range of library resources available. Use them.

·     Don’t overwhelm the user with too much at once. Ask if more is needed.

·     Confirm which library resources the user can access (you can’t send a database search result web-page – you had to log on to do the search remember)

·     Ask if the information is on track. Get clarification all the way through the session.

·     Thank the user and ask for an evaluation of the service if they have time

·     Cite the source for any information you give the user…”

 

As with everything else I am learning and considering for potential future use in the library, perhaps one day some of these ideas and concepts can be applied.

 

“By failing to prepare you are preparing to fail.”–Ben Franklin

 

 

Reference service, preservation, professional development…06.04

Today, I will start a general discourse briefly about our institution’s patrons, circulation, reference service, preservation & conservation efforts, and may touch on professional development.

Our library resources patrons are all from within the organization.  The library resources are primarily used by the Marketing Department, TV production, and Executive Management.  Potential patrons would also include individuals from our Events and Partner Response Departments.   

Reference inquiries generally originate from email or telephone contacts.  Follow-up reference interviews take place in the communications method favored by the specific patron.  In-person requests are fewer because patrons are located at geographically diverse locations and usually not near the librarian.  The fact that there is no central library collection with patron access also hinders frequent in-person reference questions.

Due to the nature of our patrons–usually with pressing deadlines, expeditious and accurate handling of each request is imperative.  Also, maintaining communication with each patron from the time of the inital inquiry to the time service is delivered is paramount. 

Sample types of requests include finding specific items in the collections, researching topics using the collections and outside sources, providing topical bibliographies of items in our collections, and searching our electronic document collection on our network for specific items or related materials.  Since only 16,000+ items have been cataloged to date, this presents a problem for those items not yet cataloged and the items for which are outside the current cataloging strategy, i.e. our photographic print and negative collection, our gift item collection, etc.  

Besides the current use of materials by patrons for daily business, there is also a undefined but occasionally stated desire for the preservation of our intellectual properties for posterity by upper management.  Attempts to date to propose or discuss specific preservation/conservation activities, including the preparations of a Disaster Recovery plan, have been fruitless.  However, further attempts will continue as this is a vital part of the mission of the librarian/historian position.

I will round out today’s post discussing my professional development plan/strategy.  As is the case with many libraries of all kinds, there is no budget for professional development or the understanding of its value to the organization.  I recently was allowed to take 1/2 day off to attend the vendor exhibition hall at our state library convention because 1) it was local, 2) I could justify attendance because I could visit most of the ILS vendors in one location to review our future ILS options, and 3) because the $20 1-day fee for the exhibit area only was a minimal expense.  Certainly, I could have benefited from further attendance but it was not even suggested since the cost would be perceived as prohibitive and/or unnecessary.  This pervasive attitude also obviously precludes asking for association membership on the national or state level or SLA membership.

To compensate, I have devised a personal professional development plan.  This plan involves reviewing library literature that is available, particularly online although much access is restricted to members, attending online webinars or accessing archived webinars such as those on OPAL, using an RSS aggregator to gather library and librarian news and blog feeds, and communicating with other professionals online.  I have also endeavored to take on-line courses when possible as well.  

Mmmmmmmmmm… I’ll have to gather my thoughts for the next subjects to discuss.