[Web4lib] prove that library 2.0 isn´t useless

[Leo Robert Klein]

Anderson, Patricia wrote:
> The flaw in this question is the assumption that unless something brings
>  patrons to the physical library it is useless. Gatecounts are 
>  a ROI metric whose time is past. There are other ways we can and 
>  should be measuring patron engagement with the librarians and 
>  the resources provided by the library. For one, I would like
>  to see something that measure the amount of TIME spent
>  in what type of interactions with patrons, rather than 
>  numbers of questions answered, just for one.
>
> Sorry for turning the question on its head, but I think this really is a 
> "return on investment" question, rather than a Library 2.0 question. We 
> have to answer first how we measure ROI, and *then* we can look at 
> how Library 2.0 and social technologies impact on that.
> 
> My two cents,

I don't see why trips to the "real bookshelf" can't be one metric.

If we're going the "brick-and-mortar" route, I'd include increased
participation in activities like book clubs, readings and other special 
events -- thanks to advanced publicity via social networking.

That said, I totally agree that we need better ways to measure success 
in this area.

If every time the lights go out, someone yells "Blogs-Wikis-Flickr" (the 
'BWF' syndrome), we ought to have some way of figuring out whether it's 
the most appropriate solution.

Case studies from others would be helpful.  In many cases, we may not 
even know what to look for.

LEO

-- -------------------
www.leoklein.com (site)
www.ChicagoLibrarian.com (blog)

aim/msn/yhoo/goog: 'leorobertklein'
-- -------------------------------