[Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

Tue Jul 8 14:14:18 EDT 2008

Actually, we do participate in a 24/7 program that originally was started by a California State Library grant, but eventually was bought out by OCLC.  It still exists and many libraries use it.  By spreading it across the country, more time zones could be covered than by trying to staff it locally.  We link to it from our home page, but still don't get that many questions.  The ones we do get are often circulation questions (overdues etc.), and staff from another library can't always help with that.  We can't control what our users ask (nor would we try!), but that's true of many of our services.  In my long service here, it's amazing how as staff we develop new services or online things with a view of how we think the public will use it, and most times, the public finds all kinds of other ways to use it (or ask for additional services) that we never thought of.

Thanks
Norm

Norm Reeder | Library Services Manager | Torrance Public Library |3301 Torrance Blvd., Torrance, CA 90503 |310.618.5955 voice | 310.618.5952 FAX | nreeder at torrnet.com<mailto:nreeder at torrnet.com> | www.library.torrnet.com<http://www.library.torrnet.com>
________________________________
From: Christopher Kiess [mailto:clkiess at gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 11:03 AM
To: Reeder, Norm
Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

Norm,

I meant to send this to the list. Dave Clout also brought up some good points concerning this.

Excellent points and you expose a fatal flaw in one of my arguments. Some of the best inventions have been reinventions of another technology and, in many ways, I think librarians have been adept at this.

As for the virtual reference service, I think it can work. It just has to be marketed in the right way. Maybe if it were less associated with a single library and part of a larger "web experience." What if there was a consortium of libraries participating via a single interface for live interaction.

See this article from Wired:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_curator

chris
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Reeder, Norm <nreeder at torrnet.com<mailto:nreeder at torrnet.com>> wrote:
I guess I'd phrase things a little differently.  Most of the new technologies that have come about didn't originate uniquely for libraries.  We are just too small a market.  For instance we didn't invent the barcode idea; it was adapted from the larger marketplace.

Joan Frye Williams often remarks that when she looks for new technologies or what is "coming", she doesn't look in our libraries.  She looks at the supermarket or the wider Internet to see what is developing and then thinks "how could we use that".  Stephen Abrams makes similar remarks.  Microsoft is infamous for its "embrace and extend" philosophy (and look how much money they make because of it!).

So I would think that adapting to, and extending the use of new ideas and things is the way to go.  It does take some looking around (and this listserv is one good way to keep abreast of what's going on too).  But just because we didn't invent it, or it wasn't taught in library school doesn't mean it can't be significant or we can't play with it.

I think a lot of libraries are playing with Web 2.0 technologies, but there certainly at this point isn't a "default" or "standard" way to implement the variety of things currently out there.  It's going to take some time and trial balloons to see what is effective or not.

One of the things to watch out for though here is the "greatest thing since sliced bread" thingie that initially gets talked about in all of the magazines; websites etc., that then doesn't meet the unattainable expectations and is suddenly condemned for not doing so.  Many new technologies take some time to find their true niche.  (Does anyone remember "Java everywhere--Microsoft is toast!).  Didn't quite happen, but Java is still a significant technology all the same.  I'd say the same thing about 24/7 live/Internet reference.  It was touted as the be all and end all and all of our Reference sections were toast.  It didn't turn out to be "all", and there's room for both the new way and old way.  I'm seeing some info to indicate that it isn't all that successful and some libraries are dropping it because of lack of patron input.  But at least they tried.

Thanks
Norm Reeder
Torrance Public Library

-----Original Message-----
From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org<mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org> [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org<mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org>] On Behalf Of Cloutman, David
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 9:28 AM
To: Christopher Kiess; Bill Drew
Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org<mailto:web4lib at webjunction.org>
Subject: RE: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

> All right everyone. I'm going to play the Devil's advocate since I am
one of

I sure hope, because this statement is crazy:

> Librarians have not changed and they have simply reacted with the
> changing times; that is not true change

Actually, I would consider that to be adaptation, the best kind of
change. Adaptation means that change is done is the context of
situational awareness. There are so many posts to this list about Second
Life, and IM chat, etc., and so little of it relates to the actual
demands of patrons and abilities of library staff. I cannot project in
measurable benefit of providing these technological solutions.

As sad as it may sound, in some libraries (I'm not naming names, here),
getting the bulk of the reference staff to answer reference questions by
email can be a significant change for an organization. Yes, the
reference staff knows how to answer references questions. Yes, they can
write email. But for some reason, the bulk of them can be resistant to
doing both. If reference staff were more accessible by email, it would
certainly benefit the patrons, and it would be a significant adaptation
to the current situation. But it doesn't happen, because the librarians
are resistant to change.

I'm sure the situation may different in an academic settings, but I
think for public libraries, and my library in particular, we needn't be
straining to implement bleeding edge technology. Simply implementing
well tested technology that many, if not most, of our patrons already
use, can provide significant return on investment. And, yes, that is
real change, even if it is only reactive.

---
David Cloutman <dcloutman at co.marin.ca.us<mailto:dcloutman at co.marin.ca.us>>
Electronic Services Librarian
Marin County Free Library

-----Original Message-----
From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org<mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org>
[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org<mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org>] On Behalf Of Christopher Kiess
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 2:49 PM
To: Bill Drew
Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org<mailto:web4lib at webjunction.org>
Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

Email Disclaimer: http://www.co.marin.ca.us/nav/misc/EmailDisclaimer.cfm

_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4lib at webjunction.org<mailto:Web4lib at webjunction.org>
http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/

_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4lib at webjunction.org<mailto:Web4lib at webjunction.org>
http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/

--
C.L. Kiess, B.A., M.L.S.
Information & Knowledge Specialist
Columbus Regional Hospital
Library & Knowledge Services