This article was emailed to me by no more than seven different people, and shared widely on social media, but I can’t help but feel we’re preaching to the proverbial choir. What was different about Nieman’s article is that she specifically called out how unhelpful it is when people tout the feel-good wistfulness of libraries of old: “If we allow ourselves to indulge in nostalgic middle-class ideas of quiet places and well-stuffed bookshelves, then we have failed to understand them too. In fact, we have endangered them.”³

Nieman argues that portraying libraries in this golden-hued light inadvertently labels them as a non-essential service. When deciding how to spend a shrinking municipal budget, a quiet haven for books palls in comparison to a new police car. Additionally, this representation of libraries of the past is simply not accurate. While books have been a mainstay of libraries since their inception, public libraries have always been institutions where those of lesser means can come and access resources and information. By not specifically highlighting how the work of public libraries impacts disadvantaged populations we’re simultaneously selling ourselves short, reinforcing the idea that libraries are for some and not all, and slowly but surely digging our own grave. Our advocacy must start getting real about who is using our libraries and for what reasons. A public building is intended for public use, and not just the version of the public that people feel comfortable being around. Our facilities, services, programming and materials should be able to be used by even the most marginalized in our societies. Otherwise we’re not doing our job and assisting in its demise.

The Pennsylvania Library Association recognized the need to assist libraries with reframing their advocacy to highlight the essential services that they provide. The PA Forward program leverages public-private partnerships to bring programming to libraries that address five literacies that are necessary to succeed in the 21st century. These literacies include Basic, Financial, Information, Civic & Social, and Health. When libraries demonstrate that their services, programs, and materials fit one of these literacies, their impact and value are demonstrated more clearly. By talking about story time as basic literacy instruction we elevate the work being done to its rightful position. The skills associated with these literacies are necessary for success in today’s world and we provide that support- for free! So, while it may be uncomfortable, I believe it is our duty to crawl into the dark corners of our communities, shine a light on their needs, and adjust our services to serve them. When we tell those stories, its harder to ignore our value. By doing this we’re remembering our whole community, and not just those that wax philosophical about the dusty shelves of their small-town library. There is value in that perspective, but it’s not the whole story.

References
1. The Age, “Libraries are About Democracy, Not Just Books,” by Christie Nieman, published 10/8/18. https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/libraries-are-about-democracy-not-just-books-20181009-p508k7.html. Accessed 10/19/18
2. The New York Times, “To Restore Civil Society, Start with the Library,” by Eric Klinenberg, published 9/8/18. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/08/opinion/sunday/civil-society-library.html. Accessed 10/19/18
3. Nieman, ibid.

The post Reframe Advocacy to Highlight Library’s Essential Services first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

This challenge is certainly being discussed in the ILS world. BIBFRAME seems to be the tool which will overlay MARC to allow bibliographic records to have life outside the library world. Both Innovative Interfaces¹ and SirsiDynix² are rolling out products to convert MARC records to BIBFRAME. My hesitation is that since BIBFRAME is built on the bones of MARC data, we’re not really breaking free of the shackles. For example, those using Google no longer need to consider the right keywords for a search. Google’s algorithm, RankBrain, has the ability to decipher a complex query and break it into something easy to search.³ I don’t know if BIBFRAME will get us there, but if not, we’ll still be behind.

I was very intrigued when I came across Wise, a new tool from OCLC.⁴ This product is marketed as a “community engagement tool.” Wise aims to completely redefine the library catalog by building it around the patron experience, rather than around the bibliographic record. Currently, libraries in the Netherlands operate on this system. Interestingly, the Netherlands charge a fee to patrons for library services which therefore exerts more pressure on the need for an effortless patron experience. OCLC will be rolling this new tool out in the US in 2019 through seven pilot library systems. I’m encouraged by the fact that a product like this is making its way to our shores and will be closely watching its implementation.

It is without question that the digital presence of public libraries needs to be overhauled. We currently operate on too many different systems, with too many rules, with too few successes. You might scoff at a world where Alexa can search a library catalog and place a hold for you, after all, how different is that from just calling a library? The reality is… very different. Voice searching and home assistants are quickly becoming the standard for information retrieval. While this may paint a bleak picture of the future of human interaction, it certainly poses an interesting challenge to the future of public libraries.

References

[1] https://www.iii.com/products/metadata-management/#linked-data

[2] http://www.sirsidynix.com/blog/2016/05/26/linked-data-faq

[3] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaysondemers/2018/01/09/why-you-need-to-prepare-for-a-voice-search-revolution/2/#1080e0ede65e

[4] https://www.oclc.org/en/wise.html

The post New Expectations for Search Functionality Bring Challenges first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

I spend a lot of time thinking about how to prepare my staff and community for change. I’m a big believer in trust, transparency, feedback, and letting the experts be the experts. As a trained librarian I wonder if we don’t give our profession enough credit for how intrepid we have been in the past and certainly can still be. For example, the MARC record would have never been introduced unless someone had realized that computing could greatly improve the way we locate and share resources. The Gates Foundation chose public libraries as early adopters of the personal computer because of their mission to equitable access to information.

I don’t believe library employees are any more reluctant to change than they ever have been before. I believe change-reluctance is human nature and as leaders we should always factor that reality into our plans. One way to address reluctance is to be clear that a new idea is not a judgment on past success or failure. An article by Rosabeth Moss Kanter from the Harvard Business Review states, “When change involves a big shift of strategic direction, the people responsible for the previous direction dread the perception that they must have been wrong. Leaders can help people maintain dignity by celebrating those elements of the past that are worth honoring, and making it clear that the world has changed. That makes it easier to let go and move on.”²

Change is simply an evolution of our current situation, whatever that may be. When we take good past practice and combine it with current technology and opportunities, we make something even better. This is something libraries have been doing well for a long time, and isn’t any different now. It’s time we brand ourselves as the innovators we have always been. Let’s reclaim this narrative and tell our story of transformation. We’ve done it before.

References

1. “From Change Management to Change-Ready Leadership,” Leading From the Library, Library Journal, Leading from the Library, Steven Bell, March 1, 2018, accessed 5/7/2018.

2. “Ten Reasons People Resist Change,” Harvard Business Review, Rosabeth Moss Kanter, September 25, 2012.

The post We Are Never Not Changing first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

It’s no secret that young people are always connected. In 2014, 85 percent of 18 to 24-year-olds and 86 percent of 25-34-year-olds owned a smartphone. ² These devices have become inextricably linked to our daily life with much of our scheduling, emailing, and picture-taking dependent on their accessibility. What was once taboo, having your cell phone out at work is now incredibly common and, in some cases, expected. Even many high schools have given up on policing cell phone use and instead focus on incorporating devices into the learning environment. There is certainly something to be said about remaining focused on work and not constantly being distracted by the siren call of the next tweet, but management is now about embracing and supporting the positive use of technologies and mitigating the unproductive use. Staff are going to use their phones at work and that’s okay.

Those attracted to the library profession are an interesting mixed breed of free-speech superheroes who also really like to follow the rules. The concept of disruption has been the hallmark of many tech startups as they’ve single-handedly turned major industries on their head with companies like Airbnb, Amazon, and Uber (just to name a few). Public libraries have always been a bit of a radical concept, but they tend to be slow to move away from outmoded practices. As much of library funding is in constant turmoil you’d think that agility would be built into their DNA. Unfortunately, instead you’re sometimes left with a thrifty dedication to flying under the radar for fear of reminding city officials that you exist and that you cost money. Since disruption costs money, it’s a tough concept in library-land.

There are ways however in which library tradition is being disrupted. The talk of eliminating fines is an interesting challenge to one of the hallmarks of library services.³ Many libraries are now offering unlimited renewals on items with no holds and some of the boldest libraries have eliminated physical books altogether.⁴ Disruption as a motivating force brings with it some uncomfortable truths. Jobs will change, criticism will be encouraged, and failure is a real possibility. As a new generation rises through the ranks and obtains positions of leadership, I hope we boldly face these opportunities as catalysts for a brighter future. When we share radical ideas and encourage critical thinking we progress. We progress as a library and as a community.

References

[1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/25/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/

[2] http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2014/mobile-millennials-over-85-percent-of-generation-y-owns-smartphones.html

[3] https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/blogs/the-scoop/imagining-fine-free-future/

[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2014/12/16/libraries-without-physical-books-find-a-niche-in-san-antonio/?utm_term=.e554f5b22b19

The post Shifting Expectations for Staff in a 21st Century Library first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

As librarians it is important that we talk about this new reality. Public Librarians tend to shy away from discussing anything that could be viewed as political, but I stress that most of the community hasn’t had a library education and may not be aware of how intertwined personal data is with their digital presence. The truly interesting fly in the ointment is our own staunch dedication to privacy and the reality that this has ultimately hindered our ability to keep up against titans like Amazon and Google. How many times have we heard people reluctantly tell us that they love libraries but using Amazon is just so easy. Libraries are still difficult to use. OPACs are still clunky and Dewey is still dated. People are willing to pay for convenience, even if that price includes their privacy. These are the hard truths, and it’s time we acknowledge it. Obviously, the critical difference between ourselves and Big Tech is that we are focused on the common good and not profits. Ultimately though, innovators like Facebook, Google, Apple, and Amazon, have raised the bar on standards for user experiences and our communities now expect easy.  

Luckily, we don’t have to live in extremes. Libraries can learn a lot from the user experience models created by Silicon Valley while maintaining core standards of ethics. To do this we have to question some long-standing norms we’ve come to associate with the profession. The risk of irrelevancy is high. On that same note, Silicon Valley could take a cue from libraries regarding our long-standing commitment to protecting user data. A recent study conducted by Pew Research Center and Elon University’s Imagining the Internet Center queried experts on the future of physical and mental wellbeing as our digital life continues to evolve. The results show 47% believe we will be more helped than harmed by an evolved digital presence, 32% feeling we’ll be more harmed than helped, and 21% believing there won’t be much change. With these results some themes emerged on how we can address the major threats to our well-being. Themes included reimagining systems, reinventing tech, and redesigning media literacy.¹ If that doesn’t sound like a library call-to-action I don’t know what does. 

Reference

1. The Future of Well-Being in a Tech-Saturated World http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/04/17/the-future-of-well-being-in-a-tech-saturated-world/.

The post People Don’t Care About Privacy  first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

Much like enthusiasm, pessimism is also incredibly contagious. To turn the tide, it’s important to surround yourself with colleagues and employees who are eager to seek solutions rather than point out problems.[1] “Seek out positive and competent individuals who also recognize their top talents and passions. Agree to give each other candid, concrete feedback – and a boost. Then enthusiasm is more likely to erupt, endure and be contagious.”[2] Another thing to keep in mind is that enthusiasm builds when even greater challenges are tackled. Momentum is key to maintaining a culture that eagerly tackles new challenges and opportunities.[3]

Often when we come across an idea we’re excited about, it reminds us that enthusiasm is regenerative and restorative. Being constantly bogged down in the daily grind distracts us from the North Star that is the why behind our chosen profession. Luckily enthusiasm has a way of reorienting that focus. The word itself derives from enthousiasmos, the Greek expression meaning divine inspiration.[4] This etymology speaks to that feeling of surprise and realization that this capacity is inside us all the time, we just need to access it. We also need libraries and supervisors that recognize the value and will support our effort in pursuing new and exciting ideas.

A few years ago, I came across a recommendation that library staff set a few hours aside every week to work on something new. The work didn’t have to fit into an overall plan or complement current programs, and it didn’t even have to pertain to their department. Allowing that free time to explore gives us the capacity to think differently and seek new avenues for collaboration. Another recommendation I read about recently was from Salt Lake County Library who created a, “What if we…” board. Staff can submit ideas to a management team to break through the real or perceived barriers to program and service proposals.[5]

Gaining access to the magic enthusiasm fosters is a key strategy to building effective teams and sustainable libraries. The good news is that its not hard to replicate once you’ve found it. I encourage you to go and do just that.

References

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kareanderson/2015/05/11/cultivate-productive-enthusiasm-in-yourself-and-with-others/3/#64bcdef23307

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kareanderson/2015/05/11/cultivate-productive-enthusiasm-in-yourself-and-with-others/3/#64bcdef23307

[3] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kareanderson/2015/05/11/cultivate-productive-enthusiasm-in-yourself-and-with-others/3/#64bcdef23307

[4] https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00318/full

[5] http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2017/11/library-services/straight-source-innovation/#_

The post Our North Star: Finding Our Way Back To What We Love first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

While the financial security of public libraries varies grossly from zip code to zip code, what doesn’t change is the commitment of the staff inside. Library staff directly face both the harsh and beautiful realities of our world. Library work often means introducing kids to their favorite book, celebrating when a patron gets a job, and being a friendly face to welcome folks out of the summer heat and winter cold. Library work sometimes means administering Narcan to reverse a heroin overdose², tactfully referring patrons to free showers and shelters³, or responding during a natural disaster⁴. Library work always means helping people.

We often get stuck focusing on what we need to change or how quickly we need to innovate. We’re driven by a fear of irrelevancy that causes us to lose sight of what a rare gem we are to begin with. We are an industry made up entirely of people who feel a calling to serve. It’s important to remember to look around and pat ourselves on the back once in a while. To acknowledge each other’s commitment to creating a kinder, more inclusive community. We should also remember to thank our fundraisers, elected officials, and administrators who help us tirelessly spread the word that despite the odds, we’re here.

References

[1] http://www.education.pa.gov/teachers%20-%20administrators/school%20finances/education%20budget/pages/default.aspx#tab-1

[2] https://www.npr.org/2017/06/03/531347278/librarians-in-philadelphia-train-to-thwart-drug-overdoses

[3] https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/reference-and-information-services/publications/512-hines-en.pdf

[4] http://library.ifla.org/1375/1/103-flaherty-en.pdf

The post Our Noble Cause: Reflecting On All We Do Right first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

In a study, Re-Envisioning the MLS, the University of Maryland iSchool’s MLS program in conjunction with the Information Policy and Access Center (iPAC) determined that libraries in the Maryland, D.C., and Virginia area were less likely to seek and hire professionals with an MLS due to funding uncertainties or the need for professionals with other skills and qualifications.[1] In my experience moving up the professional ladder, I have noticed an increased need for professionals in instructional design, community outreach, fundraising, marketing, and social work. I often feel frustrated that a very qualified employee cannot be included in succession planning without a degree that sometimes feels arbitrary for the realities of the position. Some raise concern that if we were to relax our grip on the MLS we’ll lose the professional status associated with libraries. I counter that we’re losing that already.

The need for innovation in libraries is no secret. Many libraries have the funding, enthusiasm, and cultural ethos to weave innovation throughout their ranks. Many do not. The huge disparities in access to innovation opportunities could potentially be mitigated if we were to look outside of our industry when hiring. The Harvard Business Review states,

“Bringing in ideas from analogous fields turns out to be a potential source of radical innovation. When you’re working on a problem and you pool insights from analogous areas, you’re likely to get significantly greater novelty in the proposed solutions, for two reasons: People versed in analogous fields can draw on different pools of knowledge, and they’re not mentally constrained by existing, “known” solutions to the problem in the target field. The greater the distance between the problem and the analogous field, the greater the novelty of the solutions.”[2]

Often it is not only the hiring manager who needs to be convinced of the need for cross-industry hiring, but also a Board of Directors. The more we talk about the need for changes to our MLS programs as well as reflect on the usefulness of professionals from other fields, the better equipped we’ll be to compete in our ever-changing environment. While Re-Envisioning the MLS concludes that there is a future for the MLS and posits many recommendations for its refinement, I don’t believe that is solely where our future lies.

References

[1] https://publiclibrariesonline.org/2016/01/re-envisioning-the-mls-the-future-of-librarian-education/

[2] https://hbr.org/2014/11/sometimes-the-best-ideas-come-from-outside-your-industry

The post The MLS Catch-22 first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

Reference is defined as the act of referring or consulting.[1] With this definition, anything other than the transactional process of circulating materials would be reference. In an age of library as a brand, we’re selling ourselves short by clinging to a term that feels so outdated. For example, we don’t direct customers to our ILS or even OPAC, instead we show them the catalog. Our jargon has long moved on from serials or periodicals to magazines and newspapers. It’s time we officially let go of the term reference, but in no way, am I suggesting letting go of the service. Libraries across the country have been tackling this with brand new terms like Information Services, Library Services, or simply, Help Desk.[2]

In these more nebulous terms we can incorporate readers advisory, research assistance, tech support, program referral, and assistance locating physical and digital materials. Many libraries are going a step further and combining their reference and circulation desks to create a more general Customer Service desk. Reference Help (or whatever you want to call it) should be obvious to find and easy to use. If possible, it should also be mobile.

And finally, staffing. While I don’t believe libraries should operate entirely like businesses, I do believe some business sense could do us good. If you think about the traditional reference department, with the multi volume reference material, databases with access to scholarly articles, and a full-time Master’s Degreed Librarian, you may realize it’s one of the more expensive departments in the library. If you then look the actual use of that department, the ROI is significantly low. With a refreshed idea of reference as Adult Services or Information Services, an opportunity opens up to include more library support staff in the mix. In a study conducted at the Deschutes Public Library System, staff tracked the type of questions being asked at the reference desk. The majority turned out to be “ready reference” with a close second going to “how to use.”[3] These questions could easily be handled by a paraprofessional with the occasional reference question being referred to the librarian.

The truth is that I’m worried about our future. if we don’t face the reality that public library work has changed, and do our best to change along with it, we are also going to go the way of the reference department.

Reference

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reference

[2] http://reviews.libraryjournal.com/2015/10/reference/reworking-reference-reference-2016/

[3] Barclay, K. (2014). Public Library Reference Desk: Less is More. OLA Quarterly, 10(2), 2-4.http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/1093-7374.1056

The post Rebranding Reference first appeared on Public Libraries Online.

This may seem like an absurd question as librarians are proud to be defenders of free speech and intellectual freedom. The Library Bill of Rights states, “Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use.”[1] Unfortunately, our high and mighty reasoning gets tricky when those “beliefs and affiliations” creep into the realm of hate speech.

Much has been discussed about the role of the public library as a neutral territory for the free exchange of ideas. There have even been challenges to the notion that libraries should be[2], or ever were[3], truly neutral spaces. If you dig into ALA’s interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights as it relates to Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, it more clearly charges libraries that they “should not merely be neutral places for people to share information, but should actively encourage socially excluded, marginalized, and underrepresented people to fully participate in community debates and discussions.”[4]

For library administrators, it can be difficult to reconcile providing a venue for potential hate speech while actively encouraging marginalized populations to participate in community discussions. These seem to be at odds with one another. Luckily, library policy does not live in a vacuum. Most public libraries are governed by a board of directors or municipal authority which approves policy. It is in this intersection between professional library ethos and this community connected governing body, that a reasonable middle ground can be reached. It is in this same intersection where library director and library board thrive.

It is also in this space where one can find an alternative to library as neutral, or biased. Libraries are rational. It is not the library’s responsibility to provide a platform for any viewpoint whether it is in our meeting rooms or on our shelves. It is their responsibility to be a democratic institution where the public feels safe. For these reasons, it is good practice for library boards and administrators to thoughtfully review meeting room policies on a regular basis with a goal of keeping your environment welcoming to your community while allowing for the respectful exchange of viewpoints.

References

[1] http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill

[2] https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2017/01/03/never-neutral-critlib-technology/

[3] https://meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/2017/09/01/whose-rights-matter-more/

[4] http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretations/EDI

The post Gathering Space: Meeting Room Policies in the Age of Charlottesville first appeared on Public Libraries Online.