Eloquence. Empathy. Comprehension. These are but some of the basic interpersonal skills that are absolutely necessary, when it comes to being a librarian - being able to relate to, understand, and communicate with members of the library community.
We are often excellent at this face-to-face and over the phone. We use these skills to foster appreciation of our services amongst our clients.
So, how do we fare, when it comes to online interaction?
Over the past few years, there has been a huge focus on libraries and social media. Well, the technology, at least. Many librarians have been put through training programs, learning how to set up accounts in MySpace, Facebook, Flickr, Twitter... learning how to set up blogs, and read feeds... learning how to edit wikis and use social bookmarks.
But I often observe the deluded assumption of "If we build it, they will come".
And then, when the library blog sits deserted, or when the facebook/myspace page doesn't get any friends, the nay-sayers step in, shunning social media as a fad that has no relevance to libraries.
So, here's one thing I'd like to see. If we're so focused on libraries using social media, then we need to train our librarians up on actual social networking skills for online communication.
1. Get your librarian to find an online community, and infiltrate it. It might be a literary fansite, such as Obernewtyn.net, or one of the many Harry Potter or Twilight fan forums. It might be a political site, such as Crikey, or a knitting Ning, or a local band's myspace, or a meebo chatroom. The more relevant to your geographic location, the better (ie. Australian politics, if you're looking at a political community.)
2. Get them to become a "regular" in that community. That means sharing information about yourself, and getting to know the other regulars.
3. Engage with others in the community. Get fired up, and participate in arguments. Share awesome experiences. Link them to other cool stuff online.
4. Become the "resident librarian". Whenever you're sharing your passion for whatever the focus of the online community is, mention those resources that your library has, that they'd be interested. This is the point when you can really utilise library content on Flickr and Youtube, because you actually have an online community that you can share with.
Remember - it's not all about you, and it's not all about the library. It's about community, conversations, and collaboration. You can't build an online community from scratch based around a library website. That's crazy.
But what you *can* do is place the librarian (ie. you) and, consequently, libraries within existing online communities. There are a hell of a lot of them out there, and many of them are absolutely abuzz with activity.
And if you've got passion to share, then they will welcome you, and your library, with open arms.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Things that have been awesome this weekend...
1. Being in Melbourne.
2. Shanghai Dumplings.
3. A DJ who plays music that I actually like.
4. A dancefloor full of people imitating Kate Bush to Wuthering Heights.
5. Late-night / early morning philosophical dialogues in hotel rooms.
6. An afternoon of picnicking in the Treasury Gardens with librarians.
7. Watching Tongan Ninja with friends, twice in a row - the second time in commentary mode.
8. Brunch on Errol Street.
9. Seeing-off relatively-newfound-but-esteemed friends, who are going on overseas library adventures.
And, for the epic win:
10. Going to an author talk, featuring two of your favourite writers, only to discover that it's also attended by EVEN MORE of your favourite writers! *squee*
Oh, and the potential for fail?
Boarding my flight 40 minutes after the scheduled departure time...
[Edit - 10:50pm] Boarding time is now set for 11:30pm... definitely fail. My 8am start tomorrow is going to be fun. As in totally not.
[Extra edit - 11:30pm] Still not boarding yet...
[Final edit - 11:40pm] I go now.
2. Shanghai Dumplings.
3. A DJ who plays music that I actually like.
4. A dancefloor full of people imitating Kate Bush to Wuthering Heights.
5. Late-night / early morning philosophical dialogues in hotel rooms.
6. An afternoon of picnicking in the Treasury Gardens with librarians.
7. Watching Tongan Ninja with friends, twice in a row - the second time in commentary mode.
8. Brunch on Errol Street.
9. Seeing-off relatively-newfound-but-esteemed friends, who are going on overseas library adventures.
And, for the epic win:
10. Going to an author talk, featuring two of your favourite writers, only to discover that it's also attended by EVEN MORE of your favourite writers! *squee*
Oh, and the potential for fail?
Boarding my flight 40 minutes after the scheduled departure time...
[Edit - 10:50pm] Boarding time is now set for 11:30pm... definitely fail. My 8am start tomorrow is going to be fun. As in totally not.
[Extra edit - 11:30pm] Still not boarding yet...
[Final edit - 11:40pm] I go now.
Friday, February 20, 2009
ApostroFAIL
ApostroFAIL
Originally uploaded by librarianidol
Signwriters really need to learn about the apostrophe. I am always greatly amused when an establishment has clearly spent a lot of money on signage, only to have accidentally omitted an apostrophe.
On the other hand, misplaced apostrophes displease me greatly.
Friday, February 13, 2009
For all you VD lovers...
Love
is like
Karaoke on a Thursday night.
Feels right,
yet so wrong
singing
the same tragic song
to a
fabricated
backing
track.
is like
Karaoke on a Thursday night.
Feels right,
yet so wrong
singing
the same tragic song
to a
fabricated
backing
track.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Professional Prism of Trust
Professional Prism of Trust
Originally uploaded by David Armano
The latest offering from David Armano.
I found this interesting, because the professional branding of librarians, and the associated trust, is definitely an issue that we need to consider, when challenging the stereotypes of librarians.
Where would you say that Librarians fit into this prism? (I'd suggest somewhere between dentist and nurse)
How does our role as potential "social media experts" effect our branding of trustworthiness?
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Dissention in the stacks...
In an age of highly-dynamic information environment, librarians hate bureacracy as much as the next person.
As I have always maintained, library professionals should be abreast of emerging information trends, and be ready and willing to adopt them. We can no longer assume to know better than our users, and instead of trying to educate them to understand our services, we should be educating ourselves to understand their needs.
And yet, a common complaint amongst progressive librarians is, "We want to do these things, but our bosses / directors / IT departments won't *let* us!". There are plenty of librarians who would love to bring their services not just onto the digital medium, but into an environment that the general public understand and are familiar with. What's the point in using an in-house digital repository that is unfathomable to the general user, when you'd be far more effective by storing them on, say, YouTube and Flickr. (And, on a quick aside, it's interesting that YouTube is very quickly becoming the preferred starting point for younger people, even before Google! Should we start running sessions, not on "Smart Googling" but "Smart YouTubing"?)
So, how do we effect change, when the powers-that-be aren't necessarily pro-active in adopting emerging trends?
A colleague of mine recently attended Information Online 2009, and the presentation that seemed to impress him most (from the number of times he kept talking about it in the fortnight after returning) was the Keynote from Mal Booth, formerly of the Australian War Memorial, and now at UTS.
In particular, there were two major points that struck a chord:
and
On the first point, I think it's self-evident when you look at usage patterns. Google has by far become the preferred search engine, not because of any authoritative merits, but because it is quick, easy, and effective in producing results that are "good enough". Certainly, the National Library of Australia has been focusing its efforts more on being searchable via Google, rather than trying to market its own catalogues and repositories. Similarly, many Australian cultural institutions have been putting much of their image collections onto Flickr.
On a vaguely similar note, look at the usage of the wireless service at the State Library of Victoria. A few years ago, when it was first introduced, you needed to show legal ID and fill out a form to be a registered library user, and then wait for it to be processed until you could go online with your mobile device. However, nowadays, they've changed this policy so that membership is no longer necessary. Usage stats have (presumably, by the number of people I see there nowadays) gone through the roof, and users no longer have that barrier to their services. They can just walk into the building and be online immediately, with no fuss.
And in terms of our users, we don't want to create barriers to our services, such as unusable OPACs, ugly repositories, congested websites. And most public users don't care about metadata, and yet we spend so much time agonising over it! (I'm not saying these things aren't important - it's just that we shouldn't use it as an excuse for holding back when we could be giving people access to these collections) If they can just go onto Google or Flickr, and immediately find rare maps and archived video footage and photographs, then that's all they need.
But, of course, how does one initiate these kind of changes?
You could propose a radical project to your boss, with the hope that they've been suitably dazzled by buzz-words such as "clicks and mortar" and "UGC"...
However, in troubled times, being a visionary isn't as cracked up as it used to be, and I imagine that most directors are more likely to go with the safe and boring option, rather than take a risk on something that's a futuristic dream.
Or you could say, "screw it - let's do this thing". After all, anybody can have an online presence, and official endorsements are overrated when it comes to most content. What matters is the kind of following you generate, and the community that builds around it. Once the ball is rolling, and results happen, then you're in a position to sell the project to your boss. As quoted above, It's sometimes easier to seek forgiveness than gain permission.
I might, however, take this step one step further, and say that, of course, accountability may not always be key, but evidence to support your actions is still important. There's a difference between ignorantly jumping on a bandwagon, just because you read it on a blog somewhere, and actually seeing a need in a community that's being blatantly neglected.
And don't confuse dissension for insolence. If your vision doesn't fit into the organisation's core goals, then perhaps you're working for the wrong people. And if you find that you're suddenly on your own with your opinion, don't discount the possibility that you might be wrong. That's okay too.
But don't stop dreaming. This industry needs dreamers who can question the conventional way that libraries work, push boundaries of library services, and take risks in following our users rather than trying to get them to follow us.
As I have always maintained, library professionals should be abreast of emerging information trends, and be ready and willing to adopt them. We can no longer assume to know better than our users, and instead of trying to educate them to understand our services, we should be educating ourselves to understand their needs.
And yet, a common complaint amongst progressive librarians is, "We want to do these things, but our bosses / directors / IT departments won't *let* us!". There are plenty of librarians who would love to bring their services not just onto the digital medium, but into an environment that the general public understand and are familiar with. What's the point in using an in-house digital repository that is unfathomable to the general user, when you'd be far more effective by storing them on, say, YouTube and Flickr. (And, on a quick aside, it's interesting that YouTube is very quickly becoming the preferred starting point for younger people, even before Google! Should we start running sessions, not on "Smart Googling" but "Smart YouTubing"?)
So, how do we effect change, when the powers-that-be aren't necessarily pro-active in adopting emerging trends?
A colleague of mine recently attended Information Online 2009, and the presentation that seemed to impress him most (from the number of times he kept talking about it in the fortnight after returning) was the Keynote from Mal Booth, formerly of the Australian War Memorial, and now at UTS.
In particular, there were two major points that struck a chord:
"(Users) want the stuff.
They expect it to be
online.
Now.
Preferably for free."
and
"It is sometimes easier to seek forgiveness than gain permission."
On the first point, I think it's self-evident when you look at usage patterns. Google has by far become the preferred search engine, not because of any authoritative merits, but because it is quick, easy, and effective in producing results that are "good enough". Certainly, the National Library of Australia has been focusing its efforts more on being searchable via Google, rather than trying to market its own catalogues and repositories. Similarly, many Australian cultural institutions have been putting much of their image collections onto Flickr.
On a vaguely similar note, look at the usage of the wireless service at the State Library of Victoria. A few years ago, when it was first introduced, you needed to show legal ID and fill out a form to be a registered library user, and then wait for it to be processed until you could go online with your mobile device. However, nowadays, they've changed this policy so that membership is no longer necessary. Usage stats have (presumably, by the number of people I see there nowadays) gone through the roof, and users no longer have that barrier to their services. They can just walk into the building and be online immediately, with no fuss.
And in terms of our users, we don't want to create barriers to our services, such as unusable OPACs, ugly repositories, congested websites. And most public users don't care about metadata, and yet we spend so much time agonising over it! (I'm not saying these things aren't important - it's just that we shouldn't use it as an excuse for holding back when we could be giving people access to these collections) If they can just go onto Google or Flickr, and immediately find rare maps and archived video footage and photographs, then that's all they need.
But, of course, how does one initiate these kind of changes?
You could propose a radical project to your boss, with the hope that they've been suitably dazzled by buzz-words such as "clicks and mortar" and "UGC"...
However, in troubled times, being a visionary isn't as cracked up as it used to be, and I imagine that most directors are more likely to go with the safe and boring option, rather than take a risk on something that's a futuristic dream.
Or you could say, "screw it - let's do this thing". After all, anybody can have an online presence, and official endorsements are overrated when it comes to most content. What matters is the kind of following you generate, and the community that builds around it. Once the ball is rolling, and results happen, then you're in a position to sell the project to your boss. As quoted above, It's sometimes easier to seek forgiveness than gain permission.
I might, however, take this step one step further, and say that, of course, accountability may not always be key, but evidence to support your actions is still important. There's a difference between ignorantly jumping on a bandwagon, just because you read it on a blog somewhere, and actually seeing a need in a community that's being blatantly neglected.
And don't confuse dissension for insolence. If your vision doesn't fit into the organisation's core goals, then perhaps you're working for the wrong people. And if you find that you're suddenly on your own with your opinion, don't discount the possibility that you might be wrong. That's okay too.
But don't stop dreaming. This industry needs dreamers who can question the conventional way that libraries work, push boundaries of library services, and take risks in following our users rather than trying to get them to follow us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)