PVLD Director's Blog

Eureka!

This past week I had the honor and pleasure of serving as a mentor for the first Eureka Leadership Institute - a weeklong, intensive leadership development program for emerging library leaders in California.

While my official role at the Institute was "mentor", I think I learned at least as much as the participants.  It is a rare gift to be able to spend a week thinking about leadership and what it means in a library context and I came away reinvigorated (despite the 12 hour days!) and with plenty of food for thought about both how to improve my own leadership abilities and how to lead PVLD towards the future.  I also came away with a whole new network of relationships with people I might otherwise never have had the opportunity to really get to know (or possibly even to meet) and with a renewed sense of optimism about the future of public libraries in California.

I'm looking forward to continued involvement through the Eureka blog, follow-up webinars and meetings, and reunions at ALA, CLA, etc.  I'm also looking forward to working with PVLD Department Managers Eve Wittenmyer and Jennifer Addington who participated in the Institute as they work on their leadership project over the next year or so.

It would ruin the experience for future participants if I write too much about the content of the Institute.  Suffice it to say that I will be encouraging more PVLD leaders to apply, and am hoping that I will have the opportunity to again serve as a mentor in future.

Now its back to the "real world"!

Deconstructing librarianship

One of the bonuses of spending this week at the Eureka Leadership Institute is the opportunity to spend time with my fellow mentors, who bring diverse perspectives and backgrounds but share a common passion for our profession.  OVer lunch yesterday a conversation with Joan Frye Williams (consultant/futurist/librarian) and Cheryl Gould (of Infopeople, the organizers of the Institute  and no relation although we joke about it) about a workshop Joan is developing on the Restructuring Reference.

Joan talked about her view that what librarians call "reference" is really a bundle of activities that we need to desconstruct in order to find the best way to delvier that particular service to our communities.  For reference the activities might be seen as

• "Directional" - either helping people find there way to somewhere (the restrooms, the biographies, etc.) or helping people find a particular item ("do you have this book and where do I find it?")
• "Coaching" - helping people become more effective problem-solvers/information seekers (this would include what we traditionally call "information literacy", teaching people to use our online resources, etc.)
• "Advising/Consulting" - recommending reading material or resources, recommending solutions to a particular need or question
• Research - actually digging out sources and finding information on behalf of the customer

As Joan points out, we try to provide all of these activities at the "reference desk", when the customer would probably be best served if we consider each individually and figure how best to provide each in terms of staffing, location, design of the access points, etc.

The conversation got me thinking about the language we use for other core professional activities and how the terms we use obscure the richness and importance of the activity.

For example we talk about "programming", but in my mind (as I've said to some of the staff) that is really a code word for the critical activities of providing lifelong learning opportunities and finding ways to connect the library with the community.

"Collection development/management" has an "order fulfillment" element (all of the logistical systems that go into meeting customer demand from standing orders for bestsellers through the ILL and holds processes) but it also has a "discovery" element of creating those serendipitous connections between people and books that they might never have otherwise found (so it includes the use of professional judgement to select materials that might be outside the mainstream, as well as thinking about how we make those items available so people can discover them...the "connecting people and ideas" part of our PVLD vision).

That fairly brief conversation with Joan and Cheryl over lunch has helped me see what we do with new eyes....and I think will have a big impact on how we approach the design of PVLD's services going forward.  That alone is worth taking a week of my time to participate in Eureka!

Curiouser and Curiouser

I came across this gem of a video of Seth Godin talking about the importance of being curious on John Blyberg's blog today and I was struck by the role libraries can and do play in "priming the pump" of curiosity.

I was also reminded of a post I wrote back in February in which I quoted an impassioned email from one of our PVLD Librarians, Sylvia Richardson, about her perception that in their quest for relevence librarians are chasing numbers and growth and forgetting, as she puts it, that

"Our job as librarians is to engage people in growth throughout their lives, before, during and after "school" days, to be a beacon of free thought unencumbered by sales figures, which more often indicates mass market thinking than new and daring concepts; the sales curve always follows some distance behind the new concepts humans create.  (Was Van Gogh a bestselling artist in his lifetime???)  It is our job, as I see it, to include in our collections "items" that may be less than mainstream, but more important precisely because they are out of the main stream; new directions, offshoots, upstarts, wellsprings off the beaten path."

Sylvia's comments have been bouncing around in the back of my mind since she wrote them, and it was one of those interesting instances of synchronicity to first see the Seth Godin video and then, within an hour or two, to read John Berry's column in the April 15, 2008 issue of Library Journal in which he reminds his readers that libraries are more than gateways to information and librarians are more than "information professionals".  I'm sure Sylvia would agree with Berry's comment that while people do come to the library for information, they also

"... come to the library to do much more than that. Many are, of course, studying, searching, reading, seeking, and finding the recorded stuff. But many more are there enjoying, interacting, exploring, and, as old Jesse Shera once put it, engaging in “the quiet stir of thought” unrecorded, unmanaged, uncaptured."

I am a firm believer in the role libraries and librarians can play in exposing people to new authors, new thoughts, and new ideas and I'd be the last one to say that we should let the development of our collections and services be driven solely by giving people what is popular.

At the same time, I recognize that in order to expose people to Sylvia's "...."items" that may be less than mainstream, but more important precisely because they are out of the main stream; new directions, offshoots, upstarts, wellsprings off the beaten path."  We need to get them in the door (whether the physical door to our physical libraries or the virtual door to our virtual libraries), and they won't come (or won't come back) if we don't also give them what they are looking for.

Finding this balance between giving people what they want and providing them an opportunity to discover something that they will value but would not have asked for is to my mind one of the core responsibilities of the professional librarian.  It is particularly challenging given the always present limitations on money (do I buy another copy of the latest Michael Crichton or do I buy something by a little known but outstanding new author?), space (How many copies of this Sue Grafton do we need?  Should I keep our only copy of The Sun Also Rises even though it hasn't circulated in a year?) and staff capacity (do I offer another session of Clutterology, which practically runs itself and always gets a good turnout or do I take a chance on a speaker who might be a bit challenging and may only attract a dozen people?)

It occurred to me today that when making these decisions we could do worse than ask ourselves "How does this "prime the pump" of curiosity?"

Is what librarians have done for decades the latest trend?

Thank you to George Needham over at It's all good for pointing me to this tidbit from Wired Magazine about the limitations of strictly algorithm-based online searching and the "latest trend" to incorporate the human touch into to the online search and information delivery process.

There's been quite a bit of press about this topic lately as new search services like the "human-powered search engine" Mahalo have come onto the market.  To be honest, I hadn't thought a whole lot about the implications for librarians other than to idly wonder how we could participate.

As I read the article in Wired, though, I began to steam.  It gives a number of examples of companies from fledgling start-ups to Google that have recognized that there is value in enhancing the Web with "the kind of critical thinking that's alien to software but that comes naturally to humans".

I have absolutely no problem with that concept.  What got me steamed was that EVERY example of how these companies are applying the "human touch" was something librarians do every day, and in most cases have done for at least 100 years!

Create bibliographies and webliographies?  Check.  "Curate" (i.e. select, organize, and display) information? Check.  Write reviews and abstracts? Check.  Interact with information-seekers to help them find exactly what they are looking for?  Check.

If this is the latest trend then we were 100 years ahead of the curve!  So why aren't we recognized for what we do?  Because we don't "sell" ourselves?  Because people don't recognize that our specialized training is necessary?  Your guess is as good as mine....so leave a comment and tell me what you think.

News from the Public Library Association Conference 2008

Adult Services Assistant Manager Debra Petersen and Branch Manager Jennifer Addington attended the Public Library Association's biennial conference in Minneapolis last week and came back full of ideas and enthusiasm.

They are sharing what they learned and their thoughts on their PLA Minneapolis blog.  Check it out for some great ideas...and keep checking as there is more to come!

I think we might transform this blog into the "PVLD conference" blog as a way of sharing what we learn at the various conferences and workshops that staff attend. 

More on Libraries vs. Bookstores

After reading Tuesday's post, Sylvia Richardson, one of our PVLD Librarians, sent me the following email - 

Kathy, I have to say that this article expresses many things I see happening within libraries that undermine our

profession. The idea that we as librarians are qualified to be selectors or guides through the sea of information (& mis-information) is being forgotten or ignored, in part because our culture seems addicted to seeking increases in quantity, not quality---whether it is french fries, widgets, literature or information.  The idea that it is better to read 50 books, (or "items")--never mind that they are mediocre, formulaic repeats of what we read last year, rather than 25 titles that are more challenging, has become the new goal of many library systems.    Our profession used to be above the fray when it came to worrying about sales figures, which made us different, in a wonderful way, from the chain bookstore. If that "supermarket" model is becoming ours, it ought to worry anyone who cares about intellectual freedom and growth in our culture. Our job as librarians is to engage people in growth throughout their lives, before, during and after "school" days, to be a beacon of free thought unencumbered by sales figures, which more often indicates mass market thinking than new and daring concepts; the sales curve always follows some distance behind the new concepts humans create.  (Was Van Gogh a bestselling artist in his lifetime???)  It is our job, as I see it, to include in our collections "items" that may be less than mainstream, but more important precisely because they are out of the main stream; new directions, offshoots, upstarts, wellsprings off the beaten path.  One of my favorite quotations is from Kenneth Burke; "Art may be of value purely through preventing a society from becoming too assertively, too hopelessly, itself."  That reminded me, when I first saw it, of the quotation above Royce Hall at UCLA that I saw daily while i was in Library School there--"Where there is no vision, the people perish."

If we are not serving as navigational beacons by dint of our dedication to --do I dare use this word that has become a derogatory one--"intellectual" training as professionals, then we may as well just pile the mass market paperbacks up and let folks browse like so many ruminants on the chaff instead of separating it from the wheat, and let them wander through the internet haphazardly bumping into information of widely varying quality. .  I hope we as a profession continue to be visionaries, using the new technologies to further open windows to new visions without making the numbers game be our primary motivation.

Sorry I went on!! Got a little excited.  But this matters!

Sylvia raises some thought-provoking points....and I want to think about what she says before I respond.  In the meantime I thought her comments were worth sharing.  What do you think?

What Are Libraries For?

First, a disclaimer:  This post contains links to some content that might be considered "adult".  Venture forth at your own risk!

I spent some time cleaning up my computer desktop today while I was eating lunch, and I cam across this post on "Defining What Your Are For (Just Like Porn)" that I had saved for future reference.  Hugh McGuire's blog is great because he's not a librarian (at least I don't think so!) but he often writes about stuff that is on topic for libraries and librarians.  And he is President of the Atwater Library in Montreal - a public library funded almost entirely by private donationsn now there's a challenge! -so he has does have insider library knowledge.  And I like his taste in music, too!

Anyway, I thought Hugh's comments about the risks of defining your institution in terms of what you do, rather than what you are for were very thought-provoking:

He writes that institutions

"...have defined their existence by various functions they perform within a given ecosystem. In the context here, these institutions grew up in an ecosystem where information was scarce, and information distribution limited. The ecosystem has changed (info distribution & access is abundant), and institutions are having a hard time adapting. So: music labels think they sell CDs to people; newspapers think they get writers to make news articles, and get people to read them; libraries think they give people access to books and computers; universities think they provide a place for people to learn and do research; governments think they try to improve society by implementing policies wanted by the people … etc. But I think they are all wrong.

All those kinds of definitions get you tied up in the functional stuff you do, and they don’t really get to the core of what’s important, what the real thing is that you are doing. I don’t have answers, but any business/institution that thinks like this is going to get creamed in the next ten years, unless they take a look at what they are really for."

Then, in a real stroke of genius, he makes the comparison to the porn industry, which has no illusions about what it is for and is one of the most enduring and profitable industries in the world...but you'll have to read the post to learn more!

Anyway, I re-read Hugh's post and then, still munching on my hummus and pita chips, I spent 20 minutes listening to the latest Joan Frye Williams and George Needham Thinking Out Loud podcast from Infopeople.  They were talking about the book Forces for Good: the Six Practices of High-Impact Non-Profits and what lessons there might be for libraries. 

The whole podcast was interesting, but one comment from Joan particularly struck me.  In talking about the need for libraries to be actively engaged with their communities she said "you have to have a place at the table, but you also have to bring a dish once in a while".

Another way of saying it's not enough to talk about what you do (your function), you actually have to connect with people in ways that they find useful (what you are for)!

Since lunch the thought that has been rattling around in the back of my mind is that while I think there are some core things that I think all public libraries are "for" - centered around literacy, reading, access to information, and lifelong learning - the ways in which we deliver these services so they are of use to our local communities can be very different.  And I also think there are other things that we are "for" because they meet unique needs in our community, and sometimes these feel like they are a long way from the core of functions that we feel comfortable with. 

This month's Library Journal (the print version, available online only to subscribers) recognizes the Chelsea District Library in Michigan as the "2008 Best Small Library in America".  One of the reasons?  They have gone outside the library walls to bring services and activities to the Chelsea Senior Center - including video gaming (Nintendo Wii bowling leagues), music events, and more.  Not much mention of books and reading in that outreach effort...but it clearly says to the Chelsea community that "the library is for seniors, wherever they are and whatever their interests."

In Palos Verdes there is a need for safe, comfortable places for young teens to socialize and relax (and maybe do a bit of homework) after school.  The library has always served this function to some extent, but when we opened the Annex and started offering fun activities for teens over at Miraleste the message we sent to our community is "we are for kids who need a place to go after school but don't want to sit still, be quiet, and study".   

"What are we for?"  "What dishes are we bringing to the potluck?"  Great questions that I suspect will be rattling around in my head for a while....thanks Hugh and Joan!

Librarian - A Career with a Bright Future

If U.S. News and World Report says so, it must be truel!  Librarian is one of "31 Careers With Bright Futures" according to an article this month. (Thanks Stephen Abram for sharing this!)

And the article linked to this article on Librarian: A Day in the Life from December 2007  - it doesn't really describe a day in MY life, but its interesting all the same!

Redefining Information Literacy

"Information Literacy" is a topic that we think/talk about quite a bit here at PVLD. We have an active program to take information literacy education into the schools, we have until recently participated in a group of librarians from all kinds of libraries with an interest in this topic, and some of the librarians and I have been guest contributors to a University of Illinois Library School class on the topic. We've tended to take a pretty narrow view of what is meant by the term, though - something along the lines of this definition from The American Library Association's (ALA) Presidential Committee on Information Literacy, Final Report "To be information literate, a person must be able to recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information" (1989).

It's an ok definition, although I'm not sure it goes far enough in today's Web 2.0 world where individuals are increasingly able to create and publish information. As applied by most librarians it also has a kind of dry, academic feel – we tend to think of information literacy in terms of teaching students about "sources" and "research skills". That's why I loved this post on Sexy Librarians of the Future from "The Read Write Web" which offers a whole new spin on information literacy and the role of librarians. (And thanks to the folks at Library Garden for pointing me to this item!)

I especially loved the paraphrased comment attributed to Jon Udell of Microsoft -"the librarian of the future will help a growing number of citizen media producers to classify their online media and get it connected to other related content in ways that will increase its discoverability". I couldn't agree more with Read Write Web author Marshall Kirkpatrick – that is HOT!

The staff here at PVLD is getting pretty adept and learning and applying some of these Web 2.0 tools – as witnessed by our Meebo widget, various blogs, and soon-to-be unveiled new website. Now we need to figure how to help our customers gain these skills. Should be fun!

Meebo Us!

Got a question for PVLD?  Want to chat with a librarian?  Now you can contact us via Instant Messaging directly from our home page at www.pvld.org

The story of how this came about is a testament to both Web 2.0 techologies and to the "can do" attitude of the PVLD staff.

Some of us at PVLD have been playing around with IM for a while trying to figure out whether/how to take advantage of it for internal communication between staff members as well as for the public.  We discovered Meebo ( http://wwwm.meebo.com/ ) - a neat tool that lets people IM whatever system they are currently using (gmail, Yahoo, etc.) or by setting up a Meebo account you can IM someone on any other system from the Meebo website.

A couple of weeks ago I figured out how to put a Meebo "widget" on my blog which allows anyone to chat with me via IM from my blog as long as I am logged into Meebo.  The other person doesn't even need a Meebo or any other IM account.

Earlier this week I was showing this to Debra Petersen, Assistant Manager - Adult Services and as we played around with Meebo we realized that it could provide a quick and easy way to test out whether people would use IM to communicate with us.  So on Wednesday afternoon we decided to just do it!

By 1PM David Campbell, our Manager of Digital Library Services, had the Meebo widget up on our website.  The first question came in about a minute later.  Over the course of the afternoon Debra fielded a number of questions.  Many were about things like the library's hours over the Thanksgiving weekend, or how to get a library card online, and there were also seven "real" reference questions. 

If that trend keeps up our little spur of the moment pilot will be a real success.

This got me thinking about why it was so popular so fast when our other "online reference" tools like "Email a Librarian" or the Asknow Virtual Reference Service which uses also uses IM technology are hardly used at all (on average less than 10 questions a month combined).  Of course I don't really know, but my guess is that the Meebo widget has several things going for it:

1.  It's intuitive.  It doesn't even say that it is an IM system. All you see is a box that says "The PVLDLibrarian is online" and a prompt to "Type here and hit enter to send a private message".  Its as easy as that...no special training, user account, or other folderol required.

2.  It's right there on the home page.  You don't need to click down to get to it.

3. It's informal,personal, and local.  You're not interacting with some anonymous librarian somewhere in the country - you are chatting with the PVLDLibrarian from your local library.  It's not intimidating - you don't have to be asking a "reference" question.  If all you want to know is whether the library is open the Friday after Thanksgiving that's fine.  I think this probably makes it MORE useful to most visitors to our website than the AskNow type virtual reference service which implies you have some meaty question you want answered and is really not set up to deal with questions about local library services. 

4.  It encourages human interaction.  Even when using technology like a library website, people want to "talk" to another human being.

As I said, these are just my thoughts.  Whatever the reason, its been fun to see how people have responded.

Try it out!  Just remember that we are still experimenting and may not be online at all times.