L2 Friendly

L2 Friendly
Originally uploaded by freerangelibrarian.

Thoughts on ALA Bootcamp: An L20 Manifesto

Some of you may be following the conversation going on concerning ALA’s Library 2.0 Boot Camp. (If you want to catch up, read here, here, here, here (audio here), here, here, here, here and here).

I am a participant in the workshop, and I see the conversation that's playing out as one big, (public) demonstration of the power and value of L20. There are both positive and negative examples for us to learn from here. My working group in L20 Bootcamp has been charged with answering the question: "How can Library 2.0 be used to enhance [ALA] membership?" What follows is my response.

First, a few thoughts:

I understand the Otter Group’s motivation to defend themselves against perceived attacks. I believe they set out to do good with this workshop. I'll grant that their motivations are pure. I imagine they must be feeling a bit like “no good deed goes unpunished." Having said that, I think their evolving response to the criticisms being levied at them could have been plucked whole-cloth from the ClueTrain Manifesto, under the heading, “What not to do” or "Example of corporation 1.0 in its’ death throes." That is to say, while running a course that is, at its heart, about having conversations, they are investing time and energy and (allegedly) using the language of intimidation and threats of legal action to stamp out conversation because they don’t like what’s being said.

This is great!!! It’s great because it offers us a real-time, unfolding case-study, ripe with lessons we can sink our teeth into. I do not see this as a simple case of the big bad corporation versus the noble defenders of good. It’s a little more nuanced than that (most things are, right?). To the extent that we can resist our impulses to cast this as a drama of good v. evil, we can extract some useful lessons.

That I am getting value from my Bootcamp experience and the conversations that have sprung up around it is unquestionable. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that ALA is doing anything is a huge overriding value. I'm aware that much of the value I’m extracting as a participant is because of Otter’s (and Jenny Levine's and Michael Stephens') contributions. And some of it is in spite of their contributions. Right now people are talking about the “in spite” part. That’s ok. That’s natural. That's healthy. But it's not the whole story. What follows is my attempt to frame what I'm seeing, hearing, reading, and experiencing in a way that will help me learn and extract value from this experience. Nothing more, nothing less.

El Tuo's L20 Manifesto: (Thoughts on using L20 to enhance membership in ALA

1. L20 is a conversation.
2. Don’t try to put the conversation in a box.
3. Conversations do not occur in boxes.
4. Conversations are organic. They go where they go. They grow where they grow.
5. The further a conversation goes the better. The wider it grows the better.
6. Go where the conversation goes or you will cease to be a part of it.
7. No one controls the conversation.
8. If you try to control the conversation, it will affect how others perceive you in spite of anything or everything else you are doing.
9. If you try to control the conversation, you will lose credibility (at best).
10. Credibility is the coin of the web 2.0 realm.
11. If you try to control the conversation, you will ignite and draw peoples’ anger or ridicule or both (if you’re lucky).
12. Your response to anger and ridicule can be a part of the conversation or separate from it, in which case it is simply prologue to your epitaph.
13. If you try to control the conversation you will be ignored as irrelevant (at worst).
14. Irrelevance is worse than death. People say nice things about the dead, but the irrelevant are seldom mentioned.
15. Anyone can participate in the conversation.
16. We add value by participating in the conversation.
17. It is the quality of our participation, not the quantity, that determines how much value we bring to the conversation.
18. We extract value by listening to the conversation.
19. The best listeners extract the most value.
20. The organization that listens best extracts the most value.
21. Organizations can’t just listen... They must participate.
22. ALL feedback is good.
23. Conversations flourish when ALL feedback is seen as good.
24. All feedback is useful.
25. Conversations flourish when ALL feedback is seen as useful.
26. The appropriate response to feedback is to say thank you.
27. Find another way to say thank you.
28. Repeat.
29. Now offer a thoughtful response to feedback.
30. Congratulations, we are now having a conversation.

(This manifesto has been cross-posted to: http://eltuo.pbwiki.com/ I encourage fellow boot camp participants and anyone else interested in growing the manifesto to jump in and edit. The pwd is eltuo.)

--------------------------------------

EDIT: This was written and posted before reading Michael Stephen's latest post at Tame the Web--really! A little bit of sychronicity...

Tags: ALAL2, Cluetrain, library 2.0, ALA Bootcamp, L20

I've been George Needham'd (literally)

But I wasn't the only one... Yesterday was MPOW's annual Spring Membership meeting (20th anniversary to boot), and we were delighted and honored to have OCLC VP for Member Services George Needham on hand to discuss OCLC's must-read "Perceptions" report. I know it's been out for awhile but if you haven't read it yet, go read it. Or re-read it. Or read the 8 page conclusion. Or the respondent's advice to libraries.

George's talk was wonderful. Warm, reassuring and hopeful, while still being provocative and challenging. Here are some highlights:

• "It is not the customer's job to understand us, it is our job to understand the customer." (paraphrased from a comment made to OCLC Prez Jay Jordan, "It is not our job to understand OCLC, it is OCLC's job to understand us."
  
  
• "Convenience will always trump quality (so it is our job to make quality convenient.)"
  
  
• George summarized the points of Jennifer Rice, Omar Wasow, Antony Brewerton and Patricia Martin who spoke at OCLC's mid-winter "Extreme Makever" symposium in San Antonio. The webcast and mp3s are available at: www.oclc.org/community. Of particular relevance to our audience was George quoting Jennifer Rice (Mantra Brand Consulting--great blog!) on the importance of libraries letting customers get a library card online. You can hear just that snippet of Jennifer's talk here:(direct link or press the blue arrow.) This was particularly significant because we're piloting a Get a Library Card Online project - aka GALCO- in New Jersey!
  
  
• What do customers tell us they want? More books, more copies, no fines, longer hours, more computers, friendlier staff, cleaner, better-lit, uncluttered facilities.
  
  
• George quoted Joan Frye Williams' point that self-service isn't synonymous with "no service" and would better be thought of as "self-directed" service. YES!!

Thanks Mr. Needham. Indeed, it was all good.

Scan this post

Kevin Kelly's NY Times Magazine article, Scan This Book, blew my mind. I read it straight through on Sunday and have re-read selected snippets a few times trying to wrap my mind around the implications. Here are a few selections that really jumped out at me (with my comments if I rally the brain cells to assist me.)

Kelly writes,

The link and the tag may be two of the most important inventions of the last 50 years. They get their initial wave of power when we first code them into bits of text, but their real transformative energies fire up as ordinary users click on them in the course of everyday Web surfing, unaware that each humdrum click "votes" on a link, elevating its rank of relevance. You may think you are just browsing, casually inspecting this paragraph or that page, but in fact you are anonymously marking up the Web with bread crumbs of attention. These bits of interest are gathered and analyzed by search engines in order to strengthen the relationship between the end points of every link and the connections suggested by each tag. This is a type of intelligence common on the Web, but previously foreign to the world of books.

Mind blow the first: Simply by clicking on a link we are affecting the order the of the web. What seems to be a "read" action, turns out to be more of a "read/write" action. The more we click on something, the more likely it becomes that someone else will find it and click on it.

Kelly writes,

Once digitized, books can be unraveled into single pages or be reduced further, into snippets of a page. These snippets will be remixed into reordered books and virtual bookshelves. Just as the music audience now juggles and reorders songs into new albums (or "playlists," as they are called in iTunes), the universal library will encourage the creation of virtual "bookshelves" — a collection of texts, some as short as a paragraph, others as long as entire books, that form a library shelf's worth of specialized information. And as with music playlists, once created, these "bookshelves" will be published and swapped in the public commons. Once snippets, articles and pages of books become ubiquitous, shuffle-able and transferable, users will earn prestige and perhaps income for curating an excellent collection.

Mind blow the second: Individual enthusiasts writing, selecting, "curating", mashing, may soon be on an equal footing with the "experts." I can already see this happening with wikis and blogs. The truth is, I now get almost zero useful information from our professional literature (It takes me about 10 minutes to read American Libraries and/or LJ.) But I get an immense amount of useful and stimulating information --information that is helping me do my job better-- from a number of library and marketing blogs that I read regularly with the the help of RSS. (So how long before we hear, "Dude, have you heard my mashup of Federalist #51 and the new Neil Young album? Publius rocks!!)

And there's more. A lot more.

• The sorry state of our copyright law, and the black hole of out-of-print information it has created (sucking, sucking, sucking information away from the public domain.)
  
• The fact that a large % of out-of-print info can't be put back into print because, well, because no one even knows who owns the copyrights.
  
• The possibility that Google can bring much of this "lost" information back into play by scanning and indexing it, thereby shifting the onus to copyright holders to exert claims (if they have them.)
  
• The filtering power of hyperlinks and tags to bring items that exist out on the long tail to peoples' attention. (think: If you like Ryan Adams, you may like the Jayhawks, and if you like the Jayhawks you may like, Uncle Tupelo, and if like Uncle Tupelo, you may like Calexico, and if you like Calexico you may like Giant Sand, and if you like Giant Sand, you may like their album Glum (and that's about as long tail as it gets.)

I'll be re-reading this piece, and reading other blogger's thoughts on it, trying to flesh out and extrapolate what it all means for libraries. It occurs to me that the Overdrive audiobooks platform already allows us to add our own pdf and audio content to the collection. Will librarians soon be performing more local collection development of digital formats?

The possibilities (and challenges) of adding exponentially more community created content (like Atlantic City's teen poetry slam, or flickr photo sets, or autobiographies) as permanent additions to the collection is intriguing!

Tip #4: Keep a "No" log. (aka Steal this post)

Practical Tip #4: Keep a "No" log. (Steal this post)

OK, I've been meaning to post this idea for over a week, so it serves me right that I got beaten to the proverbial punch by Stephen Abram, who appropriately titled his post, "an idea worth stealing."

The idea? Keep a log at every service desk and note every time a customer is told "no", or "we can't do X", or any other variation on the theme of denying the customer what they want or need.

Look at the logs on a regular basis and evaluate whether those 'nos' can be turned to 'yesses'. I recommend reviewing the nos while keeping in mind Michael Stephens' "Five Factors for User Centered Services"

1. Does it place a barrier between the user and the service?
2. Is it librarian-centered or user-centered in conception, i.e. is it born from complaints from librarians about users?
3. Does it add more rules to your bulging book of library rules, procedures and guidelines? The more rules you make the more quickly library users will turn you off.
4. Does it make more work for the user or the librarian?
5. Does it involve having to damage control before you even begin the service?

I'm not suggesting that every no be turned to a yes. But I am suggesting that your customer service will improve if you every 'no' is critically evaluated.

Tags: customer service, customer experience, user-centered, library management, libraries

Customer Service Tip #3: Be a great place for teens

Practical Tip #3: Be a great place for teens.

Granted, many libraries already excel in this area, but it's worth mentioning. In my first "test" post I joked that, "If we can get [baby ducks] to come in for quacky time when they're still fuzzy, cute, and let's face it a little impressionable, I think we'll have them for life." But seriously folks, if we give teens a positive, engaging, welcoming library experience, there's a much greater chance that we will keep them for life (or at least through their first molting season.)

And I don't think that a positive, engaging, and welcoming experience is at odds with the necessary boundary setting that has to happen with teens. I never felt more loved and welcomed than when Carol Kuhlthau was throwing me out of my high school library! (I had an inkling that defacing magazine covers by cutting out the noses and mouths and wearing them as masks was not appropriate behavior.) I appreciated that I had done something wrong and Carol always welcomed me and my friends back. I guess she realized that when we weren't goofing around we were actually doing some reading.

So how do we make libraries welcoming and engaging for teens? There's the basics: Smile at them. Treat them as you would other customers. Anticipate and meet their needs. What needs? Stephen Abram suggests letting teens bring their skateboards into the library:

"Why don't we have a skateboard rack inside the library? Why would we have our patrons risk their independence if their skateboard is lost or stolen? How would they get to the library? We should support them. A skateboard box, Rubbermaid storage container or simply a towel bar by the service desk is a simple solution that provides a service instead of a negative interaction. It's welcoming. Buy or get a second hand old skateboard and a few sticky letters that say WELCOME. Why wouldn't we do this? It's a cheap visible proof of welcoming attitudes."

Aaron Schmidt suggests (gasp) letting them use the stapler (that generated a LOT of discussion across many blogs--worth following.) Back in a previous incarnation when I served as a YA librarian I set up a modest homework center with paper, scissors (double-gasp), hole punch, white out, pens, pencils, highlighters, paperback dictionaries and thesauri all located in a little 3 shelf bookcase--just for teens! If they're asking us for it, why not provide it? (Please don't say "money": paper, pens and a few staplers a year--yes they walk occasionally--aren't going to break the bank.)

Beyond the basics (smiling, scold-free service) there are so many good ideas out there for serving teens it's hard to know where to start. So why not start here at the BIG IDEAS, NOW: teens @ your library conference that took place April 30-May 1, 2004, at Trinity College University of Toronto. There are a lot of goodies here so I'll highlight a few:

1. Keynote address by past YALSA President Michael Cart
2. Notes from breakout session, Attracting Teens/Selling Teen Services to Staff and Administration
3. Notes from breakout session, Adolescent Development and Libraries (good ideas on why teens come to the library and what we can do to meet their needs)
4. Notes from breakout session, Librarians New to Working with Teens

Thanks Ontario Library Association for continuing to host such a valuable resource!

Tags: Teen services, ya services, ya, young adult, libraries

Having a bad day? Trait vs. State

I recently presented a workshop on "Conflict Resolution" at the NJ Library Association conference and I have been thinking more about the idea of "state vs. trait" and the importance of being aware of how we interpret the behavior of others in library service encounters. Our judgments often depend on how well we know the other person.

If someone we know (and like or love) is rude or cold to us on any given day, we are likely to think "He's just having a bad day," or "Something must be wrong with her today." In other words, we think that our friend is temporarily upset, in a bad mood, or in a bad state. We are able to give that person the benefit of the doubt and may even excuse their somewhat nasty behavior because we know that this is not their usual personality. Our first reaction is to become concerned and to ask "what's wrong?" or "what's going on with you today?"

If, however, we don't know someone at all (as is the case for most library service encounters) and this person is rude or cold to us, we are much more likely to think "What an awful person" or "What's their problem?" or even "What an expletive deleted!" We think that the person has a bad trait. We are unable to excuse their bad behavior since we assume that they are always like that. Our first reaction is to be offended. We may not be able to resist the urge to snap back with a tart retort and then conflict ensues.

For service excellence in libraries, if we are able to think of the grumpy, stressed, or otherwise annoying people we encounter as nice people possibly having a bad day or being temporarily stressed out, this would enable us to be more sympathetic. We could then perhaps respond by asking "What's wrong?" or "Can I help you, you seem upset today?" We could openly acknowledge that they seem stressed or upset, that we understand that they are a bit fragile today, and they may be in need of a little bit of TLC. If we can see argumentative or grouchy people as being in a bad state rather than having a nasty trait, and if we react to them in a more caring way, many potential conflicts can be averted or defused.

On the days when I am stressed or rushed or hungry and tired while running a bunch of errands, I would just love it if those I encounter at service desks could understand that I am usually quite lovable and kind. Yes, I am a bit grumpy and fragile today, but I am having a really bad day.

Just one.