Instant Message with
the Librarian??? What??? Yep, that’s what patrons want. And the patrons aren’t
asking easy questions; they are very complex questions. The Binghamton
University Library created accounts on AOL, MSN, and Yahoo! along with still
having, in-person, telephone, and email reference services available. And of
course they started with the humanities and science libraries. Data was
collected after 1 year to see of users were getting quality service and patrons
overall view of the service. According to their study undergraduates are more
likely to use the instant messaging service than graduate level or even
faculty. The traffic of the instant message service and the reference desk were
the same time of early afternoon on the weekdays and a low usage during the
weekends. The top three questions were about website navigation, instructional,
and then research or subject. The average time of a chat session was 1 hour 9
minutes. A whopping 84% percent of patron said that the librarians had hit the
nail on the head and answered their questions completely and correctly. Patrons
are becoming repeat users because how accurate the answers are. Ways to help
patrons is to have better website navigation with tutorials and having
librarians continue to practice and learn new reference interview techniques.
Now to go work on my Q&A performance.
Maximiek, S.,
Rushton, E., & Brown, E. (2010). Coding into the Great Unknown: Analyzing
Instant Messaging Session Transcripts to Identify User Behaviors and Measure
Quality of Service. College & Research Libraries, 71(4),
361-373
I suppose it's good that these services are working so well; I've always been a little uncomfortable with handling reference services remotely through text-only discussion. It's one thing for simple questions, but what if you need more information, or the idea is best communicated graphically (i.e. discussion of art techniques in a Monet)? I imagine a lot of the problem will take care of itself over time as technology improves and videochat becomes integrated more broadly (and patrons begin to become more familiar with the technology), but I think we always have to be careful to remember that technology can supplement our service very well, but we must seriously consider the implications of replacing current practice and be prepared to compensate for the change.
ReplyDeleteI think that virtual reference services have come a long way even within the two brief years that I have been in this program. I remember using one of the virtual services "Ask a Librarian" or whatever it was called at the time, and being entirely underwhelmed when it was clear that the cybrarian, who was probably outsourced to Bangalore for the job, basically just used Google to find a Wikipedia page for me. I coulda done that! I think tha the trend now is to have real bona fide competent librarians performing the cyber reference, and not just leaving it to lazy lumpuses.
ReplyDeleteI'm amazed that the average chat time was 1 hour and 9 minutes! I guess people have a lot to say to their librarians! I do think that live chat is another important way that libraries can reach out to their patrons. It is quick, easy, and non-intimidating for shy patrons. My library uses live chat and, while I'm not sure of the actual numbers, I know that these represent a significant portion of our reference interactions.
ReplyDeleteSanta Monica Public Library's virtual reference services has a maximum -- you can ask three questions or converse for 15 minutes. And that's it. Otherwise, folks will never let you go, I believe.
DeleteThat is an amazing chat time average! I agree with Michael concerning shy patrons. There are some people that are less comfortable with in person interactions that would appreciate an instant messaging system. I can also see it working well for distance education for people who can't come into the library and don't want to pay for a long distance phone call to get information.I also enjoyed your other post about how online resources such as electronic reserves were helping students and faculty.
ReplyDeleteIts good to hear that 84% of people were given the correct answer because my initial reaction was that instant messaging wouldn't be a good form of communication for complex answers. Over an hour for one communication seems like a long time though, I don't know if I would have enough patience to wait that long. Although, if this is help people come back to the library then it can't be a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteI was also amazed by both the good response, and the long chat times described in the article. I am one of the Ask a Librarian volunteers for Ask Now Texas this semester (signing in from Houston, not from overseas!), and I have received all of 2 questions since mid-January. That seems to be typical of many of the shifts. In fact, many of the questions come from public library patrons who have access to the service, rather than from the community colleges and smaller UT campuses that I had understood were the main targets of the service. And yes, many of the questions are directional, rather than reference. And yes again, many of the answers walk a fine line between showing a student where/how to find information and doing the homework for them. On the other hand, for the student who really needs help right now, and isn't near the library, the service is definitely a plus. I hope such students will provide positive feedback to the library.
ReplyDeleteHmm. I think I'll check the chat logs during my next quiet shift, and see whether there are any trends in time-of-day usage.
The fact that the average chat time was 1 hour and 9 minutes shows that if given the chance to talk to their librarians patrons would embrace it. People know that librarians have a great deal of knowledge and by talking to them the librarians share the knowledge with the patrons. Many people are shy and simply do not like to ask questions personally so having Yahoo messenger, AOL, and MSN gives the patrons who are shy to ask questions that they would not ask if they were in person. I bet if you ask all the patrons who participate in this program they would really appreciate this type of service and the librarians who participate in this program.
ReplyDeleteI wonder whether this is becoming a service people are more comfortable with even on-campus, as people become more at ease with picking up a tablet or a smartphone when they have a question.
ReplyDeleteI could see how this service would better benefit from librarians at the helm though - originally they probably thought the same mistaken thought many people have re: libraries and the internet: the latter replaces the former, so we can use less-experienced staff for the job and save money. But that wouldn't work - it's more cost-effective for someone being on the line who knows where accurate information is or at least how to find it quickly.
It's funny how the kinks have to be worked out a bit first when introducing a new tech service. This is something we've discussed in Distributed Learning librarianship (my other class), particularly the hit-and-miss nature of chatterbots (programs and avatars that help with common questions and direct users to info) for library chat assistance. They're also wildly expensive (for now) and can be very helpful. And occasionally very glitchy - they're not as good at improv as we are!
-G Streeter
I am most surprised that the questions were directionally based, rather than specific research subject based! The chat time also surprises me, too, but I realize that via chat, some cues that may be more apparent in an in-person interaction (namely, voice inflection), would be missing, therefore requiring additional follow up questions for more specific information to ensure an accurate and fulfilling answer from the librarian. I fully endorse virtual reference, and I think it would add value to the library's services.
ReplyDeleteI recently had to instant message a librarian for another one of my SLIS classes, and I can see why it is in demand. It was nice to enter in a query and instantly get a respond as opposed to e-mail where I may be waiting at my computer, constantly refreshing the screen and waiting for an answer to an important question. In short, instant messaging with a librarians in my opinion perfectly combines the immediate aspects of a face-to-face query with being anonymous as in an e-mail exchange. I will definitely use such a service again.
ReplyDeleteCTC library has recently starting to utilize Meebo as an instant message service. Initially, I was excited new technology is always fun, however has not been as successful as I would like and not for the reason people would assume. Librarians are the issue, they have not embraced the service and normally will not log into the service, therefore providing a disservice to the students. I asked some colleagues and the responses are similar, they are not comfortable with IMing; therefore choose not to use it. The public service department is going to be giving additional training sessions to assist those who are less comfortable with Meebo. I'll use the information as incentive to continue the use of Meebo in our library.
ReplyDeleteangela c
This kind of customer service would certainly appeal to those who will text their friend when the friend is in the same room. Whatever makes the user more comfortable in "approaching" the librarian with a question is probably a good thing.
ReplyDeleteGreat comments, everyone! I find the average time confusing, especially if people are asking mainly directional questions. Back when we had a booming VR service at UNT, most questions were research based - not always high level research but still how do I use the catalog, what database do you recommend etc. And often fairly quick. Maybe 20 minutes for a thorough research question and answer.
ReplyDelete