Comments on: The Reference Singularity

By: ALA 2010 Post Game « Agnostic, Maybe

ALA 2010 Post Game « Agnostic, Maybe — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 06:27:01 +0000

[...] to cover since he had asked me if he could use my Library Day in a Life Round 4 entry. (Here’s a previous thought on reference posted back in April.) Pete really brought back the affirmation of why I love reference as well; it [...]

By: Mike Shell

Mike Shell — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:24:59 +0000

Thanks, Friend.

I wanted my library colleagues to know about your blog–especially this post–so I’ve mentioned in on The Surly Librarian.

Mike Shell

By: Peter Bromberg

Peter Bromberg — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:27:23 +0000

Great post Andy, and Steven adds an interesting dimension by asking what happens *after* the initial encounter.

If you’re not familiar with Dr. Marie Radford’s research on the relationship aspects of reference, check it out. Marie’s research reveals that there is a disconnect between how librarians judge the success of a reference interview, and how customers judge the success of a reference interaction. Librarians traditionally judge based on whether the question was “completely answered.” Customers however are much more likely to judge the interaction successful if they had a positive interaction–regardless of whether their question was completely answered.

For starters, see http://www.askus247.org/tutorial/radford.pdf and the abstract at: http://www.jstor.org/pss/4309107. I’m sure you can find more on this–you’re a librarian

My own reference theory (and the topic of the book I have to write some day) is that we’re not giving out information; we’re giving out little bits of love. Ok, maybe not a book–but my next blog! http://littlebitsoflove.wordpress.com/about/

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:53:46 +0000

You’re right in that there are other aspects that can add/detract to the reference interaction. I had limited my post in scope to just that encounter without consideration to the other outside influences before the reference desk. But it is no less important.

Follow up calls are an interesting suggestion; my gut reaction is the staff time and logistics to make it work on a consistent basis. Coupled with gather people’s phone numbers (I can imagine the myriad of reactions to collecting such data), I think it could work. But to work most effectively for both staff and patron, a call should be sent out only for certain types of inquiries (such as involved research questions). I think that would be time well spent, for those people interested. (I might have to start this as my own experiment.) Email might also suffice.

What about ‘thank you’ postcards for people who attend programs or use services at the library? While the card may be formulaic, a hand written name or short note would be the right touch.

By: Steve Matthews

Steve Matthews — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:33:11 +0000

Andy, VERY interesting observation that appears to support my own position that the 21st Century Library is More: Business-like in their approach to delivery of customer (patron) service. “Service Oriented – Customer Service Competitive Advantage: Competitive Business Solutions ... What is needed is for us to go above and beyond what our competition is doing.” In fact, what is needed, as you point out so well, is for librarians to recognize the value of the customer (patron) interaction in the reference experience, not simply the outcome – answer/no answer. The success of that interaction is measured by whether the customer comes back, or takes their business elsewhere. Excellent advice. Thanks.

By: stevenb

stevenb — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:22:11 +0000

I agree with much of what you say here Andy. The experience the community member receives can have more to do with the relationship building (or lack thereof) that happens during the transaction. So even if you don’t get the exact right response (and sometimes there isn’t one or your goal is to get the person moving in the right direction within 5 minutes of arrival – not provide an indepth research response), how you manage the experience is critical.

But you say:

In my mind, good or bad reference experiences do not hinge on the resolution of the inquiry, but on the type of customer service a patron receives. How much does the result matter when the experience was unsavory or unpleasant versus engaging or personable?

Again, agreed, but I’d add to it that the reference experience is often more than just what happens at the reference desk during the transaction. Over at Designing Better Libraries I’ve written about the importance of “totality” or “high fidelity” as being crucial to the library experience. That means that even if you provide amazing customer service at the desk – and then the member goes to the stacks and gets lost – or is frustrated because a needed book isn’t there – or finds the book and then gets treated like crap at another desk or your bathroom is dirty – that is all going to detract from your great reference service. In fact – by the time that person walks out the door they might even have forgotten about you and your great service. So while you are right that it’s important to give a great reference experience – it’s even more crucial to offer a “total” library experience. Of course – that’s much harder to do and requires a more concentrated effort from the staff.

What else do I think we could do to make it a great experience? Follow up calls. How many libraries are doing that?