HKLA 50th Anniversary Conference: Part 5

Hmm, I saved this as a Draft and forgot to publish it. Here's a belated part-5 from attending the Hong Kong Library Association 50th Anniversary Conference, Nov 2008.

[Continued from Part 4]

"Analysis of social tagging and book cataloging: a case study". Yi-Chen CHEN. Department of Library & Information Science, National Taiwan University.



Her premise for the study: little research has been done to examine how social tagging has been applied to books.

So she looked at items tagged in librarything.com

Research questions:

• How can tags be organised to different function types?
• What kind of tags are used?
• How can it help the library?

Study involved a random sample of "most often tagged" Fiction & Non-fiction records in librarything.com

Some findings

• For Fiction titles, users tend to tag with "Bibliographic Information" (i.e. author, title, publisher)
• For Non-Fiction titles, the tags tend to be "subjects"

When she did a comparison of the user-created tags and the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), she found:

• 90% of tags were not reflected in LCSH (i.e. 90% of the tags were unique)
• The overlap (between the user-tags and LCSH) was less than 12% overall
• Tags tend to give more "genre" information, especially for Fiction works
• In tagging, users tend to describe more character names from the books
• Tags often had simpler and informal usage on person names, geographical names

My rambling thinking-aloud
I think when "social tagging" or "folksonomy" is mentioned, there will be some librarians who will inevitably pooh-pooh the former and start extolling the virtues of Authority Control exercised by librarians (i.e. LCSH).

That sort of argument -- of which is "better" -- is is irrelevant. It's like asking, "Is it better to search by author or by subject"?

The answer depends on what you prefer, and what you hope to find.

I noted that the areas of overlap between "social tags" and LCSH is only 12%, i.e. there tends to be different set of results retrieved, depending on whether you use tags or LCSH.

That suggests to me that it's really about different ways to find a book, according to users' preferences.

There are pros and cons: those who aren't familiar with LCSH can go by social tags. It is informal (i.e. not constrained by rules) and hence more easily remembered by those not familiar with LCSH. But there tends to be more misses in finding records, since the nature of social tagging there isn't any effective means of standardising the terms used (unlike LCSH).

I know some libraries are developing a sort of "hybrid systems" that marries -- or tries to bridge -- a structured and more consistent system like LCSHs, and a more user-oriented system like social tagging.

We'll see.

HKLA 50th Anniversary Conference: Part 4

[From Part 3]

"Mass digitization, Scan Robotics, and more: The digitization strategy of the Bavarian State Library as in International Research Library". By Dr. Klaus Ceynowa, Deputy Director General, Bavarian State Library (i.e. the National Library of Bavarian), Germany.


They are 450 years old this year!

They operates 7 days a week, 0800 hours to 2400 hours daily.

See themselves as an "European Universal Library" and an "International research library".

Target audience are researchers, scholars and students -- worldwide.

Rich and deep collections dating back to the 16th century. Most notably its Medieval manuscripts, including an original Gutenberg-pressed bible.


Bavarian state lib has 16,000 oriental & Asian collections. Including Dun Huang manuscripts dating back to 1651.

Their digitisation strategy (i.e. their approach to funding, and collections to be digitised)
For funding, they have decided to partner with Google but only for manuscripts from the 17th and 19th century. Says there is an urgent need to preserve the collections. And only Google has offered that amount of money.


For materials from the 20th and 21st century, Dr. Ceynowa said something about these still being under copyright so they won't be digitised for now (if I got my facts right).

As for their Special Collections, maps, music supplies, these will be digitised in the future, from funding by the European Library (or was it Council)?

They have decided to go for mass "industrial-scale" digitisation, rather than a highly-selective approach. No selective picking. They would scan everything (within the identified collection period) with the aim towards volume.

Main challenge is logistics. They designed a workflow to track every item, at every step of the procedure. And in a manner that doesn't interrupt the normal day-to-day workflow.



They're using something called "ScanRobots", which they jointly developed with a German firm. The machine automatically flips the pages, captures the pages in very high resolution -- two facing pages at the time.


Target is to scan between 1,000 to 2,000 pages daily.

Their partnership with Google
Without revealing any specific contractual details, Dr. Ceynowa shared that Google will complete the digitisation (of the agreed materials) within 10 years, at no cost to their library.

Scanning is done within Bavaria; the materials will not be transported out of their country.

Google and the Bavarian State Library will get digital copies, and the Bavarian State Library will also own the "digital data" (i.e. they have the source digital scans). Their library is subsequently free to provide the scanned documents "via OPAC, website, and the library web services". And they can freely share the object metadata.

The Bavarian State Library is not allowed to give the digital objects away.

The contract is non-exclusive (i.e. Bavarian State Library can choose to scan the same materials with another partner; doesn't mean Google has the exclusive rights to scan the materials).


Future
Dr. Ceynowa ended his keynote speech by saying that they are choosing to be a digital library, rather than a library with the physical objects.

Says to survive in the world of information, libraries have to be a place within the online world.

To that, they have reconstructed their building in SecondLife.

Their premise is that if more people use the digital collections, then more people will eventually find their way to use the physical library.

[Next: Part 5]

HKLA 50th Anniversary Conference: Part 3

[From Part 2]

Dr. Colin Storey (University Librarian), University Library System, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

I found myself agreeing with most of what Dr. Storey had to say. And disagreeing with some.

His talk was titled "Ur-librarian to un-librarian, or Ur-librarian to Uber-librarian?"

The parts I agreed
He suggested there were "8 professional distinctions":

• ICT-literate library school graduates
• Need to know about books and intellectual history
• Librarians need to be serious readers ourselves
• Professionally global in perspective
• Have a sense of importance in our work, coupled with common-sense and a sense of proportion
• Totally committed to the free flow of information
• Expert in public relations
• Totally vigilant with our spending of public money

And "5 personal distinctions":

• Out-going personality for outreach
• Brave and persistent
• Quick-thinking and articulate of speech
• Sharp political sense (to survive in senior policy committees)
• Steadfastness and humility

Dr. Storey says library managers and librarians have different expectations about library 'brand'. Meanwhile, users have another.


Thinking readers "know everything" is a great mistake.


The parts I disagreed
My understanding of what Dr. Storey terms an "un-librarian" was a person who called oneself a "librarian" but who betrayed the "tradition" of librarianship.

In his paper, he gave the example of how librarians "spend time on un-librarianish things, and less and less on helping the users". He took issue that "librarians are appearing at material handling and logistics conferences along with storage container facility managers" and suggested librarians had better use of their professional time.

Maybe he's relating to a different context, and I don't know what went on during the meetings Dr. Storey mentioned , but I feel librarianship is ultimately about access.

In a sense, libraries are really in the "information logistics" business. Our job was is to bring books from publishers to the readers (to the library, but perhaps via home delivery -- who knows).

The logistics aspect was part of "Access to Information". If going to meetings with storage facility managers helps, then why not? (Wasting time at unproductive meetings is a separate issue).

Another area Dr. Storey took issue was how "centuries-old cloister of the mediaeval French monk and of the Qing Dynasty scholar is being quickly jettisoned in favour of cafes, sofa beds, multi-coloured neon lighting, concert halls, and wi-fi hotspots so that the digital native kids can get Face Book".

I think we have to separate the issue of "bad taste in furniture" Vs. "the need to re-invent library spaces".

Multi-coloured neon lighting? Maybe that's questionable.

But how are cafes wrong? Or Wi-fi access for that matter? I think we have to judge the decisions on space planning and design on customer's needs and relevance. I can't make the connection with those examples and the acts of un-librarianship that Dr. Storey is suggesting.

If my notes are accurate, in his presentation, Dr. Storey says "librarians should try new things and move forward. But still have to cherish our traditions."

I totally buy that. But I think the contention is "What is our tradition?"

Seems to me it depends on how broadly (or narrowly) we choose to define what is tradition.


Additional "five professional distinctions"
Dr. Storey ended his presentation by suggesting the "8 x 5" distinctions should be "8 x 5 x 5". The additional five being:

• To be more informal in formally organising access
• Not to dumb down to get readers
• Remain non-commercial and/ or unbiased
• Not disclose patron history
• Try to assist in searching for and access to "library-watermarked sites" (approved sites?)

So, I don't quite agree with everything Dr. Storey said.

But I totally agree with his last slide:


[Next: Part 4]

HKLA 50th Anniversary Conference: Part 2

[From Part 1]

"Building a service culture in a major Asian academic library". Presented by Peter Edward Sidorko (Deputy University Librarian) & Esther Woo (Administrative Services Team Leader). The University of Hong Kong Libraries.

"This is not about technology. This is not about digitisation," said Peter (it's a wry sort of library humour, if you will).



"No one escaped" in their quest to improve customer service ratings for their libraries. They targeted librarians to cleaners.

Mentioned global pressures as one reason for drive towards greater customer service improvement.

That, plus the results from their customer survey and feedback.

Their paper cited the "Service-profit Chain Model" (Haskett et al, 1994). The model is based on the premise that profit and growth is derived from customer satisfaction and loyalty. Which is in turn derived from a customer sense of value received, and the capability, productivity, satisfaction and loyalty of employees.

Peter, in his presentation, cited the BBC report (2005) on how librarians suffered the most stress, compared to firefighers and the police (one reason being a lack of support structure for librarians to handle work stress).

In that light, HKU believes that "stressed librarians cannot provide good service".

They modified their organisation logo to reflect a consistent image to go with their new taglines relating to customer service.

Their main approach in improving their customer service levels:

• Clarify (internally) what is expected in terms of customer service levels (rather than assume all staff & management share the same view)
• Improve internal communication (they have 240 staff, considered big for academic libraries)
• Improve skills through formal and informal methods (they looked at interpersonal skills as well)

They developed three modules to address those areas:

1. The Philosophy of Customer Service
2. (3 Parts) Focusing on Library Customers/ Problem-solving Process/ Communication with Customers
3. Internal Communication

Esther shared how they carried out their internal staff training programme.



They called it Sharing Sessions rather than "training". One reasone was some staff, who were asked to conduct the internal training, had doubted if they were qualified enough to conduct training sessions per se.

[I wonder if they should have a formal "Trian-the-Internal-Trainer" programme, where their own staff become trained Trainers to champion service quality].

***

Some personal rambling reflections
Seems to me HKU Libraries tried to look into the Process, Awareness and Attitude aspects. Of those three, "Attitude" seems the hardest to tackle, i.e. measure and address.
[note to self: email Peter and ask him about this]

I was also wondering how successful organisations influence staff to care about the quality of work.

Of course the word "care" was loaded with subjectivity. Also, it would be hard to measure, wouldn't it? How would you tell if one employee "cared more" that another?

Which led me to ask myself, "Are there any reliable indicators that employers can use or questions to ask, during the interview and recruitment phase, to better ascertain the candidate's attitude towards service quality?"

'Cos nothing beats addressing the problem at the start, I think.

Then I thought about "service channels".

For instance, are staff using the same channels available to external customers? Or do they use some other means not available to those outside the organisation?

If the answer to the latter is 'yes', it may be an indication of some areas for quality improvement.

So the long term objective would be to raise the level of the service (to external users) to become equal to the "special internal service", isn't it?

I think experienced librarians will tell you most customers will walk away satisfied when they feel the librarian has done their best, even if they do not get the information they are seeking.

Perhaps it's HOW you do it, as well as WHAT you deliver.

[Incidentally, I just read from CNA that Singapore improves world ranking in customer service].

[Next: Part 3]

HKLA 50th Anniversary Conference: Part 1

[This is Part 1]

Off to Hong Kong in a few hours time.

To present a paper at the Hong Kong Library Association 50th Anniversary Conference.


My paper is on the various digital/ new media initiatives our Public Library Service initiated (starting in 2005 with this event, then this in 2006, followed by this and also this in 2007, then this being latest for 2008):

CHANGING THE WORLD: ONE NEW FRIEND AT A TIME (REACHING OUT TO TEENAGE USERS OF OUR PUBLIC LIBRARIES)
By Mr. Ivan Chew, Manager, Adult & Young People's Services (Public Libraries). National Library Board, Singapore

Abstract
Teenagers (13 to 19 years) are a user group that the Singapore public libraries find difficult to reach. One reason is that the typical library programmes (e.g. talks and lectures) do not appeal to them. In response, the Singapore Public Library has been using digital mediums like blogs and Instant Messaging in its programmes and activities for teens. The strategy has been to leverage on teens being IT savvy, so that programmes for teens are relevant and meaningful to them. In addition, the library also seeks to involve teens overseas, through various overseas partners.

This paper presents case studies from the NLB Public Library's programmes for its teen library users. It will share the learning points in conducting those events, and also discuss the library's future plans.

Two other NLB colleagues -- Ivy Lee (National Library), and Ian Yap (Public Library) -- will also be speaking at the conference.





Say, all our names start with "I", lol.

After the 2-day conference, Ian and myself will be on a study-visit to a few libraries of the Hong Kong Public Library.

As usual, I'll try to share what I can (where appropriate) from the conference proceedings, and from the library visits.

[Next: Part 2]