Some Tenets of Self-Service in Public Libraries

Some Tenets of Self-Service

1. A great deal of library service has always been self-service. Many patrons use the library without assistance and with minimal contact with staff and like it that way. They are not unsocial or dysfunctional. Many shoppers don’t like sales associates hanging around them either.

2. Some core functions can not be provided well by self-service. Reference. Reader’s advisory. Teaching people to use the library’s resources. Arts and cultural programming. Libraries should focus on making staff support of these as available and visible as possible.

3. Some core functions work quite well as self-service. Internet access with patron self-registration. Holds pickup. Wireless Internet access. Community gathering space. Displays. Remote use and placing of holds. These all require considerable work to make them function properly, but not at Point of Service.

4. Repetitive tasks should be automated as much as possible and, if physically burdensome, split among part-time staff. Good management and worker’s compensation demand nothing less.

5. The move to self-service will bring about disruption in staffing, procedures and routines. It is likely that certain kinds of positions (those that checked out books) will be phased out and new positions (service desk types) will replace them.

6. Staff is the most expensive part of the library. If you are not planning to move to self-service and the staff reorganization it will bring, you are not making the best use of that resource. Too much of library work is still in a pre-automation stage.

7. At some libraries, the reorganization will help handle growth in use without new staff. At other libraries, it will entail fewer staff and/or staff at new classifications.

8. A split between check-in/shelvers and service desk staff does not represent deskilling, but a recognition that they operate at different levels. Service desk staff will require a different (and higher level) skill set than checkout desk staff. Shelving is, unfortunately, mainly a McJob.

9. Self-service should always be optional, with staff on hand to assist patrons as required, even if it means operating a self-check station for the patron. Self-service as a form of abandonment is suicide for the organization. If self-service does not improve service, why is it being implemented?

10. Self-service will annoy some patrons, my mother among them. Many more will see it as a sign that the library is being responsible and technologically forward. Anyone under 30 will love it.

11. Like MARC records, automated library systems and digital resources, the self-service library will cause anguish in the profession for the next decade and then become the status quo. By 2015, no one will be quite sure what all the fuss was about.

12. Self-service either changes everything or it changes nothing. If you are self-checking 80% of your circulation, have patron pickup of holds, patron self-registration for workstations and wireless Internet, then you have changed just about everything. Welcome to the future. If not, then you have merely waded into the shallow end of the pool and have a lot of work ahead of you. Sooner or later, you will have to learn to swim. It’s a car, not a horseless carriage.

13. Throughout all this change, the public library can and must remain constant. Not constant in superficial things like the types of technology used or position descriptions, but in its mission. That hasn’t changed since the Boston Trustees first enunciated it in 1852.

I had this posted at my previous site, so I am porting it over to here.

Library Policy Hurts Privacy, Patron Says

A Washington Post article tells a troubling story. A library has gone to self-service and open holds. Open holds means that patrons can come in and pick up items they have on hold without staff intervention. It’s a good service, but the implementation is troubling. The library puts the patron’s name on the book and then shelves it in a public area. In Wisconsin, any information that connects a patron to a circulation is strictly confidential. To the point that even video surveillance camera footage can not be shared with police without a court order. It was only recently clarified that parents can see their children’s records.

I am unsure of the laws in Virginia and don’t really care. It is not good service to operate that way and it is totally unnecessary. As the article points out, American Airlines (and many libraries) use initial letters from the last and first name to identify items being held for pickup. It is sufficient for identification and patrons can’t check out items destined for another patron with a similar name, since the checkout system won’t let them. Why annoy patrons and violate their privacy for such a small advantage? Looks like an implementation that will last until the first law suit about it, then it will change to what it always should have been.

Finding a focus

As I have noted in the About Me section, this blog is being re-focused on two subject: book reviews and what ever I have to say about libraries. The former will be more common, since mI am less likely to be moved to comment about libraries and want to take great care about doing so, as it is my profession. I contribute to DailyKos (politics), Street Prophets (religion) and TimesFour (Packers).

Occasionally, I will be unable to resist and some of those topics will spill over here, but I plan to keep that to a minimum.