Walking Paper

“If we allow library service to be trivialized to the point where it can be performed out of a vending machine, perhaps it won’t be Apple that finally kills the library, it will be librarians.”

I couldn’t agree more. Great statement from James R. Lund at LJ.

I visited some great places as part of my participation in the Gates Foundation’s 2010 Global Libraries Peer Learning Meeting.

The libraries I saw have overcome their addiction to circulating content. Now they’re all about doing, making, publishing, working, and experiences revolving around content. People are still getting print books and CDs for the library, sure, but other stuff seems more important. Here’s a little report.

Finland has two official languages. Finnish and Swedish.

Library 10

The first place I visited was the Helsinki CIty Library’s central location: Library 10. Even though it is the central library it is considered a music library and there aren’t many books. Right now about 70% of the space is devoted to people and 30% to materials. Their next design will expand the space for people to 80%.

Instead of books people check out guitars.

Or record music and edit music videos.

There’s a radio station and the library broadcasts a small segment locally every day, and nationally once per week.

The library is certainly nice looking but it isn’t flashy. That’s a pretty accurate description of Helsinki in general so it fits.

The chairs of this area are often moved out and a stage is set up. They host cultural events and record many of them. They’re interested in the library as publisher of content. One great fact about the events held at the library. Over 80% of them are organized by library users. Librarians just facilitate hosting the events.

Modularity is a big part of the library. All of the big furniture is on wheels and can be easily moved. They’re not limited by outlet placement because there are outlets everywhere in the ceiling. While most of the staff furniture stays put, people rearrange the public’s furniture daily. It is straightened up every morning and staff look for patterns to help plan future layouts.

It is impossible for library patrons and staff to sit on opposite side of a desk. They work together answering questions. Staff were resistent at first but quickly came to fully embrace the arrangement and wondered why they didn’t make the switch 10 years earlier.

Speaking of work, chief librarian Kari Lämsä says he prefers the concept of Library as Working Room rather than the more common Library as Living Room because living rooms are too passive.

There are all sorts of other interesting things about the library. They have a group of people working on cool web stuff. I wrote about their country-wide library searching iPhone app in January.

They have a mobile events van that takes gaming equipment to other libraries. It also travels to music events in the Summer, changing out the content to be event specific. Library 10 tries put the same kind of people on both sides of the desk. Staff aren’t your typical library workers. A bunch of them are 20-something guys.

Meetingpoint

This Helsinki CIty Library location is across the street from Library 10 in a building full of stores and cafes. There are no materials to browse or check out. People bring in their computers to the Laptop Doctor for repair and for lessons. Most of the interactions are one-on-one but there’s a Laptop Club during which many people gather for instruction.

Other services include Citizen Media Computers with multimedia and publishing tools, a new and popular VHS to DVD setup and a few computers dedicated to finding a job.

Their next project is the Urban Office Workspace for people in the city that need a temporary place to conduct business. Two successful business have already been started at Meetingpoint.

A place like Meetingpoint couldn’t work without an enthusiastic staff. Everything I observed indicated that they’re super stoked on doing what they do.

Nokia World Headquarters

A group of us heard a bit about how Nokia learns from their R&D prototypes and incorporates ideas into their final products. We also got a tour of the Nokia Lounge which is a showcase of their products. They seem most excited about their phones for the developing world and they billed all of their smartphones as being extremely affordable. It almost seemed like they’ve given up on doing anything to combat iPhone-mania.

This was the neatest thing I saw. Wireless charging.

And, just for fun, here’s the first library sign using the Cyrillic alphabet I’ve ever photgraphed!

More Stuff

Library 10 on the HCL webpage

Kari Lämsä’s presentation about Library 10

A presentation with some info on Meetingpoint

One indication that something is well made is that it becomes better with use. Think about your favorite pair of jeans or a leather briefcase handed down from a father to his son. These things might not necessarily appreciate is actual in monetary value but they’re nicer to use than when they were brand new.

In this way, libraries should be like a nice leather briefcase. However we conceive of them a bit differently right now.

Disposable Goods

Things that get better with use have to last a long time. Most of the time, though, people buy inexpensive and low quality goods (quite often manufactured in Asia). Why? It’s often temporarily easier to buy things that are less expensive if your focus is on the short term. Especially if after some time passes you are going to want the Next Big Thing anyways. We’re conditioned to think like this. In the USA, 70% of our GDP consists of consumer spending and the success of our (global) economic system hinges upon continued and never ending increase in GDP. Hence, more spending and a lack of focus on stuff that lasts.

I realize I’m a bit of a pinko and live in People’s Republic of Portland but I don’t think it takes a tremendous amount of insight to realize that such growth isn’t sustainable in the long term. Currrent economic crisis, anyone? Global warming?

Economists & Librarians: Peas in a GDPod

What do consumer spending habits have to do with libraries? Just like economists are obsessed with increases in GDP, librarians are obsessed with increases in per capita circulation. Both are rather shallow.
 
I bet these statistics play a major role in 99+% of reports to library boards. Similar reports go to the state libraries at the end of the year. I don’t know if anyone takes the HAPLR ratings seriously anymore (the animated .gif on the homepage certainly doesn’t help) but 6 out of 15 measurement categories are related to circulation. That’s 40% of the measures. LJ’s Index has less criteria, four, which makes circulation 25% of their measures.

And just like continual increases in GDP aren’t sustainable, libraries can only optimize their operations and collection development strategies so much. If we extrapolate this model a few centuries out we will see a library either circulate nothing, stagnate, or checking out 5000 items per day. I dare say the later scenario is physically impossible.

The continuation of increased circs isn’t something we can take for granted. This is compounded by the fact that libraries are being squeezed out of the content distribution game by the lack of circulatable digital commercial content.

We’re not at a crisis point yet. Many libraries have been able to get more and more items into the hands of patrons to stay solvent. The fact remains though, that there’s an upper limit to how much can be circulated. What’s the plan for when that happens?

A Better Goal

I don’t think I’ve met a librarian who really values circ stats beyond being happy to report favorable ones. Everyone just seems to accept that shuffling content around and reporting the stats is the way the game is played. Including me, to some extent. Why shouldn’t a library be proud when it circs a bunch of stuff?

Even if it were possible, though, the continuation of the red trend isn’t desirable. Our collective fixation with circ numbers is stifling the evolution of libraries. It is making us focus on a very narrow and relatively boring aspect of libraries: distributing content.

I’m not terribly interested in just being a content distributor. Are you? I doubt it. Even if we could be better than Netflix at movies, even if we could have “you may also like” recommendations better than Amazon, even if we could do music better than iTunes, we have more important things to do.

I’m interested in helping people accomplish tasks that support their goals.

Measuring the Nebulous

Much like there are difficulties in (quantitatively and even qualitatively) measuring the characteristics of your favorite jeans that have become more comfortable after five years, libraries don’t yet have a mechanism for measuring success without circulation statistics. (Or similar stats like computer use and reference questions asked.) Measuring something as grand and vague as “helping people accomplish tasks that support their goals” poses challenges.

It’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation. Libraries cannot concentrate on matters other than getting books out the door unless they have a way to demonstrate success elsewhere. And they can’t fully commit to succeeding elsewhere (let alone trying to figure out how to measure it) if they’re busy getting books out the door.

Let’s suppose that a library shifts the emphasis of its efforts and has wild success supporting community and individual goals. How could they measure it? Customer satisfaction surveys? Seems like a fine idea but nothing that could be relied on fully. Telling stories of the successes? Good. Having people in the community tell their stories? Better.

Library Made

What about people showcasing how they’ve solved their problems and achieved their goals by using library resources and connections?

Imagine if alongside a Creative Commons icon you found a Library Made icon. Clicking on it leads to authorship info, the context in which and when the content was created, and what library resources (including people) were consulted in the process. Also listed are links to other relevant library projects and any other pertinent info.

Even better it works the other way too. Library resources link out to these projects, demonstrating that they’ve been used, how they’ve been used and who has used them. Think of it like trackbacks for library content.

A concept like Library Made is a measurable way that our libraries could become more rich with use.

If you’ve ever felt the awe of history contained in an old object handed down to you, imagine what it would be like to open a book and see what’s been done with it and how it has changed its readers and its community.

Growth of this type is more sustainable and certainly more meaningful than increases in cheap-like-Chinese-goods per capita circulation. Looking to the future we don’t see the absurd scenario of people checking out 5000 items per day. We see libraries enabling people to share knowledge and solve real problems.

It is really neat how much of a role the library is playing in the City of Birmingham’s revitalization plan.

The Library of Birmingham, opening in 2013, will occupy a prime site on Centenary Square, the city’s largest public square, acting as the flagship for the regeneration of Birmingham, and celebrating the ‘Global City with a Local Heart’.

Sited between the 1970s Birmingham Repertory Theatre and the 1930s Baskerville House, the new Library of Birmingham will “bring the spoken and written word together to inspire creativity and discovery.” [via]

See libraryofbirmingham.com for more.

The response to my post “Proposal: The Case Against Innovation in Libraries” has been interesting. Some people have wondered, exactly, what I meant and wanted to discuss the idea. I also got one trolling anonymous email calling me a traitor.

The comments are worth a read. The post did breeze over (as Eli put it) the real issue of what we’ve been calling innovation for the past few years. A more fair title for the post would have been ‘The Case Against “Innovation” in Libraries.’

In large part we’ve been “meeting users in their space” by using social software stuff. Which is necessary and great, don’t get me wrong. I’m all for it (when it solves a problem). I’m just not sure that it is all that innovative. Meanwhile, other organizations have been doing research and meeting people’s information needs.

This is what I’m trying to say:

Libraries are a bit top heavy with somewhat aimless experimentation. Learning/experimenting/playing is great. And necessary. Etc. Speaking broadly we’ve done a good job developing those skills. However, learning/experimenting/playing shouldn’t be the end goal. Meeting the needs of our users is the end goal. Collectively we now have nice tools at our disposal. A missing piece though is how we figure out how and when to apply the tools.

Forthcoming: How libraries can transform into something more stable and meaningful:

Eli’s Twitter account will probably have updates.

But like I said before, libraries might not provide content in the future & it’s okay. So come on everybody. Create some meaning for your library beyond shuffling books around.

Let’s get to it.

Right now I’m in Xalapa, Mexico for the Peer Learning Meeting of the Gates Foundation’s Global Libraries Project. People attending the meeting have either received, or will be receiving grants from the Gates Foundation and I’m along to talk about Web 2.0 and library usability.

We’re going to do a few site visits, including some Web enabled all-terrain buses that travel around Mexico providing access. Does that sound as cool to anyone else as it does to me?

Here I am in full turista mode at Zempoala, where Cortés headed after arriving in Mexico.

Yes, I like riding bikes but that’s not the only reason I’m posting about this bike rack. This clever system functions not only as a bike rack, but also a wayfinding mechanism and bench. I’ve been keeping my eyes open for examples of flexible infrastructure and this is a great one. I wonder if the P shape design element is meant to indicate PARK.

[via]

The Roku digitial video player, an AppleTV-like device that allows for easy streaming of NetFlix content to a TV, now supports streaming from Amazon’s Video on Demand. It costs $100.

…

Some people passionately disagreed with me in the comments on last week’s “libraries might not provide content in the future & it’s okay.” I remain unconvinced that it won’t be okay. An ideal future? Maybe not. The way we’d like to envision our future? No way. We’d love to be delivering content to people in convenient ways. A nevertheless viable and perhaps more meaningful future? Could be.

Of the comments questioning a future without digital library content there was only one real articulation of why such a future wouldn’t work.

Why would I want to go to a library to exchange thoughts and ideas about materials that I have found and (using the examples you have cited in the first six paragraphs) paid for outside of the library?

… I don’t need a library to do this this kind of thing.

It simply does not make sense to think that people who use the web for materials provision will then travel to the library to “share their experiences about those materials.”

My experiences with the hundreds of people I’ve hosted film discussion groups, book discussions, gaming events and tech training classes for tell a different story. Hearing about playing miniature golf and ninja tag in their library tells a different story. The restaurant on the top of OBA tells a different story.

While it is certainly true that people don’t *need* a library to do the above things, they still chose the library. So it makes perfect sense to me that people will congregate at the library even if there isn’t an eBook to check out. Even increasingly so if libraries concentrate on becoming excellent public spaces that help people navigate their personal content consumption and create stories. (And let’s be a bit real here. Like Nate Hill said in his comment, this isn’t likely going to be an all or nothing situation.)

There’s another take on why people might increasingly use public spaces instead of private ones. They might not have a choice. In a Kunstler-esque future everyone will be forced to go back to using local public spaces because there won’t be a Starbucks on the corner in which to gather. Libraries are sustainable in this sense.

One more thing. In a comment Tony Tallent wrote:

Libraries–in all formats including electronic, can be a place where we ‘do’ not simply talk about what we did from home.

I agree and if it’s okay with him I think one of my new mottos will be: Libraries are places of doing.

I want you to read these posts.

Libraries Should Become Better with Use

Libraries Might Not Provide Content in the Future & It's Okay

Beautiful > Ugly

Here are more options.

RSS Feed

Search

Grid