#01 Wrangling Content
#02 Navigation & Wayfinding
#03 Online Card Application

Empathy and preferences

As I discussed in the January 2010 LJ (p. 28), if we want to make deep connections with our communities, we must figure out how people feel. I don’t mean in the narrow sense of sending out a survey. Surveys can be useful for getting a sense of people’s stated preferences (often different from their actual preferences) but rarely go deeper. In fact, relying on surveys and market research techniques alone can actually be harmful, setting up a consumer/producer dynamic that doesn’t let us recognize our patrons as individuals.

Let’s say that half of your library’s renewals are made by telephone. If you know this, you’ve deduced a preference. But what can you really do with this information? There are a number of reasons people might show this preference: they could lack computer access; the online renewal process might not be obvious; or they could enjoy interacting with librarians. What’s more, the response is likely to vary depending on the motivation.

How can we recognize patrons as people and learn about their motivations? As in any good relationship, we can listen to them.

By the way, LJ has created a feed for the series. I’ll likely keep linking from here too.

In our attempt to create amazing user experiences, we often want to push the envelope, to create something new, to show people a bright new future. But too often we fall into the novelty trap. The novelty trap is when, in an attempt to dazzle our clients and our users, we focus too much on the new and not enough on the now.

To create great user experiences we need to focus on the now. In reality the problems of our users are painfully mundane and often obvious. It is our task to ease this pain, and in doing so we might not invent some amazing new thing, but that’s OK. Success is incremental.

Read the whole article at 52 Weeks of UX

In this month’s I explain what UX is, make the case for librarians as designers, and even talk about Paul Renner.

Every time librarians create a bookmark, decide to house a collection in a new spot, or figure out how a new service might work, they’re making design decisions. This is what I like to call design by neglect or unintentional design. Whether library employees wear name tags is a design decision. The length of loan periods and whether or not you charge fines is a design decision. Anytime you choose how people will interact with your library, you’re making a design decision. All of these decisions add up to create an experience, good or bad, for your patrons.

What an adorable promotional video!

Via Suzanne at userslib.

Making Content Shine
An example of rewriting content for the web.

The Making of influx.us
What we kept in mind while making this site: a mini-case study.

Here’s a quick example of something that is novel and entirely usable but isn’t getting used. One of my local haunts put a box of toys on a table that parents can use to entertain kids while they’re in the cafe. Nice idea.

Nothing about the arrangement is preventing people from using it so why is it sitting there neglected? Either people aren’t aware of it or there’s just no need for it.

I often notice the cafe making slight alterations to the physical space. Some stick, some don’t. They seem to be nimble enough to try new things and make a decision about whether or not they’re working.

First, I’ll admit that I hadn’t heard of EBSCOhost Connection. Attempting to learn more, a Google search returned 15 results including a Web4lib post from 2006.

I wasn’t particularly interested in the article returned to me but wanted to look at it as a proof of concept so I clicked though. As expected I was presented with the article’s abstract and further action was needed to get to the full text. I assume that if I was in a library and my IP was authenticated the article would have been right there, but since I wasn’t I needed to search for my library to log in.

Problem. My library, Multnomah County, wasn’t listed even though it provides me with access to EBSCOhost through their website.

Note the “Library Sponsored Research Content” seal of approval

Having worked in an Oregon library I happen to know that the state library provides this particular database to libraries in Oregon and that’s probably why MCL wasn’t listed. No one outside of the library field would know this. Would they think to click on the “Oregon State Library?”

Since I did I eventually got to a login box. I tried to use my MCL credentials to login but they didn’t work. I had been defeated by the system and had no other options.

Here’s where we could start assigning blame. Who is responsible for this situation? Our profession for giving money to vendors providing stuff like this? EBSCOhost for not conducting effective user testing or even heuristic evaluations? I dunno. Both? Whatever the case it boils down to this:

We should be ashamed for putting (potential) library users through these experiences.

##########

P.S. I found the article quite easily searching EBSCOHost’s MasterFILE Premier through the Multonomah County Library website. Here’s the permalink they provided. Can you login and see the article with your barcode and PIN? I could not.

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=9603051138&loginpage=Login.asp&site=ehost-live

I was happy to see that Krug uploaded a presentation he recently gave to slideshare. The slides are entertaining and informational, I can only imagine how fun it was live.

It is not without heart-breaking irony that we acknowledge a near-total lack of legibility in our collective repository of typographic history – the typical library. In the beginning, there was one problem, books, and one solution, shelves. When you go into the library now, there are literally hundreds of signs and pieces of furniture provided to deal with each new format. Everything from magazines to DVDs has a cabinet, a users’ manual, an inventory, and an interface. The result is a massive communication problem. While librarians themselves should be commended for their improvisational tactics, overall the patrons confront a constant meddle, with one organizational layer of information Scotch-taped over another. The time has come to imagine a new way. Life Style p. 242 – Bruce Mau

It is pretty easy to come to the conclusion that Dewey Decimal System ® signs in our buildings are metadata (or at the very least, representations of metadata) but what about the operational, directional, and prohibitory signs?

They’re metadata about librarians. They provide information about librarians’ attitudes and priorities.

How are the signs in your library describing you?

Jeffrey Zeldman on Twitter

These big numbers got me thinking about the viability of patron review and comments in library catalogs. Should we be discouraged? After all, how many library websites have 3 million visitors every day? I don’t actually care. It doesn’t matter. We shouldn’t be discouraged. I’m not even interested in the metrics. Why? Because library websites should just be as normal as possible. Full stop. Part of this normality is the possibility for interaction. People should have the opportunity to voice their opinion if they feel motivated.

What interests me more than these stats is how most of the discussion I’ve seen surrounding improving the OPAC has stopped with making them social and easy to use. I’ve advocated for these goals and will continue to do so. They’re important and they should be a priority, but in the scheme of things they’re low hanging fruit. Shouldn’t we be aiming to make some deeper, more significant connections? What I haven’t seen, and I just might not be looking in the right spots, is advocacy for going beyond creating OPACs that are imitation amazon.coms. We can do better. I’m not 100% sure what they’d look like, but they’d be more than just inventory systems for book mausoleums.

For one, they could include user generated content. I’m not necessarily talking about YouTube videos created by local people. I’m talking about capturing and making available information produced in library programs. There’s a ton of great stuff happening in our buildings. Not only could we do a better job telling those stories, we could do a better job making the content from those programs and meetings available and useful. Thinking about this end goal might even have an impact on how a library plans and conducts events.

Let’s not exclude stuff created by organizations and enthusiast groups around the community. I know that the Helsinki City Library is exploring this idea. There are probably some great curricular tie-ins too. Local university and high school students could produce reports relevant to the community. Into the OPAC they go. Useful chat transcripts could be findable in the OPAC too. Taking it a step further, why not make scapes created by librarians and others findable in the OPAC.

Again, a deep participation OPAC wouldn’t just keep track of where books are. It would also be a evolving database of things important to the community. Yes, this has everything to do with my thoughts about the unsustainability of libraries relying on content provision as their reasons for being.

I can’t think of a much better way to engage people than to say to them, “We want to know what’s important to you. We want to help you share your expertise.” By doing this librarians can fulfill their role as universal joints, connecting people to information, information to other information, and people to people.

#1: Stylous.com let’s you chose facets by clicking pictures.

[via]

#2: I find fancy architecture firm websites to be some of the least usable websites around. This might not be an exception, but the websites from diller scofidio + renfro achieves a CoolIris type effect (by using Flash).

[via]

As the name suggests, the 5-Second Test involves showing users a single content page for a quick 5 seconds to gather their initial impressions. Five seconds may not seem like a lot of time, but users make important judgments in the first moments they visit a page. Read the article [5-Second Tests] for more details.

 
If you’re looking for a place to start, why not with your homepage? In just a few minutes you can see if the message you think you’re broadcasting to people is what they’re actually seeing. If not, schedule some time to make an adjustment (bigger font size? more contrast? less words?) and take another 10 minutes to retest. Better? hint: Yes.

This is even perhaps more applicable when you’re in the planning/building process. Do some 5 second tests with drawings or Photoshop mockups. Little fixes early on can save you from having to correct things that are nearly cemented in place.

You can do 5 second tests with almost anyone as your testers, but if there are absolutely no people around (or you just want to do something different) check out fivesecondtest. You can upload an image and have random people on the web give you their results. A great way to get a feel for how to conduct a test might be to make a designer happy and do a few tests.

For even more lightweight usability testing goodness, take a look at the NPYL Labs’ infomaki.

Even more inspirational was the signage treatment provided, I think, for libraries across the state of Veracruz. These pictures came from a number of different libraries but you probably wouldn’t guess that if I hadn’t of mentioned it.

I saw zero 8.5×11″ pieces of paper taped to walls.

Are there any libraries in the US, perhaps in a consortium, that have worked together to provide uniform wayfinding devices for library users? This would make sense where people use a few different libraries that are in close proximity.

We could have a universal signage system for all libraries. It seems to be a logical extension of sharing the same classification systems. Then again, I’m not sure how this 1920s-esque Rationalist idea fits with my previous post advocating for fun, human language on library websites.