National Libraries Day #NLD13 or, what do libraries mean to me?

Today is National Libraries Day, an annual event to celebrate library services and the essential work paid library/information staff do every day.

(via Paul Stainthorp on Flickr)

(via Paul Stainthorp on Flickr)

My first memory of a library is taking part in the Summer Reading Challenge at my local public library. I had a library card from a young age and used the library semi-regularly for most of my childhood. I was an avid reader but not an avid library user. I don’t have vivid memories of Matilda-esque escapades in the library. It wasn’t a sanctuary. The public library was (and still is) a nice place to visit to borrow a few books, quickly use the internet and read a paper but it never had a pivotal role in my childhood. It doesn’t have a pivotal role in my life now. I use it as semi-regularly as I used it when I was a child.

I’ve also never desperately life-depends-on-it needed an ambulance and paramedics; a hospital bed; or a fire engine and fire crew. Does this mean that noone else has? No. Should we cut these services seeing as most of us have never really needed them? No. Should we encourage nursing volunteers? Volunteer-led schools? No. Once we’ve stopped needing a school or university library should we stop caring whether it stays open or not? No.

via Pauline Fisk (http://bit.ly/GNpkjd)

My point is, is that its very easy to dismiss libraries as nice luxuries that have never impacted greatly on anyone’s life. And that is very easy to do if the majority of people do not know what libraries do and what value and impact they have on many people’s lives. This is the point #NLD13. To showcase public, school, college, health, university and organisational libraries; the work they do; and to celebrate the staff that provide a valuable service to their users.

Whether they directly impact my life or not (some do, some never will), it’s essential that libraries are not seen as easy targets for cuts; that the general public appreciates how important they all are (not just public ones); and that those with power realise the long-term damage they are doing by replacing paid trained staff with volunteers or getting rid of library services completely because what doesn’t immediately impact one person could be a lifeline to others.

Marketing for Libraries

At the end of November last year I attended the Libraries for Nursing Winter study day Marketing your library service with limited time and limited budget. I was really pleased to be able to attend for free (thanks to the committee’s bursary) and came away with plenty of ideas and enthusiasm for marketing my library service.

Our trainer was Terry Kendrick. He was engaging and explained concepts simply (a lot of the day was spent with me going “oh yeah!” in my head as I realised how clear and straightforward his ideas were).

So, what is marketing?

“It is not how good your service is, it is how good people think it is.”

Marketing is not the same as promotion. Too many people make the mistake of thinking that creating and distributing promotional materials is marketing. However, this should always be the last thing you do after you’ve done your marketing. The whole point of marketing is to make people ready for your service by making them want or need it because they see the value in it. Libraries need to create clear and unambiguous value for users. We need to forget what services we have and instead think about what they do.

Libraries need to know their users inside out. This means that we can get the right message to the right people as and when they need it. Marketing strategies need to be planned thoroughly based on our knowledge of our users and messages need to be delivered just before users need our services.

Terry asked us what it would take for us as professionals to stop and listen to someone selling us a new product. This was a valuable exercise as it made us appreciate how selling the library service can be viewed negatively by users. We think we’re informing users of our great services and that they are obviously engaged with our message. But unless we offer added value; a time saver; a personalised product; something better than similar resources they already use; or accessible and user friendly services they may not be listening. The quality of any message always beats its quantity. Every time a user receives a message that they don’t need and therefore think is irrelevant to them they will eventually stop opening messages and (worse) stop thinking of the library as a place or service that can help them.

Value

Terry was insistent that the only way users will be interested in our library services is if we explicitly detail the value of them. Library resources are interesting but not as interesting as helping someone do their job or study better. Libraries need to be part of a solution rather than part of an information overload problem. Many users think more information will slow them down; instead they want small amounts which are relevant to their immediate need. Spoon feeding is exactly where the value is added by libraries. Users should always get more back than what they put into the activity or relationship. User want to know if the service is worth the effort of them going; do they help them achieve important things; is the library’s offer compellingly different to other approaches?

We should segment our marketing because different user groups consider value to be different things so a personalised offer is essential. This should be based on the knowledge we have developed of the specific user group. Offering too much and overloading users with “stuff” may create a situation where users don’t use anything because they’re overwhelmed with too much choice. But encouraging them to make their own choices may result in users choosing nothing because they don’t have enough information. It’s important to get the balance right. Never draw attention to services or resources that you can’t show the immediate value of otherwise it looks superfluous and may be prone to cuts.

Getting the message out

Inform existing users of the value of a service with a friendly tone and persuade those that aren’t users with a more formal tone. If your library doesn’t appear in the news channels of your organisation this either means nothing is happening or your service’s impact gets forgotten easily. Try to keep the library at the forefront of users minds by purposefully looking for regular information and distributing with an “I came across this and thought you might be interested” tone.

Ultimately we have to be more interested in our users and what they need than trying to get users interested in services or resources that they may not want or need now (or possible ever).

A big thank you to Terry Kendrick for delivering such an interesting session and to the Libraries for Nursing committee for sponsoring my attendance at the study day.

Twitter & the NHS

Yesterday I came across the #tweetwell campaign. NHS Trusts around the country were taking part in a tweetathon aimed at highlighting inappropriate uses of A&E departments. Members of each Trust’s communication team were live-tweeting from their A&E departments throughout the day to encourage members of the public to use the right NHS resource for their specific health issue. It sounded like a perfectly reasonable campaign, one which could hugely benefit both the public and the NHS. The public get better informed about which NHS resource is appropriate in which situation (for example, using walk-in clinics or NHS direct for minor issues rather than A&E departments); it highlights the complexity of issues dealt with by A&E departments on a daily basis; and the NHS would work more efficiently if the public knows about alternative health resources.

Confidentiality and consent

Most of the #tweetwell tweets included generic examples of common ailments and advice about where best to go for treatment or advice.

#tweetwell

This is a perfectly legitimate and helpful use of NHS twitter campaigns. These tweets are useful, sympathetic & give clear information.

Unfortunately it seems that some Trust representatives thought that it was acceptable to broadcast very specific individual examples of patients attending their A&E department (including patients’ ages) without linking to more appropriate resources or advising why A&E wasn’t right for them. Simply removing people’s names from tweets is not enough to protect confidentiality. Talking about the man involved in a chemical accident, broken bones from a fight, women asking for emergency contraception, and little boys with urine infections unnecessarily individualises the campaign and turns the tweet into a humiliation of that individual rather than being helpful advice for everyone.

I also questioned whether the consent of both patients and staff had been sought beforehand. I assume that the communications team were not asking members of the public if they could tweet their reason for coming to A&E. I also assume that the staff members being named in tweets along with their A&E stories were being asked their permission by their fellow colleagues but these are just assumptions. I asked a few times on Twitter if consent was being sought and was duly ignored.

Attitude and tone

And what of the professionalism of the tweets? Most of the tweets had a pleasant, advisory, sympathetic tone but others were not so nice. Often it seemed that tweeters forgot that they were broadcasting to the wider public and not having a private chat with colleagues. Some tweets were judgmental and patronising and not the kind of comments I would expect from a professional health service department. Many of the people protesting about the content and tone of some of the tweets were medical and nursing staff appalled that patients and potential patients were being tweeted about in an unprofessional way.

I complained to the communications department of two of the Trusts tweeting yesterday. One was Royal Salford NHS Foundation Trust (whose tweets I first came across and were the most offensive) and NHS Leeds (thinking that they were the leaders of the campaign). I spoke to a very pleasant man from NHS Leeds who took my comments seriously and shared his views. I have yet to hear anything from Royal Salford.

I think that the sharing of individual patient health complaints is unacceptable on twitter. I don’t think any patient should be discussed directly or indirectly via social media. It is not a private conversation. In the main most Trusts taking part in #tweetwell acted professionally, its just a shame that some let the side down.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: