LibrariesProvide systems and services to meet the information needs of differing groupsLargest groupsBaby boomersCohort #1Cohort #2MillennialsScreenagers

Who Are They?Baby BoomersActual boom in births occurred between 1946 - 19641950s - Time of prosperity1960s & 1970s - Time of social upheaval Comprise largest part of workforce (45%)

Who Are They?Baby BoomersCohort #1Born 1946 - 1954 ExperimentalIndividualistsFree spirited Social cause oriented

Cohort #2Born 1955 - 1964Less optimisticDistrust of governmentGeneral cynicism

Information PerspectivesBaby BoomersValue authoritative informationInvolved in information seekingValue library as placeUse technology as toolPersonalized service

Who Are They? MillennialsMillennials / NextGens / EchoBoomers / Gen YBorn between 1979 & 199475 80 MillionGenerational divide13-28 year oldsBy 2010 will outnumber Baby Boomers

Who are they?ScreenagersYoungest members of Millennial Generation Term coined in 1996 by RushkoffUsed here for 12-18 year oldsAffinity for electronic communication

Information PerspectivesMillennialsInformation is informationMedia formats dont matterVisual learnersProcess immediatelyDifferent research skills

Information-seekers PreferencesIMLS-funded projectsHow individuals find information to meet their needsWhy information seekers do not choose to use library services first for their information needsHow libraries can develop services and systems to meet the needs of information seekers

Sense-Making the Information Confluence: The Whys and Hows of College and University User Satisficing of Information Needs

Baby Boomers:Convenient & AuthoritativeYeah, well, actually I was going to be different and not say Google. I do use Google, but [I also] use two different library homepages and I will go into the research databases do a search there and then I will end [up] limiting myself to the articles that are available online.

[Google] is user friendly library catalog is not.

before I came to the library to use the MLA database, I did a Google search and it turns out that there is a professor at Berkeley who keeps a really, really nice and fully updated page with bibliographic references.I'm suspicious of people who are publishing on-line because usually the peer review is much less rigorous.

I'm not trust(ing) everything that's on the Internet

Baby Boomers:Did not use the libraryIf I have a student mention a book and I'm not familiar with that book, Amazon.com gives me a brief synopsis, reader reviews of the book, so it's a good, interesting first source to go to for that kind of information.

before I came to the library to use the MLA database, I did a Google search and it turns out that there is a professor at Berkeley who keeps a really, really nice and fully updated page with bibliographic references.

Millennials:Convenient & Quick

Also I just go ask my dad, and he'll tell me how to put in a fence, you know? So why sort through all this material when he'll just tell me

you need to know which database with abstracting, indexing Google, I don't have to know, I go to one spot.

first thing I do, is, I go to Google I don't go into the [library] system unless I have to because there's like 15 logins, you have to get into the research databases. Then it takes you out of that to [the local consortium]

I had the Google tool bar, tool bar on my browser. I dont even have to go to a search engine anymore. I mean it is literally one tab down

Millennials:Did not use the libraryThe library is a good source if you have several months.

Hard to find things in library catalog.

Tried [physical] library but had to revert to online library resources. Yeah, I don't step in the library anymore better to read a 25-page article from JSTOR than 250-page book.

Sometimes content can be sacrificed for format.

Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, & Librarian Perspectives

Non-User (Screenagers):Stereotypes and IndependenceBecause, I mean, once they do their famous point, its just like you dont want to go near them again.

I wouldnt really trust my librarian. I trust Google.

Plus I think the IMing kind of gives it a cold feeling to it when you can actually sit and talk to someone face-to-face you kind of can see if they care or not

Non-User (Screenagers):Security, Accuracy, and Speed

I dont usually like to talk to like people I dont know on the Internet.

Im not going to go get tutored on the Internet by somebody who might be some psycho serial killer out there when I could get personal help from my home and people in my community.

A librarians trying to do like 15 of those conversations at once theyre going to mix up replies

I dont really want to take the time actually to type out, like explaining what Im doing, what I need it for, what type of sources I need.

Non-User (Millennials):Preference for Face-to-FaceJust generally, I would talk to somebody in person.

I prefer to interact with a librarian that I know.

I would just go, um, to the library website

I go to Google Scholar as well and Inquestia.com which I belong to.

Non-User (Millennials): Privacy and Technology ConcernsAnd there could be a chance that [the librarian might say] This guys teaching these classes and he doesnt know this?!

I was worried that in some way, you know, if the Department would get a report about what questions [I was asking], you know what I mean

Would the connection be good enough to facilitate real-time chat?

VRS Users (Millennials):Convenience and IndependenceId rather go two feet to my computer than a couple of miles to the library.

I always want to do everything myself I dont want help.

VRS Users (Millennials): CollaborationIts helpful to have another person looking for you so you get twice as much information which is quicker.

they know how to do it and know where to look and you dont necessarily know.

VRS Users (Millennials): Personalized ServiceI was on the site at 2 or 3 in the morning and it felt personalized.

Instead of having to write everything down you have the transcript of the conversation and all the links from the conversation in a permanent email.

Users (Boomers & Millennials): Ability to Multi-TaskModerator: Okay, so theres some consensus on that that it allows you to multitask?

Multiple Participants: Yes.

VRS Users (Millennials):DistrustTo me it wasnt that much more than any other search engine.

Im not sure how much attention the person was paying attention to the actual question or the key words in the actual question.

they were just Googling stuff as far as I could see.

I feel like I get better results when Im, like with the person.

Two ViewsUsersHighly value Librarians attitude & personal qualities Some value interpersonal aspects more than receipt of information

LibrariansMore likely to value content, transfer of informationAlso value relationship qualities (but to a lesser degree)

Interpersonal Communication Analysis: ResultsRelational FacilitatorsInterpersonal aspects of the chat conversation that have a positive impact on the librarian-client interaction and that enhance communication.

Relational BarriersInterpersonal aspects of the chat conversation that have a negative impact on the librarian-client interaction and that impede communication.

Facilitators DifferencesMillennials (n=296) vs. Adults (n=76)Lower averages (per transcript)Thanks 59% (175) vs. 75% (57)Self Disclosure 42% (125) vs. 63% (48)Closing Ritual 38% (111) vs. 50% (38) Lower averages (per occurrence)Seeking reassurance 56% (166) vs. 68% (52)Polite expressions 30% (90) vs. 33% (25)(n=372 transcripts)

Facilitators DifferencesMillennials (n=296) vs. Adults (n=76)Higher averages (per occurrence)Agree to suggestion 64% (188) vs. 47% (36)Lower case 43% (126) vs. 16% (12)Greeting Ritual 24% (70) vs. 16% (12)Admit lack knowledge 20% (58) vs. 7% (5)Interjections 20% (58) vs. 7% (5)Slang 9% (27) vs. 3% (2)(n=372 transcripts)

Barriers DifferencesMillennials (n=296) vs. Adults (n=76)Higher averages (per transcript) for:Abrupt Endings 37% (109) vs. 28% (21)Impatience 4% (13) vs. 1% (1)Rude or Insulting 3% (9) vs. 0

(n=372 transcripts)

Multiple Demands on the Library

What Now? Three Opportunity Areas:

ContentAccessServices

1. Content What can information providers do? Tailor contentShape collectionsMore choicesMake discovery easy

1. ContentWhat information providers are doing today:Network level servicesDiscovery24x7 accessOnline contentIncorporating more relevant contentEnabling user contributed content

2. Access What can information providers do? Expand search toolsExpose library content through both:Library interfacesNon-library interfacesProvide access anytime, anywhere

2. Access What information providers are doing today: Broadcast & federated searchWorldCat LocalPartnershipsWeb servicesMobile interfaces

3. Services What can information providers do? Integrate physical spaces with virtual servicesProvide a comfortable environmentSupport collaborationUpdate infrastructureProvide media literacy skillsRedesign the role of the librarian

3. Services What information providers are doing today: Virtual reference Social networking toolsProfilesUser contributed content TagsReviewsListsRSS feeds / alertsRecommendationsCommunity toolsCollaboration

What We LearnedLibraries are trusted sources of information Search engines are trusted about the samePeople care about the quantity and quality of information they findThey like convenience and speed They do not view paid information as more accurate than free information

What We LearnedThe image of libraries isBOOKSPatrons do not think of the library as an important source of electronic information!

What can we do?Create a library experience which matches the experience of the web Easy search functionalityIntegrated library search for all sourcesSocial networking softwareRecommender serviceClick-through to online sourcesPoint of need reference servicesInstant messaging reference servicesCustomizable library portals

University of Washington on WorldCat.org

Holdings: Local, Group, GlobalSummit collectionsUniv Washington collectionsWorldCat

Detailed record item held by UW

Detailed record request item

Request handled locally

Item not held by UW

Item not held by UWor Summit

Article citations

Article citations

ConclusionExpectations not isolated Lead the wayBy understanding them, we can serve everyone better

Additional ResourcesBoomer Nation: The Largest and Richest Generation Ever and how it Changed America, S. Gillon. New York: Free Press, 2004. Generations: The History of Americas Future, 1584-2069, N. Strauss & W. Howe. New York: Morrow, 1991. Generations at Work, S. Luck. http://dps.dgs.virginia.gov/Forum2006/Presentations/S201%20PPSluck%20Generations.pptGrowing Up Digital, D. Tapscott. www.growingupdigital.comMillennial Behaviors and Demographics. Sweeney,R. http://library1.njit.edu/staff-folders/sweeney/Millennials/Article-Millennial-Behaviors.doc Millennial Net Values: Disconnects between Libraries and the Information Age Mindset, R. Mcdonald & C. Thomas. http://dscholarship.lib.fsu.edu/general/4/Millennials Rising: The Next Generation, W. Howe & N. Strauss. New York: Random House, 2000. Net Generation Students and Libraries, J. Lippincott. In Educating the Net Generation, Educause 2005. Screenagers and Live Chat Reference: Living Up to the Promise, M.L. Radford & L.S. Connaway. (February, 2007). Scan, 26(6), 31-39.

Special ThanksRutgers University and OCLC Grant Project TeamMarie L. Radford, co-investigator Jocelyn DeAngelis Williams Susanna Sabolsci-BorosPatrick ConferTimothy DickeyDavid DragosVickie KozoMary Anne ReillyJulie Strange

Jasmine de Gaia, OCLC

NotesThis presentation is one of the outcomes from the project Sense-Making the Information Confluence: The Whys and Hows of College and University User Satisficing of Information Needs." Funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services, Ohio State University, and OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc., the project was implemented by Brenda Dervin (Professor of Communication and Joan N. Huber Fellow of Social & Behavioral Science, Ohio State University) as Principal Investigator; and Lynn Silipigni Connaway (Senior Research Scientist) and Chandra Prahba (Former Research Scientist), as Co-Investigators. More information can be obtained at: http://imlsosuoclcproject.jcomm.ohio-state.edu/

NotesThis presentation is one of the outcomes from the project, Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives. Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University, & OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc., the project is being implemented by Marie L. Radford (Associate Professor, Rutgers University) and Lynn Silipigni Connaway (Senior Research Scientist, OCLC) as Principal Investigators. More information can be obtained at: http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicity/default.htm

Questions and CommentsLynn Silipigni Connawayconnawal@oclc.org

Slides available at project web site: http://www.oclc.org/research/presentations

Baby Boomers Preferences & Characteristics (Luck, 2006; Gillon, 2004)

Optimistic about life and the futurePersonal Gratification Desire for self-gratificationLonging for personal & spiritual growthWork/Job for lifeAmerican DreamSelf-absorbed center of attentionTeam OrientationHealth, Wellness, and Youth InvolvementDrivenWilling to go the extra mileMay put process ahead of resultOverly sensitive to feedbackJudgmental of others seeing things differentlyMillennials Preferences & Characteristics Sweeney, 2006More Choices & SelectivityExperiential & Exploratory LearnersFlexibility & ConveniencePersonalization & CustomizationImpatientLess Attention to Spelling, GrammarPractical, Results OrientedMulti-taskers & Collaborators

Younger members most likely to display Millennial characteristics

Human resourcesExperts in academic communityColleaguesSubscribed services and electronic databases (Prefer to Google for credibility)PsychInfoAmazon.comGoogle for personal informationInternet and GoogleEasyDatabasesLexis-NexisOhioLinkBookstoresAmazon.comPersonal libraryHuman resourcesProfessorsDadPeersOther experts

Human resourcesDadParentsProfessorsGoogleOnline EncyclopediaJSTORAcademic databasesLexis NexisPersonal library

Ethnicity-Non-users18 Caucasian (45%) 7 African- American (17.5%) 6 Hispanic/Latino (15%) 2 Asian (5%) 7 Missing (17.5%) Gender-Non-users23 Female (57.5%) 17 Male (42.5%) 2 with VRS users

Ethnicity-Users15 Caucasian (68%) 4 Asian (18%) 2 African- American (9%) 1 Hispanic/Latino (5%) Gender-Users13 Male (59%) 9 Female (41%)Librarian stereotypesBecause, I mean, once they do their famous point, its just like you dont want to go near them again

Preference for Independent Information Seeking I wouldnt really trust my librarian. I trust Google. I find something on Google and theres enough information on it and it seems logical, Ill just go with it. Especially if its something like youre doing a paper in class and you already know the subject pretty well and all youre looking for are sources to validate what you, youre putting like your argument on paper. You validate your argument. I really dont double check it. Im like well this is what Im trying to say. This is the source Im going to use. But if its like a research paper, Ill double check my sources a couple of times just to make sure its the right information.

Preference for FtF interaction:Plus I think the IMing kind of gives it a cold feeling to it like, you know. They really dont care. Theyre just doing their job. When you can actually sit and talk to someone face-to-face you kind of can see if they care or not, you know. If they dont care, youre like Well, youre not going to help me very much anyway and you can move on. But the IM, you can keep trying to ask the same person the same question like over and over. And if they dont care, theyre just going to keep ignoring you.

Privacy/Security ConcernsI dont usually like to talk to like people I dont know on the internet. Im not going to go get tutored on the Internet by somebody who I personally dont know who might be some psycho serial killer out there when I could get personal help from my home and people in my community.

Concern for Accuracy of InfoA librarians trying to do like 15 of those conversations at once theyre going to mix up replies, mix up the what and it it, I just dont think itd be a very applicable

Takes too longI dont really want to take the time actually to type out, like explaining what Im doing, what I need it for, what type of sources I need.

Preference for Face-to-Face communicationI havent talked to her yet but if I had a question I would probably contact her. Because she seemed really knowledgeable. Just generally, I would talk to somebody in person. I prefer the face-to-face because what Ive found in the past is that what they do is they just turn to their computer and did exactly what I was doing but they then show me how they got that informationRelationship: I prefer to interact with a librarian that I know. So, I will use his card and either e-mail him directly or call him directly. Because for me, its hit or miss with random librarians.

Utilize Internet Tools for Information: Library Website; Google.

Library Website: I would just go, um, to the library website, put in maybe try searching some things, some titles, some names. Just try to find as much information as I can.

Google: I go to Google Scholar as well and Inquestia.com which I belong to.

Fear of appearing stupid, or being negatively evaluated by the librarian. And there could be a chance that This guys teaching these classes and he doesnt know this?!

Privacy concerns/ transcripts revealed to professorsI was worried that in some way, you know, if the Department would get a report about what questions, you know what I mean.

Technology Concerns: Would the connection be good enough to facilitate real-time chat? Sometimes I may not have whatever plug-in is required for that. So, Id be concerned.

Convenience: Id rather go two feet to my computer than a couple of miles to the library. My computer is always right next to me so I didnt have to get up and walk in the heat and go inthe information is right there. I think thats great. It was good, it was great, its the next best thing since sliced bread for me.

Info. Independence: I always want to do everything myself I dont want help. Theres really only two options, for me its go online and look it up myself or go to the library.

Collaborative: I could just ask the question and have them look up the reference and read through articles instead of me having to look through like a million Googled articles Its helpful to have another person looking for you so you get twice as much information which is quicker.

Knowledgeable Service Provider: Having them do something is a lot like they know how to do it and know where to look and you dont necessarily know.

Pleasant Interpersonal Environment: I was on the site at 2 or 3 in the morning and it felt personalized. I like the fact that the person I was chatting with was constantly in touch with me.

Transcript: Instead of having to write everything down as youre having your conversation, and having to remember everything, you have the transcript of the conversation and all the links from the conversation in a permanent email.

Allows muti-taskingModerator: Okay, so theres some consensus on that that it allows you to multitask Multiple Participants: Yes.

Just another Search Engine: To me it wasnt that much more than any other search engine. It was just a little maybe more intelligent because youve got another person using the search engine on the other side, but it wasnt anything I could not have found myself.

Generic Responses: Im not sure how much attention the person I was asking questions to was paying attention to the actual question or the key words in the actual question.

Distrust Information: I dont know how good they think their resources are. I didnt think they were going to come back with information, they were just Googling stuff as far as I could see. I dont see that you can guarantee any sort of minimal level of service with this type of set up.

Face-to-Face interaction preferred: I feel like I get better results when Im like with the person. At least in person I can judge you almost, well, not judge but I can kind of measure the results Im going to get. Online you dont knowit could be the first 5 Google hits they got and are giving back to me.

Population of 500,000+ QuestionPoint VRS sessionsIn-depth analysis of n=850, random sampleCollected from 07/2004 to 10/2006Sessions coded as Millennial (secondary school or collegiate) n=296Sessions coded as adult for comparison, n=76Analysis of relational facilitators and barriers reveal different communication patterns

Dramatically simplified registration: only requires username, password & email addressAbility to create customized profiles, including:NameAddressOccupationPhotoWebsiteLinks to other social sites e.g. MySpace or Flickr accountsLinks to personal listsList interests linked to other people with similar interests

Summary page of lists, both your personal lists and other peoples lists that you want to keep

Sample list of your favorite books. Some features:Format the view (compact, covers only, etc.)Sort the list (by date, author, title, pub date, etc.)Add notes or commentsBranding Replaces Find in a Library with local branding in the header Ranking algorithm adds weight for institution holdings and holdings of one or more groups profiled in WorldCat

Inherits all WorldCat.org functionality (facets, sort, multilingual interfaces etc.)

Also notice that there is an entry for an article citation in the result set. Part of the platform service that is inherited in WorldCat Local.

Holdings in brief result set

Same result set as would be returned in WorldCat.org, except that the display is customized for the University of Washington.

We show those items held by UW first in the result set (most relevant to least relevant)Then the holdings of items not held by UW, but held in Summit UWs primary consortium of academic and community college libraries in Oregon and Washington (again, most relevant to least relevant)Items held outside of UW and Summit by other WorldCat libraries (most relevant to least relevant).Item availability real time Sending a query to the Summit union catalog and returning results to the end user, showing UW results at the top of the item availability section, followed alphabetically by all other Summit libraries that own the item.

Request item In this case, all requests for returnables that are held by UW or another Summit library are sent to Summit for processing.Item availability real time Sending a query to the Summit union catalog and returning results to the end user, showing UW results at the top of the item availability section, followed alphabetically by all other Summit libraries that own the item.

Request item In this case, all requests for returnables that are held by UW or another Summit library are sent to Summit for processing.The user is taken to the request item page in Summit

Bibliographic citation passed through to Summit, so user only has to authenticate to complete the transaction.

Where they are prompted, as they are accustomed to, for their affiliation. Then their username, netID, and pickup location.

A hold will be placed against the UW circ system, if they hold the item and it is available. Otherwise, if the item is held by a Summit library and at least one copy is available, Summit will process a direct consortial borrowing request.

Item availability real time Sending a query to the Summit union catalog and returning results to the end user, showing UW results at the top of the item availability section, followed alphabetically by all other Summit libraries that own the item.

Request item In this case, all requests for returnables that are held by UW or another Summit library are sent to Summit for processing.