Themes and Trends in Library and Information Research: CILIP in Kent Conference, 8th November 2017

This was a really interesting and enjoyable day – great talks, good discussion and lovely people – what more could you ask of a conference?

Hazel Hall was the first speaker, presenting on the topic of “The value of practitioner research, the impact of such research activity (on individual career paths as well as services provision) and current areas of research”. Quite a long title! Hazel has done a lot of research over the years (that might be an understatement), and has also worked with CILIP on research-related projects: LIS DREaM and LISRiLIES, so she was an ideal person to start off the conference.

The next talk was from Claire Sewell, who used to be a cataloguer before she turned to the dark side (like me). Claire currently works for the Office of Scholarly Communication at Cambridge University, training librarians in research support. Her presentation was entitled “Librarians as researchers: methods, lessons and trends”.

There is also a summary of Claire’s presentation on her blog.

Last up before lunch was Alison Hicks, who is a lecturer in the Department of Information Studies at UCL, but has only recently moved back to the UK from the US, and is also a PhD candidate at the Swedish School of Library and Information Science at University of Borås, so she had the added advantage of an international perspective! Unfortunately, I don’t have a link to her presentation, but I can report that it was mainly concerned with librarians’ research into information literacy (can you have too much of  a good thing?) and was both enjoyable and informative. She also recommended an article on information literacy that might be of interest: “Information literacy and literacies of information: a mid-range theory and model”, by A. Lloyd.

Lunch time!

After lunch, the sessions consisted of researchers talking about their research. The first speaker was Rebecca Daniels, formerly of University of the Creative Arts and now working at the V&A. Rebecca’s studied the information needs and behaviours of Fine Art students for her Master’s in Information and Library Management, and discovered some interesting things about how browsing the shelves relates to creativity theory, and lots more.

This was followed by a talk from Steve Dixon-Smith, who currently works at UCA, and has done research with students as co-researchers. The research was focused on the experiences of Black and ethnic minority students at UCA: “Co-researching beyond the category: an exploratory study into BME students”.  Some of the accounts given by students interviewed for the research were pretty shocking – not just in terms of racial but also class distinctions (or perceived distinctions) that can prevent students from seeking help from (e.g.) tutors (and probably library staff as well as we tend to be white and middle-class).

The final presentation of the day was given by Kirsty Wallis, now working at the University of Greenwich, who talked about her experience of visiting The University of Helsinki as part of their International Staff Exchange Week, funded by Erasmus. You can read Kirsty (and Ruth)’s article about what sounds like an excellent adventure in UKSG eNews.


I couldn’t let the mention of Finland (well, Helsinki) go by without a picture of a  Moomin!

Thank you to everyone who organised and participated in the conference.


A-roving we will go

Mill no. 4. Roving department, by Folsom, A. H...

A different kind of roving: Mill no. 4. Roving department, by Folsom, A. H. (Augustine H.) 2 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Last week, the some of the library staff in the Shiny Not-so-new Learning Centre had some training in roving – Roving for Service Excellence, no less. The training was delivered by Jigsaw@work®. We’ve actually been carrying out ‘roving, or roaming, or floorwalking, or whatever you like to call it, for a number of years now, on and off, but never with very much success overall. We work in a very large building, and, with the best will in the world, we don’t have enough staff to have library people roving at all times of the day, so students have been known to complain that they can’t find help when they need it. This is obviously not good, so we are looking again at how we rove, and also getting a ‘pod’ for each floor, where we can help students on the floors so library users don’t have to go all the way downstairs to the only point that is currently manned at all times during office hours.

It’s not completely certain how things are going to work out with the pods at the moment – questions such as ‘will we have access to the library management system?’, or even ‘will there be a PC on the pod?’, have not yet been answered. Hopefully there will at least be a phone there so we/library users can call the office or the helpdesk for help if necessary. We shall see.

Anyway, back to the roving. I have to say that the course exceeded my expectations. I wasn’t entirely sure what there was to say about roving that wasn’t obvious, but it turned out that there was quite a lot.

First of all we talked about the role of a ‘rover’, their purpose and why there is a need for them. This generated some interesting discussion about the visibility (or lack of) of library staff, particularly in a large building such as the one we work in, the problems library users face when trying to use the library and its resources, and so on. But, really, the point of roving can (arguably) be summarised as ‘taking the service to the customers’.  Also, we can use roving to promote and raise awareness of services, and help library users to make full use of the services we offer. So, roving seems like a pretty good idea so far.

A key point that came out of the whole day was that we have to see roving as the primary way of delivering our service(s) – not just an add-on, which is how it tends to be seen at the moment. People from teams other than the one team who currently rove attended the course, so it’ll be interesting to see whether or not they are more involved in roving next term, particularly in light of the above point.

We went on to list the benefits of roving in the library – for library users and for library staff. We listed such things as:

  • library users feel more confident, happier and become more self-sufficient
  • library users make better use of the library and its resources – get more out of the service
  • roving helps form better relationships between library users and library staff
  • roving helps library staff to better understand the needs of library users, and also how their ‘office’ job fits in to the wider work of the library
  • roving helps improve staff knowledge – if they don’t know the answer to a question they should find out the answer
  • roving relieves pressure on staffed points at busy times
  • library users’ experience of the library improves, they improve their knowledge and therefore will hopefully do better in their studies

Next, we looked at what we thought were the key skills and traits that are most useful for library staff doing roving. Sadly, I seem to have left my notes for this part at work. However, I think the list included such things as knowledge, friendliness, empathy, organisation, confidence, etc. Following that activity, we had to list what we thought might be some common barriers to roving. These range from a lack of confidence on the part of staff, to a perception that we have too many other things to do, to insufficient staffing, and a lack of support from managers.

Unsurprisingly, the discussion about possible barriers to roving  and ways in which we could break them down went on for quite a while. Unfortunately, a lot of us feel overloaded with office-based work at various times of the year (and all the time in some cases), and it’s then that roving can feel like something that gets in the way of other things we feel should take priority. The trainer’s argument was that roving is always a priority because it’s the  primary way in which we deliver our services to library users, so we should do it however busy we may be with office-based work. This is true – roving is important, and we need to see it as such and give it the time and effort necessary to do it properly. However, as we argued on the day, we also need the support of our line managers in terms of realising that we’re just not going to be able to do our other work at the same speed as we would previously have done. This may mean altering deadlines or being more understanding about why we haven’t been able to get things done. [It may also mean we have to manage our time better, I realise that.] Unfortunately, I don’t think this was really understood by the trainer – she thought we were talking about support for roving, which of course we need, but we also need support for our ‘back room’ work in the ways described above.

It’s difficult to find a balance. One way would be to allow more cross-team working, so that those going through busy times could be more practically supported by those who are going through a quiet patch. Each team within Library Services goes through peaks and troughs in terms of workloads, but at the moment we can’t help each other out efficiently and make the best use of staff time according to the situation because we don’t all have access to the necessary parts of the library management system. It can be quite frustrating at times, both for those who need help and for those who want to help!

The next part of the day took a new turn. Instead of focusing on roving as such, we talked more about people’s personalities and the ways in which these can affect our attitudes and approach to roving, and how different ‘types’ of people prefer to be approached (or not!) by roving library staff. We did a short test, which involved making a jigsaw and then found out what ‘type’ of person we are. One can, according to this particular form of self-assessment, have a red, yellow, green or blue personality type. [The test was like a much simpler version of the Myers-Briggs test.]

It was an interesting exercise, and the importance of different people’s personalities was not really something I’d previously thought about in connection with roving – at least not consciously – particularly in terms of library users and how they might prefer to be approached. We looked at each type of personality and how they might present themselves in the library, how they might act when needing or asking for help, and what the best way to approach them might be. For example, ‘red’ type people may not like to be approached at all, because they prefer to get on and do things themselves and not ‘waste time’ (in their perception) asking for help. On the other hand, ‘green’ people might be too shy to ask for help even when they need it. We also  talked about body language in relation to approaching and helping library users, for example how we can try to read it to assess when someone may need help or when they’re perfectly happy on their own.

It was all a lot more complicated than I expected it to be, but also a lot more interesting. As with all training, I just hope we can use it in practice and become more effective rovers.

Thing 2: Investigate some other blogs

There are a lot of people doing the 23 Things for CPD, so to avoid getting overwhelmed and spending my entire evening reading other people’s blogs I decided just to visit the people who’ve already been kind enough to  comment on my blogs regarding 23 Things.

So, I visited The Tidy Librarian (who I also know in real life) sarahgb, (who I ‘recognised’ from Twitter) Sophie Durcan,  Annie and antje31. I also follow other library blogs on a regular basis, on iGoogle. I should probably make a blogroll of library blogs for this blog, as well as for my other blog, and make the list on the blogrolls and iGoogle the same, before it all gets too confusing!

I enjoy reading other library-related blogs, although I sometimes get  the feeling that I’m way behind my peers in many aspects of professional life – another reason why I want to try and complete the 23 Things. It is of course good to know what’s going on out there in libraryland and I find that reading blogs (and Twitter, when I manage it) helps me to keep up a bit and feel a bit more part of the library community, such as it is.