Avoid Scheduling Conflicts
Certain commonsense planning went into setting up the office hours. Librarians were committed to guard office hours from other scheduling conflicts. Times were chosen when departmental faculty would be in their offices, and conflicts with major classes and departmental events were avoided.
Bring or Negotiate Equipment with Internet Access
Given the extensive electronic resources available, equipment needs were minimal. Only a computer with Internet access was essential. Having one’s own laptop was useful as one can be familiar with and control the programs on it. A phone and access to a printer was helpful, but as long as one could e-mail results, this was not essential. In one case, the classics librarian was using her own laptop and Ethernet card when the department went wireless. As a show of support for their librarian, the department purchased a wireless card for her use.
Market the Services
Once space, office hours, and equipment needs were set, the issue of marketing was the next essential task. As with any library service, visibility, e-mail and verbal reminders, pro-active attitude, and other forms of promotion are crucial. For example, one’s office hours should be mentioned at every bibliographic instruction session conducted for the department. The University of Calgary identified marketing as a key component of their success.
One librarian went so far as to create a “shingle” suspended from two wooden slats that could be taped to the door frame and extend out into the hall during office hours. A colorful graphic from a physics paper and the text “The Physics Librarian is IN” was easily created. The Institute of Physics Publishing (IOPP) badges, flashing the message “Physics turns me on,” were a perfect addition, calling attention to the sign without being obnoxious. The shingle caused more comment than any other promotional effort that was tried. The same librarian brought in a sturdy TV tray to place his laptop on so that he could keep an eye on the hallway. Using the existing desk would have meant having his back to the door. Standard enticements such as food, giveaways like the IOPP flashing badges, a name tag, occasional e-mail reminders, and increased visibility at departmental seminars and functions were all part of the promotion efforts.
Before discussing the specific results of onsite reference at UB, it is important to view this effort in the larger context of faculty and student outreach.
Libraries and Outreach
Patrons respond best to consistency and quality across the entire package of library services and resources. Such a multifaceted approach must take into account the culture and information needs of departments and individuals. At the risk of stating the obvious, exceptional customer service that provides the fast, accurate, and appropriately comprehensive answers or referrals to all patron requests should not be a goal or an occasional achievement, but should be standard operating procedure.
Onsite reference and instruction services are not a magic bullet, making all other forms of outreach redundant. Much has been written about outreach and faculty outreach in particular. Most of the successful models report the use of multiple, targeted techniques including invitations to library workshops and other events, creative orientation activities, involvement in as many departmental academic and social events as possible, visits to faculty and administrators in their offices, and participation in curriculum committees.
Outreach techniques the authors have found particularly effective are:
- attending seminars (especially given by one’s own faculty) and other departmental events at least once a month;
- maintaining a list of faculty teaching and research areas;
- exceeding even exceptional customer service standards for the first few requests from any new patron (first impressions count);
- keeping e-mail communications to a minimum, making them as brief and informative as possible;
- targeting graduate student groups, since graduate students teach undergraduate core courses in the departments, conduct their own research, and let other graduate students know where they received good service.
In the specific context of onsite reference services, an important component of being proactive is to seize every opportunity to engage people passing by while being sensitive to the discipline’s culture. In the case of physics, the technique of asking leading questions worked the best, especially for those who had “just stopped by to say hi.” Questions such as “Any problems using library services or resources?”; “Have you seen SciFinder Scholar yet?”; or “How do you find the information you need?” frequently led to meaningful interactions and demonstrations. Keeping an eye out for passersby and even standing out in the hall from time to time provided many opportunities.
Meanwhile classics faculty and students were more subdued, requiring face-to-face contact through more subtle means such as departmental graduate meetings, visits to faculty during their office hours, and attendance at the numerous off-campus gatherings hosted by faculty throughout the semester. There was little demand from faculty for library instruction, but many requests from graduate students. Therefore, a mid-semester workshop was conducted in the departmental library with every graduate student attending as well as two new faculty members.
Results
Only a few small signs of appreciation, at best, were expected, given the modest time commitment. The librarians were completely unprepared for the significant good will generated among the faculty by this single service. They spoke of it to colleagues and visitors with obvious pride. This one action communicated, in a way that years of other efforts had not, that the library really cares about this department and wants to help. One librarian received a warm, thank-you e-mail just for announcing the office hours before they had even begun. The long-term impact of this good will should not be underestimated. In the case of the physics department, the entire relationship to the library has been transformed into a far more positive one.
Another unexpected benefit was meaningful contact with students from other majors who happened to be taking department courses. In one notable case, an extensive demonstration of INSPEC was provided by the physics librarian to a computer science student with an interest in virtual reality. He had never heard of INSPEC before this and was amazed (as students so often are) at the high-quality, scholarly material so readily available in subscription databases.
It was clear from both verbal and nonverbal cues that many of the questions and interactions would never have taken place had so much as an e-mail or phone call been required. The most common opening line ran something like this, “I was just passing by and was wondering if… .”
Above all, the pilot program demonstrated that face-to-face encounters have significant advantages over e-mail and virtual interactions. The interactions were immediate, visual, high impact, tailored, and personal. The more relaxed atmosphere of a department office, as opposed to the typical open-reference-desk environment, permitted follow-up questions that often led to extended instructional opportunities. A casual question about finding an article could lead into a discussion of interlibrary loan, finding electronic full-text, and why everything is not available electronically. This could lead to a discussion of research interests and an opportunity to demonstrate a few key databases, retrieving citations of immediate interest.
In general, the number of quality interactions usually matched a “good” shift at the reference desk, one to two per hour after one factors out all the important but routine directional questions and equipment problems. Certainly there were slow weeks and never long lines outside the office. Still it is expected that in the long term, opportunities will continue as information needs arise.
Opportunities frequently have opened up beyond whatever office hour interactions occur. In one case, a librarian set up office hours in the department chair’s outer office area with an accompanying e-mail announcement from the chair to the entire department. Though only a few students took advantage of the office hours, the librarian noted a marked increase in the number of students from that particular department e-mailing requests and setting up appointments in the science and engineering library. The announcement by the chair had given the librarian new visibility and “imprimatur.” In other cases, it has led to sitting in on search committee interviews, positions on library development committees, invitations to important networking social events, and even an opportunity for joint publication with a faculty member. Clearly, evaluating onsite office hours only on the basis of number of transactions per hour is inadequate and misleading.
Conclusions
Though it would be false to say each attempt was uniformly successful, overall these efforts have proved to be sustainable. As long as one starts with just a few hours each week and has management support, the impact on one’s schedule is not dramatic. The librarians at UB have been in the process of combining service points, partly to free up staff time for departmental outreach. Students and faculty are also encouraged to set up appointments so that high-quality, subject-specific consultations can be provided.
The visibility and interactions resulting from being in the department far exceed any benefit from sitting in the libraries’ regular offices. The real scheduling problem is not the few hours of departmental reference, but rather the many hours of meetings in a typical week.
With academics usually needing background information and a limited number of good references in an initial consultation, there have been few problems using only electronic sources. It is always possible to arrange follow-up consultations back at the library.
For all of the advances in virtual reference-service delivery technology, face-to-face interactions should not be abandoned. Onsite departmental reference services are not the complete answer for patron outreach. It works best within the larger context of faculty and student outreach activities that intentionally build long-term relationships with the department, such as attendance at faculty seminars and departmental events. Nor does it replace e-mail, phone consultations, instant messaging, general exceptional customer service, and library-based reference services and appointments.
However, in the right settings, onsite reference has been the single most effective service for communicating a direct interest in the information needs of both faculty and students in a department. Librarians generate good will and open the door for additional interactions by spending even a few hours “onsite.” The keys are to be persistent, seize every opportunity, be patient, and keep trying various strategies until something works.
Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank Margie Wells, director of Public Services, and Austin Booth, director of Collections, both of the Arts and Sciences Libraries, University at Buffalo, for their encouragement to pursue innovative projects. This article was enriched by the many helpful conversations with other University at Buffalo subject-specialist librarians piloting onsite departmental reference services including Nancy Schiller (engineering); Glendora Johnson-Cooper (African American studies); and Chris Hollister (Career Services Center).
Submitted for review February 10, 2005; revised and accepted for publication January 26, 2006.