Library User Metaphors and Services: How Librarians look at their Users 9783110418545, 9783110419658

Citation preview

Carl Gustav Johannsen Library User Metaphors and Services

Current Topics in Library and Information Practice

Carl Gustav Johannsen

Library User Metaphors and Services How Librarians Look at Their Users

ISBN 978-3-11-041965-8 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-041854-5 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-041856-9 ISSN 2191-2742 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2015 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Typesetting: Michael Peschke, Berlin Printing: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Acknowledgements This book is very much a product of the stimulating and open intellectual environment of the Royal School of Library and Information Science at the University of Copenhagen where I have been privileged to work for many years. Among my many remarkable colleagues who have contributed, directly or indirectly, I will especially thank Camilla Moring, Birger Hjørland, Casper Hvenegaard Rasmussen, Dorte Skot-Hansen, Gitte Balling, Hans Dam Christensen, Hans Elbeshausen, Henrik Jochumsen, Lennart Bjørneborn, Martin Dyrbye, Nan Dahlkild, Nanna Kann-Rasmussen, Niels Dichow Lund, and Volkmar Engerer for encou­ ragement and support. Hans Elbeshausen and Volkmar Engerer, especially, have delivered valuable inputs concerning the section on metaphor theory. The staff of the university library and especially Karen Margrethe Ørnstrup and Lisbeth Rasmussen have also delivered valuable inputs. Research consultant Ragnhild Riis has contributed with valuable managerial and editing services. I have also been fortunate to be part of a useful national network of library professionals from academic and public libraries who have also contributed in different ways. Here I will especially mention: Claus Vesterager Pedersen, Jens Bennedsen, Laila Westerberg, Michael Cotta-Schønberg, Michael Moos-Bjerre, Gert Poulsen, Niels-Henrik Gylstorff, Peter Søndergaard, Rene Steffensen, Steen Bille Larsen and Svend Larsen. Furthermore, I have been fortunate to be a part of an inspiring international network of library scientists among whom I would like to thank especially: Ane Landøy (Norway), David Baker (UK), Hans-Christoph Hobohm (Germany), Peter Hernon (USA), and Ragnar Audunson, Sunniva Evjen and Svanhild Aabø also from Norway. For continuing interest in the project and support I would like to thank the publisher, De Gruyter, and especially Christina Lembrecht, Claudia Heyer, and Anja Weisenseel. I would also like to warmly thank the Danish Lilian and Dan Finks Foundation for sponsoring the book project. Book projects cannot be completed without sacrifices on the home front. Here I would like to thank for patience and support: my grandchild, Clara, my son Anders, my daughter Rikke, and my girlfriend Gitte. Østerbro, Copenhagen, Denmark September 2015

Contents Acknowledgements  v 1 Introduction  1 1.1 User segments and segmentation  2 1.2 User metaphors  2 1.3 Research questions  7 1.4 The basic structure of the book  8 2 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments  10 Approach 1: Library usage variables  14 2.1 Approach 2: Socio-demographic categories  17 2.2 2.3 Approach 3: Psychographic, lifestyle, and similar criteria  21 2.4 Approach 4: Combinations of library use, socio-demographic categories, and psychographic and lifestyle based criteria  25 2.5 Approach 5: Metaphors and user images  29 2.6 Summary  31 3

Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts and idea transfer in organizations  32 3.1 Language oriented metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson)  35 3.2 Organization oriented metaphor theory (Røvik & Morgan)  43 3.2.1 Metaphor theory according to Røvik and other organizational scientists   43 3.2.2 Morgan’s “images”  47 Discourses and gazes  49 3.3 Organizational idea handling (Røvik)  53 3.4 3.5 Summary  58 4 Five library user metaphors  60 The citizen  62 4.1 4.2 The client  69 4.2.1 Immigrants  79 4.2.2 Digital illiterates  93 The customer  97 4.3 The guest  102 4.4

viii 

 Contents

4.5 The partner  108 4.6 Summary  124 5 Library services and user metaphors  126 Community information (public information, homework assistance for 5.1 pupils, and information literacy courses)  127 5.2 Borrow-a-prejudice campaigns  131 5.3 Digital reading groups  133 5.4 Fee-based services  135 5.5 Guest-host services  137 5.6 Mystery shopping  140 5.7 Online message services  143 5.8 Staff-less libraries  144 5.9 Summary  146 6 Library user metaphors and the experience society  148 The experience society  149 6.1 6.2 Summary  156 7 Conclusions  158 7.1 Research question 1  158 7.2 Research question 2  158 7.3 Research question 3  159 7.4 Research question 4  159 7.5 Research question 5  161 Research question 6  161 7.6 References  163

1 Introduction My interest in library users and user concepts started at the beginning of the 1980s. It was at a time when library professionals, library studies teachers and researchers were eagerly occupied with helping their users to satisfy not only their cultural and informational but also, in particular, their social needs. The typical user, referred to in the community information literature of the early 1980s, apparently, was a weak person with few and meagre economic and social resources. What he or she needed was, first and foremost, help and assistance in solving his or her own fundamental, material social and economic problems. The point of view was highly inspired by the famous quotation from Bertolt Brecht’s (1898–1956) Dreigroschenoper: “Erst kommt das Fressen, dann kommt die Moral.” [“First food, then morals”]. As to the moral and the esthetic aspects it was at the time widely believed that the typical user was often not even capable of analyzing his or her own informational and cultural needs correctly. What the user thought he or she needed in terms of entertainment and romantic story telling and fiction was, according to the dominant paradigms of those days, based upon objectively wrong assumptions and theoretical frameworks. Luckily, however, the librarian was able to see through the numerous mystifications produced by the commercial mass media and therefore also able to determine the proper, objective information and literary needs of their beguiled and weak user. Later, in the mid 1980s and in the 1990s, the typical user had obviously changed a lot; he or she had now become a demanding customer who needed entertaining experiences and fast and user friendly access to information. The idea of objective information needs and interests had also, apparently, evaporated from the vocabulary of many librarians and library studies researchers. I also found that similar thoughts appeared not only in my home country of Denmark but internationally too, at least in the Western hemisphere. The two examples mentioned above illustrate the emergence of two impor­ tant user metaphors: the user as a weak client and the user as a demanding customer. Later I began, more systematically, to collect information on characte­ ristics and shifts in the way the library profession, and especially public library professionals and researchers had perceived, looked upon, conceptualized, and created metaphors about their users from the middle and late 1970s – when my firsthand acquaintance with professional library literature started – until today.

2 

 Introduction

1.1 User segments and segmentation I have chosen the two terms, metaphors and images, to catch the characteristic traits of the pictures that professionals typically have and historically have had about their users. Similar concepts and terms, which have been suggested by sociologists and adopted by many, are discourses and gazes. Besides terms like metaphors and images, professionals also use a number of other and different types of words to characterize and describe their users or to specify distinct categories and sub-categories or segments of users. These concepts can be organized into four distinctive groups: 1. library usage oriented categories such as “users” and “non-users”, “physical” and “virtual visitors”, and the like 2. segments based on traditional socio-demographic criteria (e.g., age, sex, education, job, income, etc.) such as children, females, students, immigrants etc. 3. segments based on lifestyle and psychographics and attitude oriented criteria e.g. persona groups and, finally, 4. segments based on combinations of the categories 1 to 3. Often, advanced statistical software packages containing cluster analysis programs are used when identifying such category 4 segments, often based on data from questionnaires covering a broad spectrum of questions on use patterns, age, gender, cultural habits, cultural preferences, and lifestyle variables. Later, I will discuss in further detail the weaknesses and strengths of the different notions mentioned above.

1.2 User metaphors The prime subject of this book, user metaphors, however, are in a number of respects different from the four segmentation approaches just mentioned. First, most of the mentioned segments are based on much more precise definitions and demarcations than the softer metaphors used by professionals. That should be no surprise since a metaphor is just defined as a word or phrase indicating something different from, though related to, the literal meaning. The common metaphor “She has a heart of gold”, for example, obviously does not offer any valid medical description of the given person’s heart. However, the sentence anyhow communicates something important about the given person’s mental characteristics.



User metaphors 

 3

Library user metaphors, however, differ somewhat from at least some other metaphors. The heart metaphor mentioned above is, for example, characterized by a considerable distance between the literal meaning of the human heart and gold. When using a customer or a client or a citizen metaphor about library users, the distance between the literal and the metaphoric meaning is, apparently, much smaller. Even if we include the library user as a guest or as a partner, the distance between the literal and the metaphorical meaning seems to be quite moderate. In practice, however, according to at least some of the library staff at a Danish public library who tested the guest metaphor in 2011–2012 (Johannsen 2014b), the application of the guest metaphor was perceived by many librarians as a quite radical and also as a controversial step.

The five metaphors I have identified and selected five user metaphors or user images which later will be presented in a more detailed form. Here, only the headlines are presented: 1. Library users as citizens 2. Library users as clients 3. Library users as customers 4. Library users as guests, and 5. Library users as partners As already mentioned, some metaphors like the resource weak client and the demanding customer have spread and flourished at different times and to a varying extent in different countries. Some differences, certainly, derive from different national cultures. In other cases it has been the type of library that seems to have played the decisive role. It appears, for example, that some metaphors and their related management concepts which have been quite influential in public libraries have had a minimal impact on practices in academic libraries, and vice versa. A recent example illustrating this point could be the guest concept in Denmark, which has affected many Danish public libraries since 2010, appa­ rently without influencing the country’s academic libraries.

Customers and clients In other cases, an almost historical sequence of developments seems to have taken place. In the 1970s and 1980s, the client metaphor was particularly popular among library professionals and heavily used in many countries. However, in the 1980s the customer really became visible in the library context. It is interesting to notice that the two concepts, client and customer, were quite different. They were

4 

 Introduction

also based on entirely different views of the world. Later, after 2000, the partner emerged as a new and interesting user category in many public libraries. But according to which underlying societal trends and mechanisms? Which sectors and which dynamics could make such shifts – like that from clients to customers –understandable? The question is interesting but also complex and difficult to answer outright. Because two or more trends appear at the same time, there is no guarantee that there exists a causal relationship between them. In general, however, the changes could be related to major trends operating outside the library sector as parts of global developments or at least developments happening in the Western world. The spread of the customer metaphor, for example, is often interpreted as an integral part of the New Public Management trend in the public sector in several Western societies in the 1980s (Clarke & Newman 1997; Ferlie et al. 1996; Lane 2000; Levy 2010; Mayne & Zapico-Goni 1997; Pollitt 1990, 1998). Similarly, the client metaphor of the 1970s and early 1980s was, to a certain degree, a result of political radicalism and socialist influences following the 1968 political unrest and the subsequent development of various countercultures. Finally, the partner concept seems mostly to be influenced and inspired by technological developments within information technology and communication and internet use. The Norwegian sociologist Professor Kjell Arne Røvik (1956–), in particular, has contributed interesting theories and research on how popular management ideas and organizational recipes travel and spread among organizations and institutions (Røvik 1996, 2002, 2011). Although it seems to be evident that libraries and the library profession have also been influenced by a number of economic, technological, and poli­­tical global trends affecting the nature of the interrelationship between library users and the library staff, analyses of the profession’s application of metaphors about its users have not played a particularly significant role in the library literature. This does not mean that the profession has not been interested in or that it has not paid attention to and prioritized its users. There has certainly been much focus on both user satisfaction and understanding the needs and wants of the library users. However, the sector has apparently been more interested in the other side of the question, namely, how particular users perceive libraries, librarians, and library services instead of reflecting on how the profession itself has looked upon its users (e.g., Balling, Henrichsen & Skouvig 2008; Evjen & Audunson 2009; Radford & Radford 2003; Shaw 2010; Thorhauge 2007). A recent literature review (Vassilakaki & Moniarou-Papaconstantinou 2014, 355) states that “The library and information science (LIS) profession has for a long time been concerned with its image.” The article further emphasizes that the question of how the profession



User metaphors 

 5

is perceived has become even more dominant in todays’ society. Vassilakaki and Moniarou-Papaconstantinou reveal that 60 papers, published from 2000 to 2013 actually dealt with the librarian’s image. The earlier library literature from 1985 to 2005 on the image of information professionals was reviewed by Salinero and Grogg (2005). Indeed, to deal with the vital questions about how users – and non-users – think about libraries and librarians, sophisticated survey methods have been applied; instead of asking directly about a user’s satisfaction with different aspects of the library’s services, it has been proposed to ask him or her with which car brand – a Mercedes Benz, a Skoda, or a Volvo – he or she would compare the public library. The purpose of such unusual questioning techniques has certainly been to identify the library’s real image in the eyes of its users. Sometimes studies have focused on particular user segments, for example, Muddiman (2000), who focused on how disadvantaged groups and communities use and perceive the public library. In this book, literature on both aspects: (1) how the profession looks upon its users, and (2) how the users look upon libra­ ries, will be dealt with, although the first aspect, how the profession looks upon its users, will be the primary focus. Another issue which has interested some researchers and librarians concerns the different metaphors which libraries and librarians have applied since the nineteenth century to market and promote libraries to both their users and to other external actors. A very interesting article by Joan Giesecke (2010) reviews the many metaphorical efforts in both academic and public libraries to change the image of libraries and make users and non-users think differently about the library. Most often, the primary purpose has been to substitute a less attractive metaphor, such as the library as a “warehouse” or “museum for books,” with a more modern and favorable alternative. Broader changes in society have often motivated such efforts. Numerous terms are, for example, inspired by the information technology and computer industries, the source of metaphors like librarians as “information engineers”, “information specialists”, “information navigators”, and the like. Such initiatives were clearly targeted towards improving the visibility of the librarians and the libraries. Later, terms like “hybrid” or “blended libraries” and librarians cha­ racterized an effort to bridge the gaps between academic libraries and teaching departments and to integrate libraries in teaching and learning processes. Often discussions have taken place about which of two related, competing terms should be chosen as the optimal; an example could be whether “gate keeper” or “gate opener” were preferable; supporters of the latter, here, emphasized the more inviting and co-operative character of “gate opener” rather than “gate keeper.”

6 

 Introduction

Fundamentally, library metaphors can be grouped into larger categories: metaphors where libraries are depicted as parts of the body (the heart and blood of the university), as conversation (the library facilitates debates and discussion and mutual learning processes), as a place (e.g., a meeting place, a laboratory, etc.) and as an “ecosystem” which emphasizes the importance of building relations, relating to local environments and the like (Giesecke 2010). Nevertheless, the distinction between the profession’s metaphors about its users and the user’s images of the library raises the question whether it is equally or even more important to focus on how the users look upon you or on how you look upon your users. At first and intuitively one might think that the primary challenge should be to change less appropriate user perceptions concerning the library. Traditionally, therefore, changing the library’s image in the eyes of the user is prioritized more than changing the library profession’s image of the users. However, in spite of diverse promises from marketing professionals, many libra­ ries and other public institutions have realized that to shape a new, or to modify an existing, image can be a both costly and time-consuming affair. Indeed, an image transforming campaign can be quite risky, with no results guaranteed in spite of the process being assisted by experienced marketing professionals. However, if the professionals themselves do not change their own inadequate perceptions of their users, the task of changing the library’s image becomes even more difficult. Take, for example, a situation where a library wants to change its image from being seen as a neutral public institution to becoming an alert and warm-hearted host. Such a challenge will probably not end successfully unless the staff begin to change their own established perceptions about their users. Some recent library service development campaigns, therefore, have ope­ rated with a double focus: 1. on changing the library’s image in the eyes of its users and 2. on changing the staff’s perceptions of the users. In Denmark, at the Aalborg Public Library, a campaign was started in 2011 with this double focus both to influence the staff’s perceptions of their users by introducing and implementing a more guest-oriented metaphorical language and to change how the users looked upon and evaluated the library’s performance in terms of appearing as a friendly host more than a neutral public institution. Certainly, the way you look upon others obviously also influences the way they look upon you (Johannsen 2014b). Moreover, a personal experience during my career as professor at the Royal School of Library and Information Science convinced me that it can be very useful for all kinds of service providers – including library school professors – not only to reflect on how their users look upon them but also on how they themselves



Research questions 

 7

look upon their users and how they perceive their preferences. Indeed, within the educational business too flawed assumptions about user wants and prefe­ rences might result in inadequate services and learning outcomes. Moreover, such assumptions are often difficult to detect for those involved and difficult to change; often they are ingrained through many, and often the formative, years of whole generations of service providers. Such circumstances can, however, effectively obstruct the emergence of alternative points of view. According to my personal experience, I mistakenly – until the early 1980s – assumed that library students preferred “soft” classroom management styles with quite loose and relaxed rather than precise and exact time schedules; lessons should start and stop depending on the teacher’s sensitive feelings and impressions of the students’ present motivational moods. This perception, which turned out to be wrong, was certainly influenced by experiences from the 1970s with anti-authoritarian students. However, I learned in the early 1980s that most students, for some years already, had been irritated by the lax discipline and blurred time schedules although I and several other professors thought the opposite: that soft teaching practices still fitted the students. Especially when you deliver services to people, it is evident that the perceptions and metaphors you use as professionals will influence both the way you serve and deliver services; it will probably also change the way your users will receive and like – or dislike – the services provided. Leading researchers on metaphors like George Lakoff (1941–) and Mark Johnson (1949–) recommend professionals should develop an awareness of the metaphors they use and always be concerned to engage themselves in an “unen­ ding process” of developing “experiential flexibility” and their ability to find new alternative metaphors. Indeed, they emphasize that the only way to see beyond prevailing metaphors is to suggest and use other metaphors (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 233, 239).

1.3 Research questions This book has a similar aim, namely to heighten the awareness within the library profession – and also among politicians and citizens – of the importance of user metaphors, in particular, through focusing on the following six key research questions: 1. Which concepts have been used by the library profession to identify, classify, and understand different user segments? 2. To what extent and why are user metaphors or user images important?

8 

 Introduction

3. What characterizes the theoretical frameworks behind metaphors, images, and similar concepts and the frameworks behind idea transfer between organizations? 4. Which user metaphors or images have been active within the library sector since the 1970s? This question contains three sub-questions: a. What characterizes the different metaphors? b. How have different user metaphors been received and handled in the library sector? c. To what extent have the metaphors influenced different library types – public and academic libraries – equally? 5. What characterizes interrelations between different library services and different user metaphors and segments? 6. How do the five user metaphors identified fit into an experience society context?

1.4 The basic structure of the book The basic structure of the book follows the sequence mentioned above of the six research questions. Chapter 2, containing an overview of the primary approaches to user segmentation applied by the library and information sector since the middle of the 1970s, will address both research questions 1 and 2. Research question 3, concerning the theory behind metaphors, images and similar concepts in general, will be dealt with in chapter 3 The main and central chapter of the book is chapter 4, where each of the five images will be dealt with more detail. Research question 4 and its three sub-questions are the focus of this chapter. It will also contain many examples drawn from libraries, primarily, from the Scandinavian countries, Germany, and from the Anglo-Saxon world (specifically, Great Britain, the United States, and Australia). Besides, the chapter will try to trace both the origins and emergence and the present importance of the selected metaphors. Moreover, important idea structures, authors and books which have contributed to the creation or growth of particular metaphors will be dealt with – among others – to provide a more full understanding and a more nuanced view. The chapter will, for example, reveal that there presently exists a number of quite different understandings of the roles and functions of the user-as-partner metaphor. Chapter 5 considers the user segments and metaphors behind a selection of eight quite different library service stories. The eight selected library services are (in alphabetical order): 1. community information services and the like,



2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

The basic structure of the book 

 9

borrow-a-prejudice campaigns, digital reading groups, fee-based services, guest-host services, mystery shopping, online messages services, and staff-less libraries.

Chapter 6, finally, deals with how modern ideas about the experience society and social groups in the experience society are related to the ideas of library user metaphors: How do segments and metaphors combine with modern experience society thinking, categories, and conceptual frameworks? The German sociologist Gerhard Schulze (1944–), author of the influential Die Erlebnisgesellschaft [The Experience Society] (2005) is, here, chosen as a representative of modern experience society thinking. We will now begin with an overview of the primary approaches to user categorization – or user segmentation, which will be the preferred term – in libraries.

2 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments This chapter will focus on five different approaches to categorizing users, focu­ sing on the following two research questions: –– Which concepts have been used by the library profession to identify, classify, and understand different user segments? –– To what extent and why are user metaphors or user images important? The content of the chapter can be useful when comparing the strengths and weaknesses of using metaphors and images compared with traditional socio-demographic categories or other methods. Also, when making decisions on future surveys of library users, it is certainly an advantage to know which opportunities are available to identify important segments. “Segmentation,” a term inspired by marketing research, here plays a central role. Instead, of speaking about library users as one – assumed – homogeneous group, segmentation means breaking users into smaller separate categories; such categories could, for example, be based on age, education, or lifestyle or upon particular interests and hobbies. The purpose of segmentation is to be able to target services, opening hours and physical facilities better towards specific groups and towards their specific needs and preferences. This process is often termed “tailoring” a service towards specific target groups. Although some examp­­les of segmentation in public libraries, for example, the establishment of se­parate departments for children and adults, have long traditions, segmentation possesses, nevertheless, in the eyes of many public librarians a degree of New Public Management flavor. On the other hand, targeting or tailoring specific library departments or services has recently become very popular in many public libraries around the world. Also targeted campaigns towards specific user segments and, especially, non-user groups such as young men have emerged around the world. A number of segmentation approaches and techniques have been tested in library contexts and the aim of the chapter is to present five main approaches, primarily based upon a literature review concerning different approaches to user segmentation especially in public library context from around 1975 to May 2014 (Johannsen 2014a). Since 1975, public library professionals have used different models to segment and understand their users. This chapter will focus, in particular, on five different approaches (Boter & Wedel 2005; Lankes 2012; Gibbons, 2013) which have been applied by, primarily, public library professionals to achieve insights



User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments 

 11

into the needs and preferences of their users. The five approaches include various types of social stratification schemes and related methodological procedures. Some recent approaches even utilize computers to construct user segments. The fifth category, user metaphors, which is somewhat special compared with the first four, has influenced professional literature, debates and conceptual frameworks. However, not only has the nature of the sociological categories developed and changed through the last 40 years. The technological opportunities to collect and statistically analyze large amounts of data have also developed, especially through the availability of advanced statistical software packages enabling the use of methods such as correspondence and cluster analysis and the like (Bacher, Wenzig & Vogler 2004). The five principal ways applied by library professionals to segment their users can be summarized as: 1. Focus on the specific library use patterns and preferences, distinguishing, for example, between the frequency, purpose, or nature of library use. 2. A traditional social stratification approach, relying on established demographic and sociological categories such as age, education, gender, income, etc. 3. Segmentation based on marketing oriented and lifestyle inspired characte­ ristics, and psychographic variables classifying people according to their personality traits, behavioral variables, and the like (Adcock et al. 1995, 85–99; Jochumsen & Hvenegaard Rasmussen 2000, 53–65; Jung, Keng & Wirtz 2003). The construction of different “personas” (Brigham 2013) belongs to this tradition. Lifestyle and psychographic data are usually not included in official statistics but should be established through specific data collection procedures. 4. The fourth – and probably the latest – approach is inspired by marketing theory too; moreover, computers have also been applied to conduct advanced explorative two-step cluster analysis procedures to identify and describe which categories and segments of library users would make most sense in certain service development contexts. The fourth approach is characterized by combining highly different kinds of criteria: use pattern, socio-demographic variables and lifestyle traits. Compared to traditional demogra­­phics the fourth approach has obvious advantages, enabling more precise and richer pictures of needs since it includes both demographic characteristics (sex, age, income, education, ) and data on different kinds of cultural prefe­ rences, habits and activities. Like lifestyle and persona data, data for category 4 surveys are usually not available through official statistical publications and data banks. An example of a recent public library report, based on a ca­­ tegory 4 segmentation model, is the Danish Moos-Bjerre’s Future of Libraries (2014). Due to the report’s advanced data background the approach makes it

12 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

possible, for example, to operate with sophisticated and precise distinctions, for example, between users who are not particularly occupied with achieving social contacts and, at the same time, who appreciate traveling and tourist experiences and other user groups which share a minor interest in social life with the first group but who – compared with the first mentioned category of “individualists” – are much more interested in computer games than in overseas travel. A further and even more radical step towards identifying subtle distinctions and sub-categories, is the personalized, individualized approach which does not focus on layers and segments but on the individual user. This approach is commonplace within Internet marketing. 5. A fifth, much more subjective, approach, provides the construction of different user metaphors based on a combination of different demographic, ideological, psychographic and information needs-oriented characteristics and classifications. The main difference between a user segment and a user metaphor is that the latter is a metaphor. A metaphor is an imaginative comparison (the user as a guest) rather than a precise classification (the user as belonging to the segment of women aged over 50 years). Indeed, the me­­ taphorical way of seeing users is rarely built upon precise, identifiable and measureable quantitative criteria; rather it contains a mixture of qualitative and quantitative data – often mingled with normative claims and ethical considerations and judgements. Often such diffuse characteristics could make it difficult to distinguish between what a user belonging to a certain category actually demands (his “subjective” information needs), and what he ideally should demand, according to analyses of the users’ “objective” information needs made by the profession. The user as an information-poor client (Bunch 1982; Martin 1989; Usherwood 1989) or the user as an independent customer (Jackson 2002; McKnight 2008, 2012; Miao 2006; Rowley 1997, 2000) are both classical examples of user metaphors applied by the library sector. To sum up, we can therefore observe at least five different ways of categorizing or segmenting users: 1. through basic library use patterns, 2. through traditional socio-demographic categories, 3. through entirely psychographic and lifestyle based criteria, 4. through combinations of 1 to 3 5. through qualitative metaphors or images We will now take a closer look at the five approaches in terms of their respective strengths and weaknesses. The evaluation will especially focus on the balance



User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments 

 13

between analytical reliability and how recognizable the distinctions appear to be in practical contexts.

Evaluating the five approaches The aim of this section is to evaluate systematically the five user segmentation approaches. Each will be examined by the same criteria and through the same procedures. The applied four aspects or criteria, characterizing different types of strengths and weaknesses, are listed below: 1. Reliability 2. Library relevance 3. Measurability 4. Predictability The reliability of an approach refers to the degree to which the categorization is reliable. Reliability means the extent to which there exist procedures allowing others to classify according to the scheme and to achieve – at least approximately – the same results. As an example, approach number 2 (socio-demographic criteria like gender, age, education, income, etc.) possesses a high degree of reliability since its categories are precise and well defined. In contrast, approach 5 has a lower degree of reliability because its definitions and criteria are more blurred and less precise. Library relevance deals with the extent to which the categories make sense and can be applied directly to public and academic library contexts. Here, ca­­ tegorizations using pure socio-demographic (approach number 2) and lifestyle (approach number 3) criteria are judged less relevant to public libraries than the other three approaches. It is, of course, highly dependent on the character of the particular user survey. If socio-demographic data could be linked to library-re­ levant data, for example, distributions of different socio-demographic categories in the socio-demographic data of different library districts can be highly useful too. In other cases, data on social and economic parameters will make less sense, especially when the demographic and lifestyle criteria are mostly developed outside the library sector. Measurability refers to the extent to which it is possible to define precisely and measure the size of a given segment or group, which is especially impor­ tant when making decisions on targeting specific user segments. In some cases, a certain segment might be so small that it does not make sense to plan and initiate major marketing offensives. Rowley (2000, 160) has emphasized three basic requirements for segmentation approaches to work in practice: 1. the size should be known

14 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

2. the segment should be sufficiently large to justify efforts and expenditures, and 3. the segment should be accessible through appropriate communication channels. Finally, predictability indicates the degree to which it is possible to predict the interests and preferences of particular segments. Here, socio-demographic variables are rated lowest because preferences as to library cultural and informational offerings, being based on a mixture of motivational and attitudinal elements, often run across social and economic categories. It is, for example, often seen that married couples within the same socio-economic levels have quite different cultural and library use habits. However, sociologists have shown that sociological variables like age and education are closely related to preferences as to literature, art, entertainment, experiences, and the like (Schulze 2005, 277–333).

2.1 Approach 1: Library usage variables The first of the five approaches, segmentation based upon library use patterns, will, typically, distinguish between different use patterns related to different materials (digital or printed), different media (books, films, music), and different services (IT courses, lectures). Among library professionals, knowledge about use patterns has probably always existed as a kind of tacit professional knowledge possessed by the experienced librarian. However, more and more digitalization and computer technology in libraries in recent times has made data on both use and demand easier to access and to base calculations and prognoses upon. It is very important to mention here that (anonymous) data on loans and reservations of specific titles of books and other library materials are made available not only to the staff but also to users directly through the online ca­­ talogues of many public libraries in Denmark. It is, for example, quite easy for a user in Copenhagen to check the waiting time and the demand for the popular novel The Goldfinch by the American author, Donna Tartt. Indeed, the homepage of the Copenhagen public libraries indicates that the 20 library units in Copenhagen possess 82 hard-copies of the book; furthermore, we learn that 692 users are standing in line for this specific title. However, the most important information is without doubt that the estimated waiting time for The Goldfinch is nine to ten months. Another example of how library use data are utilized dynamically to communicate with users is “just delivered” book shelves where users can get inspiration from other users as to their next loan. Electronic data on loans and reservations also makes it possible for libraries to offer tailored and individua­



Approach 1: Library usage variables 

 15

lized Amazon-like recommendations such as: users who have read or borrowed this specific title, also requested another specific title. Many library professionals are likely to value such recommendations as a positive innovation while others appear to be more skeptical. However, most library professionals certainly agree that increased openness about demand and queues represent a user-friendly advantage in terms of increased transparency and – maybe – also a contribution to increasing the library’s serendipity. Among the weaknesses is often mentioned the privacy issue, understood as the risk that freedom from interference or public attention on the reading habits and intellectual preferences of the individual citizen might be threatened through such practices where recommendations are based on surveying of earlier use patterns of the individual user. However, the importance of utilizing library use data as means to construct useful and meaningful user categories and segments is in­­­ te­resting because it will enable the library to offer more tailored and personalized services. It might also help the library to reach the not-so-frequent users and even the non-users. The distinction between user and non-user has played an important but also shifting role during the last 40 years. Also, the applied criteria of separation between user and non-users provides an interesting aspect. In the recent Danish national public library survey (Moos-Bjerre 2014), a user is defined as a person who has used the library within the last year. Therefore, a non-user could, for example, be a person who had used the library regularly for many years, but stopped using it one year ago as well as a person who had never used the public library. In other user surveys, the criteria for what defines a user versus a nonuser could be different. Not only the applied criteria but also the overall importance of the user/nonuser distinction has played a shifting role. In the second half of the 1970s and during the 1980s, it attracted considerable interest with much discussion on how to attract the non-users. However, the focus on non-users was toned down in the 1990s. Here, concepts like “customer loyalty” and “customer retention” were prioritized, resulting in much less focus on how to attract non-users. Apparently, in the new millennium, a renewed interest in non-users has emerged. We have mentioned the importance of library digitalization concerning mapping user behavior as to loans and reservations. It is also important, however, to mention the importance of application of advanced access and surveillance technology to enable much more sophisticated registrations and analyses of physical library visits and use. Data on when exactly the user arrives and leaves the library, the amount of time he or she spends there, as well as potential borrowings and returns are now routinely registered in many libraries. Especially, the so-called “open” or “staff-less” libraries – open, typically, for 80 hours a week

16 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

without staff and 20 hours a week with staff (Johannsen 2014b) are video-surveyed during the staff-less hours. Although, the recordings, primarily, are collected for security reasons to prevent vandalism and, therefore, are often deleted after some time, they can provide useful information on user behavior and pre­ ferences. Staff-less libraries should be an obvious field for use studies. One of the challenging problems here could be to find out to what extent the segment of staff-less library users significantly differs from the library’s “normal” users present during the staffed hours. However, data from the monitoring systems are in many countries considered to contain personally sensitive data included in protection of the sanctity of private life, which means restrictions as to the use for user studies and the like. Another basic limitation concerning library use data, besides privacy protection considerations, seems to be, that although data on many library transactions are now available in digitizaled form, it is for several reasons difficult to utilize the data further to achieve a deeper sociological and cultural understanding of user needs; pure data on library use does not typically deliver potentially relevant background information of the user such as his/her sex, age, education, and the like. Finally, it should be mentioned that categories based on library usage have been applied by both public and academic libraries (e.g., Budd 2009), although the chosen aspects of the usage could often differ a lot. In academic library contexts, for example, searching techniques and the users’ judgement of the retrieved documents have, traditionally, been emphasized much more than in public libraries (Ondrusek 2004). To sum up: the reliability of library use data is high, primarily because data are collected through reliable technological devices and because the concepts used to organize the data – e.g., number of loans, times of arrival, etc. – are relatively well-defined although there might be differences as to the precise definition of what defines a non-user, and the like. Also, the relevance of library use data is high, for obvious reasons. Measurability which is associated with reliability is also high, especially after loan and delivery transactions have become digitalized. Where identification of trends and use patterns earlier was highly dependent on professional tacit knowledge, instinctive feelings and gut reactions, the introduction of automated systems has caused increased precision and much more detailed accounts. The predictability, however, is not optimal since it is seldom quite evident what creates a certain demand or lack of demand. It is also risky to extrapolate observed trends and patterns mechanically into the future. Often, especially when dealing with fast developing information and communication techno­ logies, growth curves break and new actors enter the field. On the other hand,



Approach 2: Socio-demographic categories 

 17

the increased openness about library use patterns is likely to have a significant influence on usage so that data on reservations and loans creates self-fulfilling prophecies. Moreover, changes in library use patterns are not only influenced by technological innovation but also by demographic, economic, social, cultural and political developments. In other words: changed use patterns – especially reductions in loans or downloads – might have been caused by powers and dynamics more or less outside the influence of the local library or even the national library system and the international library society. At least to understand such powers and to act smart, it is necessary also to consider broader contexts, which is the theme of the following section on socio-demographic variables.

2.2 Approach 2: Socio-demographic categories Providing data and constructing segments based on traditional socio-demographic variables such as age, sex, occupation, education, income, etc. is also relevant and useful in many library contexts, both public and academic. Both public and academic libraries (e.g., Diers & Simpson 2012; Sarkodie-Mensah 1992) have applied socio-demographic distinctions to understand their users. As to library usage patterns some differences between public and academic libraries are found. Whereas the latter, primarily, are interested in specified socio-demographic data on academic levels and type of studies (e.g., medicine, humanities, sociology), public libraries typically demand information on social, and cultural characteristics. In academic library contexts, however, such information is rarely considered relevant. Only exceptionally are academic libraries interested in, for example, the leisure reading habits of their users (Diers & Simpson 2012) or the particular social problems of immigrant students (Sarkodie-Mensah 1992). Most often, it is relevant to have up-to-date information about the social composition of the library’s users in terms of, for example, gender, age, and education. Whereas the social composition of a specific local community is often – but not always – relatively easy to obtain, it can cause severe problems to determine who the core users are in terms of age, gender and other key socio-demographic cha­ racteristics. Instead, important priorities and service policy decisions are based upon intuition and upon the tacit knowledge of staff members. Here, systematic surveys could reveal counter-intuitive and, partially, surprising and unexpected results about the socio-demographic composition of the core users. Moos-Bjerre (2014) thus delivered some surprises. The 2014 survey, which was a national survey, was primarily based on questionnaires distributed to about 2,000 respondents aged 15 years and above. It showed that the two most frequent adult library

18 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

user segments in Denmark were: (1) university students aged between 20 and 29 years and (2) educated women aged between 40 and 69 years (Moos-Bjerre 2014, 43–50). The latter group was labelled as “cultural super users.” It was not particularly surprising that middle-aged women were frequent public library users, but what about the university students? Why were they so attracted by the services of the public libraries in towns where they had access to several academic libraries? Was demand for entertainment their main purpose of being such frequent users of public libraries or did they actually use them to get study relevant knowledge? And how should the public libraries react towards and prioritize this segment? Was it not more appropriate for the public libraries to concentrate their service efforts and expenditures on other more “proper” public library users? (Pors 2006). Such questions and issues clearly demonstrate the evident relevance for libraries of socio-demographic variables and segmentation based on socio-demographic criteria in relation to both library services and library policy discussions. However, the real power of socio-demographic variables and segmentation depends on the combination of library use data. Therefore, the specific library relevance is probably lower than the relevance of pure usage data. Due to established procedures and standardization of definitions of main categories, the reliability is quite high. For example, two researchers calculating the proportion of immigrants in a certain local community would probably reach the same results because the central definitions and procedures are well defined and precise. As to the third criterion, measurability, it can also be characterized as high due to precision and well-defined criteria. According to Rowley’s (2000) three criteria, the size of the segments can be established which makes it possible to eva­ luate if the segment is sufficiently large to justify expenditure, which is the second of her three criteria. Rowley’s third criteria deals with the segments’ accessibility through communication, which indicates to what extent it is possible for a library to reach and communicate with the segment. Indeed, in spite of features making it easy to calculate the size and also to determine whether it is worth addressing the segment, it can, nevertheless, be a challenging task to establish and conduct a targeted communication with the members of the segment. Finally, we will discuss the predictability of socio-demographically defined segments in library contexts. The professional confidence in the assumption that important library decisions could and also should be based on socio-demographic data and on proper socio-demographic oriented analyses has varied somewhat the last 30 to 40 years. In the 1970s and 1980s, many librarians and library students were quite convinced that thorough analyses of social and economic conditions – for some, such analyses were optimal when inspired by



Approach 2: Socio-demographic categories 

 19

Marxist theory – were more or less necessary when planning and designing the services of a local library. Certainly, the predictability of the behavior and preferences of different socio-demographic segments at times has been highly overestimated. In the 1980s and 1990s, when the customer concept entered the library sector, the interest in socio-demographic conditions was still intact but changed its cha­ racter both by becoming more dynamic and by beginning to focus on concepts like marketing, market shares and competition rather than objective information needs. However, the predictability of socio-demographic characteristics became underestimated at the expense of aggressive marketing campaigns. It was also important that the marketing sector began to worry about the obvious limitations of traditional socio-demographic properties in terms of understanding customer preferences and behavior. New concepts with potentially stronger predictive powers, such as “lifestyle” and “Persona” qualities, appeared. In the following sections these and similar concepts will be explained. Moreover, further developments in many Western countries contributed to weaken the importance of socio-demographic characteristics. One development undermining the importance of socio-demographic descriptions at least at local community level derived from library surveys which revealed that the socio-demographic profile of a local community had very little relevance as to basic library decisions, such as how many copies of a specific book title should be bought by a given local library. According to the socio-demographic paradigm, one would expect quite different selection profiles in typical working class districts and in more suburban environments. Indeed, one would expect that libra­ rians familiar with the peculiarities of the specific local community would choose both different titles and different numbers of copies than their colleagues from different surroundings. In practice, however, surveys conducted by Japsen (1992) showed that the selection of book titles and the decisions on number of copies was almost the same, even in local community areas which were quite diffe­­rent from a socio-demographic point of view. The consequences of these findings were, among others, that the material selection functions in most Danish public libraries later became more centralized. The socio-demographic paradigm was challenged by changes in people’s media preferences too. The example is related changes in the relationship between social class, political orientation and media use. In Denmark, and pro­ bably also in other European countries, newspaper reading preferences were historically narrowly related to party political preferences which again was related to social class. In the 1920s and up to the 1950s, for example, if one knew a person’s political preferences, it was relatively easy to predict which local or national newspaper he or she most probably read and also to which social class or segment

20 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

he or she belonged, and vice versa. Press historians have confirmed that such a situation, where it is possible to predict quite precisely a person’s political prefe­ rences, newspaper choice, leisure interests etc. based on knowledge of his or her social position no longer exists (Schultz 2007). Indeed, the historical fixed relationship between newspaper choice, party politics and social class had already disappeared in the 1950s. Many developments have thus contributed to weaken the authority of socio-demographic concepts within the library profession. Still, a main strength of the socio-demographic approach is that data are readily available through official statistics. The use of more or less standardized definitions also makes comparisons with statistical data from related areas like museums, schools, archives etc. on, for example, social patterns, preferences, media usage, and political preferences relatively easy. It is, for example, easy to find out via official statistics that public libraries have succeeded in attracting many immigrants, compared with other cultural institutions like museums and theaters, at least in Denmark. Nevertheless, the main weakness of socio-demographic data is related to its lack of validity in many cases. Socio-demographic data do not fully explain the uses of and preferences for certain cultural offerings, choice of media and library services. The official statistics, for example, tell us that immigrants, apparently, among the public institutions prefer libraries to museums and theaters but they do not tell us why. The relationships between socio-economics and cultural factors contain, indeed, more complexity than can be deduced from socio-demographic statistics alone. The combination of socio-demographic and library use data is seldom sufficient either. But then, what other types of data are available for better understanding of users? Here, a broad category, lifestyle and psychographic data, including data on the users’ lifestyles, attitudes, beliefs, social leisure time activities (hobbies, interests), benefits sought, purpose of information use, loyalty, and the like is at hand (Rowley 2000). One common trait of such data types is that they are usually not available through official statistics. Instead, supplementary data on lifestyle, personality traits, preferences, attitudes, and the like should be collected and analyzed se­­ parately, often by marketing bureaus. Indeed, people of the same age and sex may exhibit quite different information and library use patterns, preferences as to, for example, the importance of social needs, services etc. Similarly, people with different social-demographic situations may share the same preferences for specific library services. In the following section we will take a closer look at this third category of segmentation criteria.



Approach 3: Psychographic, lifestyle, and similar criteria 

 21

2.3 Approach 3: Psychographic, lifestyle, and similar criteria The third approach differs from the socio-demographic by being based on quite different social classification systems. Instead of objective categories like educational and income groups, lifestyle characteristics refer to softer elements such as perceptions, opinions, preferences, values, habits, and the like, of respondents. Mostly, lifestyle criteria are based on opinions and preferences. Often leisure activities and habits such as golf playing, library visits, concerts, etc. are also included in lifestyle surveys. In some cases the lifestyle concept is used in a clearly normative way, such as, for example, a “healthy lifestyle” based on characteristics concerning fruit and vegetable intake, smoking behavior, and alcohol intake (Yu 2011). In other cases, the lifestyle concept is used to understand better the heterogeneity of young people’s mobile phone use. Here, distinguishing between three lifestyles based on attitudes towards the mobile phone as (1) a fashion article, (2) a display of one’s popularity and (3) a display of one’s time scarcity seems to make sense (Vanden Abelee et al. 2014). Data are typically collected through specially designed questionnaires containing questions on psychographic and lifestyle characteristics. Normally, series of agree-or-disagree statements are developed, covering areas like activities (work, hobbies, sports, shopping etc.), interests (e.g., family, job, food, media), and opinions about themselves, political issues, future, culture etc. (Adcock et al. 1995, 93–94). Statistical software packages enabling cluster analysis or similar types of analysis are often applied as tools when constructing lifestyle categories based on answers from several hundreds or thousands of respondents. The mobile phone lifestyle project, for example, involved two-step cluster analysis procedures performed on data from about 1,900 respondents (Vanden Abeele et al. 2014). As already mentioned, data on such issues are not found in official statistical publications or databases; instead, they are collected through regular or ad hoc surveys, for example, on cultural consumption, leisure time activities or on various ad hoc surveys based on questionnaires, today more and more often collected online. Furthermore, the aggregation of data from the surveys often utilizes advanced statistical methods such as cluster and correspondence analysis to construct broader categories based on, for example, overall lifestyle orientations. Typical examples of lifestyle-based classification forms are the diverse marketing models used by Gallup, AIM Nielsen and similar market analysis agencies. Here lifestyle orientations are often depicted by two-dimensional models containing, for example, the dimensions: modern versus traditional, community minded versus individualistic, and the like.

22 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

To ease the understanding and application of the results of the different analyses on user lifestyle segments, different methods are used to popularize the findings. Often market analysis agencies emphasize that the particular lifestyle segments should be identified through easily recognizable symbols, for example, colors: the blue segment, here, sometimes indicates a modern and individualistic orientation whereas the red segment represents a traditional and community oriented. An alternative approach, the Persona model, also emphasizes that the personality types are recognizable in daily work contexts. Instead of colors, however, Persona models try to figure out realistic but fictitious characters, often with names, personal details and sometimes even a picture to make the different segments more realistic. Personas are defined as “research-based user archetypes” (Brigham 2013, Koltay & Tancheva 2010). Personas are often based on ethnographic data describing behavioral patterns, goals, skills, attitudes, and the like. The use of personas started in the early 1980s and were originally applied in marketing and web design context by companies like Microsoft, Apple, Procter & Gamble, and more. The earliest applications of the Persona approach in library studies appeared in the late 1990s. It was primarily in American academic libraries such as those of Cornell University, John Hopkins University, North Carolina State University, Stanford University, and several others, that the Persona approach was tested. In the different libraries Personas served many purposes such as the planning of spaces, the improvement of existing and the development of new services, design and re-design of web sites, and the like (Bilandzic & Foth 2013; Brigham 2013; Koltay & Tancheva 2010; Lage 2011; Rogers 2009). A European example is the Danish State and University Library project in Aarhus in 2012. Here, a field study resulted in the construction of three Personas. The archetypical users were named: (1) the “busy bee”, (2) the “library enthusiast” and (3) the “drive-in user” – each characterized by specific patterns of need and library uses (Kulturministeriet 2008, 90–91). Supporters of the Persona approach emphasize that its main strength is that Personas as firmly research based and unbiased characters are based on data rather than on assumptions. They also emphasize that Personas are useful in supporting user-centered design. A risk associated with Personas, however, is that of stereotyping the user (Brigham 2013). The most revolutionary trend about lifestyle segments is, certainly, the almost mandatory application of advanced computer based statistical methods and powerful statistical software packages. The modifying “almost” is here used to indicate that lifestyle segments, are also sometimes identified through qualitative methods, for example, the above mentioned Aarhus project which only



Approach 3: Psychographic, lifestyle, and similar criteria 

 23

involved analysis of 16 users. Schulze’s (2005) comprehensive sociological study, involving about 1,000 respondents, of experience economy segments in Germany, is also based on primarily manual quantitative and qualitative methods. Traditio­ nally, when dealing with usage or socio-demographic data, cross-tabulations and graphs are used to make trends and changes visible. Statistical tests, for example, the popular chi-square test, are also used to determine whether a revealed relationship, e.g., between age and popularity of computer games, is statistically significant. Technically, the chi-square and similar tests allow one to test diffe­ rent hypotheses about asserted significant relationships. This means one has an assumption of a certain relationship beforehand. The purpose of the statistical test is here to test whether one’s intuition is statistically valid. Hypothesis testing is a statistician’s way of trying to confirm or deny a claim about a population using data from a sample (Rumsey 2010, 87). Lifestyle analyses also use statistics and numbers in a different way, namely, to identify invisible and hidden relationships between different elements such as cultural consumption habits and certain attitudes. Here, statistics are used to reveal and explore if there are any correlations of which the researcher is not conscious and aware of beforehand. Therefore, the approach is often named “explorative statistics.” Explorative statistics have been particularly useful to create segments based on many different use, socio-demographic and lifestyle criteria. An example is the above mentioned survey on mobile phone use (Vanden Abeele et al. 2014). The study found that young mobile phone users could be categorized, as mentioned above, into three segments. To let the statistical packages do the work of creating segments thus re­­ presents a more explorative way to use statistics than the classical hypothesis testing approach. The explorative approach is useful and makes sense in a lot of situations and contexts; however, it is also characterized by a certain opaqueness and by being not so transparent as classical hypothesis testing. Certainly, even an advanced cluster analysis presupposes many human decisions both on technical oriented issues about which techniques to use and concerning more strategic decisions, for example, on which variables or characteristics which should be included in the analysis. Also, its iterative character should be mentioned as an important element within explorative statistics. The process also becomes complex because, for example, to determine a respondent’s adhesion to a certain lifestyle dimensions, such as individualistic versus community minded, often requires the application of several – sometimes about 40 – different indices covering many different values and normative orientations. Furthermore, each index might contain, typically, three to five different questions (Dahl 1997, 20). To determine a respondent’s religious orientation, for example, several questions on church attendance, belief in God, prayer behavior,

24 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

and the like, are required. One question, for example, about church attendance, is, for obvious reasons, not enough. Indeed, one can attend church often without being particularly religious and vice versa one can be very religious without vi­­ siting churches or mosques. To sum up: As to reliability, lifestyle segmentation can be described as a reliable approach since the methodological approaches are normally well defined both as to processes concerning data gathering and concerning the analytical procedures. Such descriptions would allow another researcher to reach the same results at least in principle. Most often, however, it will probably not make sense to conduct the same survey. On the other hand, to conduct a survey every year, or every second or every third year, will sometimes make sense. In such instances, the high reliability will mean that the collected data probably will be consistent in terms of measuring the same variables each time. However, of course, the attitudes and preferences may have changed from year to year. The relevance for public libraries varies according to the specific purpose of the survey. A survey covering mobile phone related lifestyles (Vanden Abeele et al. 2014) is certainly less relevant to public libraries than a study focusing on libraries in particular (Moos-Bjerre 2014). One may, however, criticize lifestyle studies for being too marketing oriented, focused on selling – or, translated into library contexts, on maximizing the use and utilization of the library’s facilities and thereby paying less attention to other community oriented concerns. The amount of measurability, which deals with the extent to which the lifestyle approach enables the planners to determine the size of the segment and to communicate with the segment, is assessed as high because we normally have a rich amount of information on its members in terms of basic socio-demographic and data on preferred media usage and the like. Here, certainly, the character and quality of the applied sample and sampling procedures plays a significant role. It also plays an important role how many segments and other characteristics one plans to combine. As will be discussed in the following section, in some cases it is not possible to get detailed and at the same time reliable data on certain segments. Based on a representative sample, however, it should be possible to judge the size of the user segment on a national level. Finally, the predictive power is high, although it very much depends, among others, on the character of the survey. We have already mentioned that the lifestyle approach derives from the private sector marketing context; it has not been developed inside public libraries. Therefore, it is interesting to focus on what the public library sector in general and library researchers in particular have thought about issues such as segmentation and marketing. In a review about user studies from 1994, Tom Wilson (1994) did not even use the term “segmentation”; on the other hand, he was obviously



Approach 4: Combinations of library use, socio-demographic categories 

 25

aware of the need for new approaches to user studies by considering a shift from focusing on different uses of information towards focusing on different users. Another trend, which Wilson called for in 1994, was improvements as to the methodologies applied in user surveys. In particular, he missed the use of proper random sampling methods to facilitate generalizations concerning the total po­­ pulation and, in general, the application of more advanced statistical analyses. Six years later, Rowley (2000) again spoke in favor of changes. When considering how to segment library users into groups and targeting library services to meet the needs of those groups or segments, she directly recommended the library sector to apply the “language of marketing.” Indeed, she then saw user or customer segmentation as a sign of a proactive approach and as a useful means in connection with relationship marketing strategies, loyalty programs, and the like. Segmentation offered further benefits such as a better understanding of user needs and preferences, a better understanding of actual and potential competitors and, finally, a more effective targeting of library resources and the possibility of more tailored marketing communication. She distinguished between traditional demographic segmentation variables (geography, location, age, sex, occupation and social class) and psychographic and lifestyle criteria (attitudes, beliefs, activities, behavior, benefits sought, frequency of use, purpose of use, loyalty, and the like). She also mentioned that data on the traditional variables were popular because they were readily available. However, she did not go into detail concerning how psychographic and lifestyle data were collected and how more complex segments were constructed. We have already dealt a bit with combinations between, for example, library usage data and socio-demographic categories, socio-demographic data and lifestyle data, and library usage and lifestyle data. We will now focus on approaches combining all three variables.

2.4 Approach 4: Combinations of library use, sociodemographic categories, and psychographic and lifestyle based criteria Here, a distinction is made between the former approach to user segmentation based entirely on lifestyle variables and the fourth approach, based on a combination of library usage, lifestyle and socio-demographic variables. This combined approach was applied in the Danish public library survey: Fremtidens biblioteker – målgruppebaseret viden til biblioteksudvikling [The Libraries of the Future – knowledge on user segments for library development] (Moos-Bjerre 2014).

26 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

Although, The Libraries of the Future is unique in many respects in Danish contexts, it is not at all the first cluster analysis based survey within the library sector. Nagata (2007, 2011) has examined the traditional understanding of public library user profiles based on statistical factor analyses, and Stenmark (2008) applied automatic clustering techniques to separate users into distinguishable segments, based on their search behavior. Indeed, already in 1994. Wilson (1994, 14–15) dealt with the issue – although in an academic library context. In a research review Wilson compared so-called “subjective classifications” with classifications based on cluster analysis. He found the latter to be the most robust approach. Wilson also reviewed an earlier, scholarly article by Palmer (1991) who identified – also through the application of cluster analysis – five different, ima­ ginatively named user groups: 1. “non-seekers” 2. “lone, wide rangers” 3. “unsettled self-conscious seekers” 4. “confident collectors” 5. “hunters” Actually, the mentioned groups were not called lifestyle categories but information style groups. However, the way they were constructed and their purposes seem to be very much related to lifestyle analyses. Another, even earlier antecedent of the application of statistical cluster ana­ lysis for segmentation purposes forms the theoretical framework of the prominent and influential cultural sociologist, Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002). Bourdieu’s thinking and theoretical frameworks have influenced much library sociological research since then. Indeed, Bourdieu’s “lifelong commitment to statistics” led him already in the 1970s to the choice of advanced statistical methods such as multiple correspondence analysis and geometric modeling of data (Lebaron 2009). The thoughts of this influential thinker are therefore not entirely based on qualitative methods and pure theoretical reasoning, but on an intelligent combination of both quantitative and qualitative data. This quantitative and, according to (Lebaron 2009), “essential aspect” of Bourdieu’s entire theoretical framework, including the central concept of “field”, has been “somewhat neglected” by those who later have written about and applied his theories. Also Bourdieu’s “constant concern for quantifying his data material and putting his thinking into mathematical terms” (Lebaron 2009) seems to have been somewhat forgotten by many of his later supporters. Bourdieu also combined variables on tastes and cultural practices with socio-demographic and occupational questions to visualize the sociological relations between tastes (lifestyles) and social positions.



Approach 4: Combinations of library use, socio-demographic categories 

 27

After this short review of the history of the application of diverse explo­ rative statistical methods, we will now return to problems concerning combined approaches. Like lifestyle analyses, the combined approach also relies on different kinds – printed, online or telephone interviews – of questionnaires as its primary data collection method. The Libraries of the Future (Moos-Bjerre 2014), for example, is primarily based on a questionnaire survey among a probability sample of 2,000 adults in Denmark – both library users and non-users. The quantitative survey is, however, supplemented by focus group interviews and individual interviews (Moos-Bjerre 2014, 7, 13). Based on nine selected variables (library use oriented), socio-demographic (e.g. age and education) and lifestyle and psychometric (digital orientation, social aspect and “nerd-ness” indices), 10 different segments are iteratively identified through two-step cluster analysis (Moos-Bjerre 2014, 34–39). The author, Moos-Bjerre, emphasized (in an interview on April 28, 2014) the iterative character of two-step cluster analysis. In particular, he mentioned the challenges of finding a proper balance between statistical fit and how well the library profession could recognize the identified segments. Here, the size of the ten segments – four containing members between 15 and 29 years and six with members aged over 30 years – vary from 2 percent (young parents between 20 and 29 years) to 19 percent (lower middle class between 40 and 69 years) of the population aged over 15 years. Among Rowley’s three requirements, certainly, the first of them is met: the size of the segment can be determined. As to her second requirement, the answer very much depends on whether the context is a national or a regional or local library campaign. Indeed, the size of some of the segments was too small to allow more detailed calculations of the impact of very specific factors on segment level. The report, for example, documents that digital library use (e-index), in varying degrees, is influenced by seven different factors (Moos-Bjerre 2014, 109). It has not been possible, however, to specify the influences onto the different segments, since, for example, the young parents only constitute 2 percent of the sample (which equals about 40 respondents). This is too few to make sense in a statistical calculation. Also, the third of Rowley’s three requirements seems to contain certain challenges. What communication channels, for example, are obvious for communication campaigns targeted towards “nerds” or elderly people belonging to the lower middle class? Nevertheless, the survey results can deliver inspiration for planners and service providers for diverse campaigns, targeting and tailoring efforts, and library policy priority making. For example, when considering the future importance of the internet, Google, and e-books considerable differences as to attitudes

28 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

and expectations can be found within the 10 segments whether, for example, e-books will make libraries superfluous and similarly, to what extent meeting place functions or library cafés would lead to increased use (Moos-Bjerre 2014, 173, 128–134). As mentioned, a balance between statistical fit and professionally recognizable segments was regarded as desirable. However, one could raise the questions why certain segments which have often been mentioned in library and cultural debates are not found among the identified segments. The creative class, for example, is a segment which has created and legitimated considerable efforts both in terms of urban and in terms of library planning. Skot-Hansen, Hvenegaard Rasmussen & Jochumsen (2012) emphasize that cities in the global competition are often being planned and marketed as “creative cities.” Therefore, one could ask why the often mentioned and famous “creative class” was not included among the 10 identified segments? Is the answer that the whole concept of a distinct creative class is an illusion or does the creative segment reside within other segments? Reports applying combinations of library use, socio-demographic and lifestyle data, can serve both strategic and operational purposes (Moos-Bjerre 2014, 6). Among the strategic goals could be mentioned the development of new services or modification of existing ones, shaping of increased user satisfaction and improved market shares within different user groups. This goal influenced by marketing logics may appear relatively narrow compared with the broader societal role of the public library. As will be shown below, user metaphors such as the user as a client, for example, reveal broader, societal concerns beyond the recruitment of new users. Another question which the focus on clusters may raise is whether the segment focus may blur for alternatives. Moos-Bjerre, for example, emphasizes that the user segment particularly interested in computer games consists of male “nerds” aged between 30 and 49 years (Moos-Bjerre 2014, 55). This observation is probably correct; but does it also imply that access to computer games in libraries should be targeted only and alone towards this segment? The topic is interesting because recent Norwegian experiences show that also non-nerds, such as senior citizens, could gain from access to at least certain computer games (notes from an unpublished presentation at a national library congress in Trondheim; Norway, 2014). We will now consider the fifth approach which differs significantly from the preceding four.



Approach 5: Metaphors and user images 

 29

2.5 Approach 5: Metaphors and user images The final approach, segmentation through metaphors (Bies 1996; Buxton 1994) and images, is in several respects quite different from the preceding. First, it is not documented through formal registrations, documents, and standardized classification systems. Rather, the occurrence of different library user metaphors used by members of the library profession is identified, primarily, through selected texts and discourses available in various library journals, pamphlets, and books (Hedemark, Hedman & Sundin 2005; Jochumsen & Hvenegaard Rasmussen 2006; Johannsen 2009). Its informal and often fluid and prejudiced character, and discourse traits make both its reliability and measurability rather low. On the other hand, its origins and occurrence in many library professional contexts endows the approach with a high relevance to public libraries. As to predictability, experiences vary from low to medium. User metaphors are often – but not always – related to established socio-demographic variables such as income, social status and education. The client me­­ taphor, for example, has been identified through varying objective social criteria. In Community Librarianship: Changing the Face of Public Libraries, Martin (1989, 72–73) explains that “many libraries either ignored the disadvantaged or else gave them the kind of standard, undifferentiated service that largely failed to meet their needs.” A list of people most likely to be classed as disadvantaged would include “the economically deprived, including the poor and the unemployed; ethnic and sexual minorities; people in institutions; deprived young people and senior citizens; people with language and literacy problems; and the physically and mentally ‘handicapped’”. Depending on whether the target groups were seen as socially disadvantaged people, which was the common denotation in the 1970s and 1980s, or as immigrants and ethnic minorities, which started in the 1990s, their weaknesses could be recognized through social and economic statistics. Often, the intention of library professionals was not only to attract socially disadvantaged people as library users but also to help them to change their present unfavorable situation. The same situation appears later concerning immigrants and ethnic minorities. Compared with the preceding four segmentation approaches, some differences appear conspicuous. As to the ultimate goal of segmentation, it is not always only to increase library use or to transform non-users into library users. The goal is often seen as a broader societal issue. Furthermore, the categories not only reflect pure objective, sociological contexts but also more normative oriented issues such as the desire for social equality. The most distinguishing difference is, however, that the segment of disadvantaged users was developed, not by statistical agencies or marketing bureaus, but within the profession itself, primarily in

30 

 User segmentation in libraries – from library usage patterns to lifestyle segments

the 1970s. However, the profession origins do not mean that the mentioned client metaphor is only found within library contexts. Both the concepts of clients and customers are widely used in a number of different public service sectors. Indeed, in libraries the term “client” is apparently used but not very often compared with the frequently used, but also more controversial, term “customer”. From the late 1970s onwards, a number of other user metaphors were deve­ loped. Sometimes they were quite different from the above mentioned client metaphor. The user as a customer, which began to influence public library debates and discourses in the late 1980s and 1990s, thus had ideologically quite different roots than the discussions about disadvantaged clients which took place earlier. Moreover, a customer represents a sociological category to a lesser degree than a client – the customer concept is rather a marketing concept, New Public Management oriented, and inspired by a normative framework. The latest user segment developed within the library profession is certainly the creative partner, a segment that plays a significant role in many recent library development and building projects (Skot-Hansen, Hvenegaard Rasmussen & Jochumsen 2012). At least five different metaphorical understandings of library users have been revealed by library researchers (Jochumsen & Hvenegaard Rasmussen 2006, Johannsen 2009). The five metaphors are the user as a: 1. citizen, 2. client 3. customer 4. guest, and 5. partner. These metaphors are also mutually different in many respects. Citizen is, primarily, a political and legal concept containing both descriptive and normative elements. Client is a more sociological term, also with both descriptive and normative aspects, while a customer is mostly defined as an economic, market oriented relational role without specific sociological characteristics. A guest is also a relational role associated with specific contexts (visits). Finally, the partner is mostly characterized by his or her relational role in the library and not so much by specific sociological characteristics. All the five categories, however, have in common that they are metaphors. The precise definition of this key concept and how the five metaphors differ from other terms like “user,” “patron,” “borrower,” “visitor”, and the like, will be discussed in the following, chapter 3.

Summary 

 31

2.6 Summary The main characteristics of the five segmentation approaches are summarized in Table 2-1 below. Table 2-1: Strengths and weaknesses of the five segmentation models

Library usage variables Demographic variables Lifestyle variables Combinations of 1–3 Metaphors and images

Reliability

Public library relevance

Measurability

Predictability

HIGH

HIGH

HIGH

MEDIUM

HIGH HIGH HIGH LOW

MEDIUM MEDIUM HIGH HIGH

HIGH HIGH HIGH LOW

LOW MEDIUM HIGH LOW-MEDIUM

Source: Johannsen (2014)

The two following chapters will deal specifically with user metaphors. Chapter 3 treats the theoretical aspects and the conceptual frameworks related to me­­ taphors, images and related concepts, while chapter 4 details the five above mentioned user metaphors.

3 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts and idea transfer in organizations The aim of this chapter is to present some theoretical considerations concer­ning concepts like metaphors, images, and the like. Since many of the metaphors, actually, have spread from country to country and from societal sector to societal sector through particular patterns and routes, the chapter will, moreover, present Røvik’s theory on organizational idea transfer. The research question to be addressed in this chapter is: –– What characterizes the theoretical frameworks behind metaphors, images, and similar concepts and behind idea transfer between organizations? In particular, the chapter will deal with metaphor theory or rather: theories about metaphors and on how such theories can be translated into library contexts. Concerning metaphor theories the chapter will, especially, focus on two main strains: 1. the language theory oriented, and 2. the organizational theoretical tradition. The first line of thought is here represented by Lakoff and Johnson (1980), while the organization theory introduction draws on several authors (Boxenbaum & Rouleu 2011; Brunsson & Winberg 1997; Cornelissen 2015; Cornelissen & Kafouros 2008; Morgan 1980, 1993; Oswick, Keenoy & Grant 2002; Røvik 2011; Tinker 1986; Tourangeau & Rips 1991; Tsoukas 1991; Weick 1989). The two strains both share a number of elements, for example, concerning what defines a metaphor. However, they are also different in several respects, for example, by focusing on either individual or organizational contexts and by having different purposes: personal development and openness (the Lakoff & Johnson tradition) and metaphorical thinking as an instrument to facilitate organizational theorizing (the organizational tradition). A framework for analyzing metaphors will also be presented in the chapter in order to be used in the following chapter 4 on the five library user metaphors. Furthermore, the chapter contains an introduction to the inspiring theore­ tical considerations on organizational idea handling and on transfer processes and outcomes of the Norwegian professor, Kjell Arne Røvik (2011). Røvik has criticized the “management fashion” theory, a dominant theory on how management ideas, trends and concepts travel around from one sector to another and, on a global scale, from country to country. He has, instead, introduced an alternative virus-inspired theory, which according to Røvik, is better able to equip scholars



Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts 

 33

with more sophisticated and appropriate concepts to deal with organizational idea-handling processes. Consequently, metaphors about library users are, in this book, not only seen as metaphors, but also as examples of travelling management ideas, trends, and organizational recipes. But does this comparison make sense at all? Are professional discourses and discussions concerning user metaphors altogether comparable to wandering global management trends and organizational recipes, which are Røvik’s key interests? There are, certainly, many similarities between metaphors used in library professional practice and travelling business concepts. As to the global aspect, many of the metaphors applied by the library profession within the last 40 years have both global roots and global distribution patterns. Client metaphorical language and expressions, for example, were not only popular among library professionals in the United States and in Great Britain, but also in the Scandinavian countries and in Australia. The same picture appears for the following customer trend, which also had global origins, inspired by the New Public Management movement, which facilitated the spread of the customer concept to public sector contexts. Also, the latest metaphor, the user as a partner, is found both in private sector and in public sector environments and on a global scale. For those reasons, referring to the global character of both library user metaphors and management trends, it seems to makes clear sense to use Røvik’s organizational idea framework and concepts on the movement and spread of library user metaphors.

Differences between metaphors and other terms When a library professional imagines and speaks about users as if they were citizens, clients, guests, or partners, she actually applies different metaphors to catch essential characteristics of her attitudes and behavior towards users. But what is the difference between the terms just mentioned and other commonly used terms like “borrower”, “user”, “visitor”, “patron”, and the like? Why is the language used sometimes called metaphorical, and sometimes literal? To address this important question, the chapter will begin with a presentation of some definitions and important theoretical frameworks dealing with the specific characteristics and importance of metaphorical use of words compared with their literal use. Included in the presentation is also a discussion of whether it makes sense to speak of, for example, library users as “guests” as metaphorical use compared with classical metaphors such as “argument is war”, “time is money”, and “Achilles is a lion.”

34 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

Lakoff’s and Johnson’s metaphor theory To deal with basic meaning of the word metaphor, one of the most important contributions to our understanding of this, and related topics, without doubt stems from the works of two American professors, George Lakoff (1941–) and Mark Johnson (1949–). During the presentation of Lakoff’s and Johnson’s metaphor theory, key concepts will be presented and placed in a library context. However, also more recent developments within metaphor theory will be referred to (Gibbs 2008) and some critical opinions and objections as to the use of metaphors will also be dealt with. Here, the American writer and political activist Susan Sontag (1933–2004) provides an example of a clear “metaphor hostile” position. In legal circles, among others, it is a widely held belief that metaphors should be avoided (Gibbs 2008, 10).

Organizational metaphor theory, images and Morgan Besides Lakoff’s and Johnson’s humanistic and language oriented approaches to metaphors, there exist other theoretical approaches which could inspire and inform an examination of library user metaphors. Within the social sciences there is a “long and rich” tradition of metaphor usage in organization theory (Røvik 2011, 634). According to Røvik, the role of metaphors in organization theory was hardly discussed until the early 1980s, when the American management author, Gareth Morgan (1943–), published his influential text Images of Organizations (Morgan 1980). Later, in 1993, came another book by Morgan, Imaginization – The Art of Creative Management, where, especially, the practical managerial aspects were in focus. Indeed, Morgan originally did not use the term “metaphor”; instead he chose the related term “image.” He believed images to be a powerful tool to create change and innovations in organizations. In fact, Morgan’s two classic books have the word “image” in their titles. However, it seems as if the meaning of the two terms, “image” and “metaphor”, is approximately the same. Later, after Morgan, a number of academic works have tried to reveal further the dynamics of using metaphors in theory-building efforts (Røvik 2011). Apparently, the concept “image”, like the “metaphor” concept, could be useful also in library contexts. Thus, “clients”, “customers”, “guests”, and “partners” can easily be seen also as alternative “images” in Morgan’s sense of the word as well. The section on organization oriented metaphor theory will introduce the role of metaphors in organization theory, which is somewhat different than its role in language, psychology, and cognitive science. Besides differences in overall purposes, communication and inter-personal understanding versus organizational innovation and theory-building, both Lakoff’s psychological and the organiza-



Language oriented metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson) 

 35

tional approach use the “metaphor” concept similarly as a mechanism which transfers structures and relations from one (source) domain – or context – to another (target) domain. However, there are several other interesting theoretical frameworks, which offer related, elaborated frameworks and concepts for understanding and dealing with phenomena similar to metaphors and images. Two of them, discourses and gazes, will be briefly presented and discussed. Finally, a section on Røvik’s approach to organizational idea handling and transfer will round off the chapter.

3.1 Language oriented metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson) We typically use the word “metaphor” when we speak about poetry or about rhetorical performances. The phrase “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players”, from Shakespeare’s As You Like It, represents a famous poetical use of metaphorical language. In the political sphere metaphors like the “Iron Curtain” from Winston Churchill’s speech at Fulton University in March 1946 have played an even more prominent role. The conspicuous characteristic of the metaphor in both examples is that the words are not used in their literal sense. The world is certainly not (only) a stage, and there existed no real “curtain of iron” dividing Europe in 1946. Metaphors often come into being when we import words from one sphere to another. In both examples, concepts from the theater – the scene and the curtain – have been transferred into broader life and geo-political contexts. Similarly, terms like “citizen” are transferred from a constitutional into a library service context, and “customer” from trade and commercial activities into a public sector environment. Metaphorical terms or metaphorically used terms are therefore different than ordinary words, where the literal meaning is the primary. “User”, “borrower”, and “visitor” represent such ordinary words with focus on the literal meaning. A library user is one who uses the library, a borrower one who borrows materials, and a visitor one who visits the library. But what about “patron”, which is a common Anglo-Saxon word for a library user or borrower? The etymology of this word – like the word “client” – goes back to classical Roman politics – where the obligation of the “patron” was to explain the law to his “clients” and to look out for them and their families; on the other hand, it was the client’s responsibility to serve his patron in every way. Indeed, there was a relation of mutual loyalty between patrons and clients (Taylor 1971, 41). Why is “patron”, then, considered to be an ordinary, literally understood word while the related “client” is seen as

36 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

a metaphor? The “client” is defined as a person who receives help or advice from a professional (e.g., a lawyer, an accountant, a social worker, an architect, etc.), while the word “patron” has two meanings: 1. a person who gives money or other support to a person, cause, activity, etc. and 2. a regular customer of a shop, restaurant, theater, etc. (Hornby 1989). The example shows that it is the daily use of a word rather than its etymology that determines whether the word should be treated as a neutral, ordinary word or as a metaphor. George Lakoff, who is professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, has developed his metaphor theory together with, Mark Johnson, professor of philosophy at the University of Oregon (Lakoff & Johnson 1980). Moreover, Lakoff, later, further elaborated his ideas about metaphors and categories in Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things – What Categories Reveal about the Mind (1987). The 1980 book, Metaphors We Live by (Lakoff & Johnson 1980) grew out of an interest in the concept of “meaning.” The aim of Metaphors We Live by was to change the situation where the metaphor concept was reserved for poetical and rhetorical contexts by making metaphors a matter of central concern not only in relationship to language, but also as something which affects the way we think, perceive and act. Basically, if we accept this premise – that metaphors represent a matter of central concern – it becomes important to reflect on how we actually use metaphors in our professional work. Lakoff and Johnson focus particularly on how we can use metaphors to create mutual understanding with other people and other cultures. “Metaphorical imagination is a crucial skill in creating rapport and in communicating … This skill consists, in large measure, of the ability to bend your own world view and adjust the way you categorize your experience.” (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 231). Translated into a practical, professional context, the meaning is certainly that it is important for both leaders and staff to pay attention to how we categorize our users and always to consider alternatives or modifications of prevailing categories and categorization criteria.

Definitions of metaphor Lakoff and Johnson define the concept of metaphor as the understanding and experiencing (of) one thing in terms of another. They also use the term “structural metaphors” to indicate when one concept, for example argument, is structured in terms of another, for example, war (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 14). Although argu-



Language oriented metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson) 

 37

ments and wars are different kinds of things – verbal discourse and armed conflict – and the actions performed are quite different, argument is, however, often metaphorically structured, understood, performed and talked about in terms of war. Similar definitions appear in Giesecke (2010, 55) who defines metaphors as “phrases that connect unlike items that actually have something in common where one thing is used to designate the other”. Metaphors can be used to support both existing values and ideas, but they can also be very useful during change processes, where images can be created to see things differently, to expand our views and to help us to accept new ideas.

Importance of metaphors As a notion with more or less exotic applications, metaphors are often seen as a rare phenomenon related to rather special social contexts. As mentioned, Lakoff and Johnson (1980, ix) argue against such a marginalizing point of view. In contrast, they point out that metaphors are “pervasive in everyday language and thoughts.” Since then a huge body of empirical work from many academic disciplines has demonstrated the ubiquity of the metaphor in both everyday and specialized language. Metaphor is not simply an “ornamental aspect of language, but a fundamental scheme by which people conceptualize the world and their own activities” (Gibbs 2008, 3). Against this background, Lakoff and Johnson wonder why metaphors are only allowed a minor role in most Western philosophical views. Here, another central aspect of Lakoff and Johnson’s thinking on metaphors becomes visible. Indeed, they not only see metaphors as central elements of daily language, but they also consider them to be a vital component in how we think. Their central point is that metaphor is not just a matter of words and language (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 6). On the contrary, human thought and cognition processes are highly metaphorical too. Thus metaphors, according to them, should always be specified and understood as a “metaphorical concept.” Lakoff and Johnson, furthermore, argue that the concepts that govern our thoughts are not just matters of pure intellectual activities. They also govern our everyday functioning, down to the most mundane details: Our concepts structure what we perceive, how we get around in the world, and how we relate to other people. Our conceptual system thus plays a central role in defining our everyday realities. If we are right in suggesting that our conceptual system is largely metaphorical, then the way we think, what we experience, and what we do every day is very much a matter of metaphor. (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 3).

38 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

It is especially the latter quality – metaphors as change agents – that is emphasized by both psychological and management oriented authors. There even seems to be a connection between the emergence in the 1980s of more creative, intuitive and empowered approaches to management and a growing interest in using me­­ taphors and images to facilitate change processes (Morgan 1993, 314).

Metaphors in library contexts The same thing occurs when a library management consciously decides to understand and treat its users metaphorically as, for example, guests. Often, however, we are not always conscious of the metaphors behind our conventional way of talking and of thinking. This point is also valid in library contexts; often staff members are not aware when they – unconsciously – treat their users as helpless clients rather than as competent citizens or demanding consumers. Lakoff and Johnson also emphasize that we might not even be aware of which metaphors operate behind our daily language and our expressions when we, for example, try to “win” or “lose” a discussion. This means, transferred into library contexts, that the question of when and how professionals use metaphors about their users represents much more than a superficial issue (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 4–6). The way we address a user, for example, may depend fundamentally on whether we see the user as a client, a customer, or a guest.

Cultural barriers and interpretations Another important feature addressed by Lakoff and Johnson is that metaphors are not universally understood. Rather, they are culturally and historically determined. They argue, for example, that a metaphor like “Time is money” would probably not make sense in all cultural contexts and traditions. Therefore, knowledge and familiarity with cultural codes is required to understand fully the meaning of the typical – rather implicit – metaphor. The metaphor “Achilles is a lion” certainly should not be interpreted as Achilles looks like a lion, but rather that he is brave and strong like a lion. However, to catch that meaning one should possess a certain amount of classical cultural knowledge, for example, familiarity with Homer, Greek epic poems, the major characters of the Iliad, etc. Due to such ambiguities, it is probable that especially innovative user me­­ taphors will be met with opposition and resistance. A recent example illustrates the point. Librarians at a large Danish provincial public library were encouraged by their library leaders and some colleagues to start to consider and treat their users as if they were “guests.” The opposition by parts of the staff to that request



Language oriented metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson) 

 39

was certainly rooted in specific cultural interpretations and values concerning what to be a “guest” really meant. Indeed, such cultural traditions made it difficult for some staff members to treat their job-related users as if they were private guests (Johannsen 2014b). Similar examples of professional resistance are found concerning the user-is-a-customer metaphor. Here again many library professio­ nals have reacted negatively, probably because they consider that a customer is a person who buys services for money, which a public library user, usually, does not need to do.

Metaphor’s partial transfer of characteristics Such reactions towards the introduction of new metaphors leads to another important feature concerning metaphors. When using a metaphor one only partially transfers or projects certain characteristics on to an entity. Achilles thus shares his courage and strengths with the lion but, for example, not its mane, claws, etc. Similarly, when we metaphorically claim that “the-user-is-a-customer” or “the-user-is-a-guest” we certainly also, at least implicitly, exclude certain characteristics of customers and guest when we transfer these concepts to library users. Traditionally, for example, customers pay for the services they enjoy, and guests are typically friends or relatives; both are circumstances which are rarely present in library contexts. But as mentioned above, it can be difficult for professionals to swallow metaphorical translations – especially if they are felt to be in contrast to ingrained values and beliefs.

Controversial issues Here the conflict between competing user metaphors involves much more than pure language aspects; especially for the two metaphors: 1. the-user-as-a-client, and 2. the-user-as-a-customer. Therefore, I think that there are good reasons to accept the claim of Lakoff and Johnson that metaphors represent an issue of central importance not only within philosophical and language contexts, but also as a professional concern. Not all metaphorical concepts are, however, equally useful in practice. Since metaphors allow us to focus on one particular aspect of a concept, a metaphorical concept can also keep us from focusing on other aspects, which are inconsistent with that metaphor (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 10). Thus, the idea of the library user as a “customer” is likely to block, for example, the more cultural, welfare state, and educative aspects of librarianship. Of course, a customer can also demand

40 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

education, but usually a customer just wants to get the library materials he or she actually demands; she or he does not want, at least not always, to be lectured about the advantages of alternative literature choices. Similarly, a client oriented user metaphor is likely to have paternalistic effects, underestimating and neglec­­­ting the importance of the user’s own competences and ability to judge, subjective preferences, and authentic demands. It seems that becoming aware of governing metaphorical concepts about users is an important step towards modifying or changing inadequate but unconsciously held metaphors into more conscious ones.

Related concepts: metonymies Metaphors are certainly the main focus of Lakoff’s and Johnson’s thinking, although they also deal with related concepts such as metonymies. Metonymies, in many respects, resemble metaphorical concepts. A metonymy could, for example, be a sentence like, “There are a lot of good heads in the library” (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 35–40). Whereas a metaphor is a way of conceiving of one thing in terms of another, metonymy allows us to use one entity to stand for another. In the example, “good heads” stands for intelligent people or something like that. Metonymies, however, also determine which particular aspect to focus on. In the example the particular characteristic is intelligence. Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 37) stress that metonymies – like metaphors – are not only poetic or rhetorical devices; metonymic concepts are also part of our everyday life and they structure our thoughts, attitudes, and actions.

Critical opinions against the use of metaphors Most of the discussion hitherto about metaphor has been rather positive, focusing on how metaphors can help both to facilitate understanding and also to contribute to innovation and progress. However, also critical opinions have been raised against the use of metaphors or, to be more precise, about the specific dangers of using metaphorical thinking in specific contexts such as health and illness. The American writer, Susan Sontag, for example, has especially criticized the use of militaristic metaphors about diseases like cancer; the diseases are treated as if they were invading aliens and the resistance of patients as battles, and the like. She argues that “the most truthful way of regarding illness … is one purified of … metaphoric thinking” (Sontag 1990, 3). Some professions are correspondingly on guard towards metaphorical language (Gibbs 2008, 10). Philosophers can also express critical attitudes towards the use of metaphors instead of



Language oriented metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson) 

 41

well-defined concepts, considering it as a kind of intellectual laziness and populist anti-intellectualism. To what extent does Sontag’s argument make sense in professional contexts? Are metaphors and metaphorical language and thinking really as harmful as she claims? Should we follow Sontag and avoid the use of creative metaphors in campaigns and service development projects? Should we, instead, concentrate on defining objective, precise and specified goals and strategies? Should the profession substitute diverse creative metaphors by using only consciously neutral terms like “user”, “borrower”, “visitor”, and the like? Should, for example, the Danish public library in Aalborg (Johannsen 2014b) have abstained from their 2011–2012 service-development campaign, where the user-as-guest metaphor was heavily used and, instead, have focused on purely objective, measurable and defined labels and goals? Or is the problem, rather than an either/or issue, an area where different concerns should be balanced, as a recent commentator on Sontag suggests (Holmes 2011)? Holmes recommends that instead of totally avoiding the use of metaphors, Sontag’s warnings could be used to teach professionals of all kinds –within both hospitals and libraries – to read both their own and their patients’ and users’ metaphors critically. She argues that health care professionals should learn to “listen to, allow, (and) consider their patient’s metaphors” about their illnesses. She further disagrees with Sontag that it is possible to stop the use of metaphors: “stopping metaphors is like ceasing to eat and breathe”. Indeed, neither does Holmes share Sontag’s opinion that the use of metaphors is likely to hurt or damage the patients; on the contrary, she points out many ways to use metaphors, some of which might even decrease the suffering of the patients. Obviously, the discussion about metaphors in the health sector has developed from a discussion for or against the use of metaphors to a discussion about the proper use of metaphors. Holmes (2011) concludes that, “Learning more about how me­­ taphor powers the engine of life narratives enables us to shift that dynamic so that we can live by metaphors rather than in their thrall.” The same seems to be true also in library contexts. An important insight which can be derived from Lakoff’s and Johnson’s me­­ taphor theory is that metaphors apparently operate at both a conscious and an unconscious level. The conscious approach appears when we decide to use – or not to use – a specific metaphor which, for example, could be the guest metaphor about library users. The unconscious use appears when we, without being particularly aware of it, talk about our adult users as if they were helpless clients or forgetful children.

42 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

Categories of metaphors Metaphors can also be further divided into several categories: 1. structural 2. orientational, and 3. ontological. Structural metaphors are metaphors like “Argument is war” where we conceptualize arguments in terms of battles and use expressions from the vocabulary of war, e.g., to attack a position when we talk about discussions. Orientational metaphors occur when we metaphorically refer to spatial orientations: up-down, central-peripheral, and the like. Examples of orientational metaphors could be: “My spirits rose.” “I’m feeling down.” “I fell into depression.” (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 14–24).

Finally, we have the ontological metaphors where emotions, events, activities, ideas etc. are viewed as entities (Lakoff & Johnson 1980, 25–32). Examples of sentences containing ontological metaphors could be: “She’s very fragile.” “The experience shattered him.” “He broke under cross-examination.”

and the like, where the mind is seen as a fragile object and “My mind just isn’t operating”, where the mind is seen as a machine. Metaphors for library users are most similar to the structural metaphors. For example, when using the-user-is-a-customer metaphor one talks about library users applying the vocabulary of customer relationships. As summarized eloquently by Gibbs, you use metaphors when you wish to explain complex issues: Speakers use metaphorical language, and engage in metaphorical thought, in complex, often contradictory patterns that make simple conclusions about both the ubiquity and structure of metaphor difficult to make ... Many contemporary scholars exhibit great enthusiasm for uncovering the messy reality of metaphor use. (Gibbs 2008, 4 ).

Finally, it is important to mention that metaphors in language and culture are dynamic factors that both shape and are shaped by dialogue and ongoing talk (Gibbs 2008, 8). It is also important that people may have entirely different metaphorical understandings of ideas and events. I have already mentioned how, for



Organization oriented metaphor theory (Røvik & Morgan) 

 43

example, the library-user-as-a-guest metaphor and the associated metaphorical language were understood in quite different ways by library professionals. From a psychological and language oriented approach to metaphors, we will now turn to an approach more flavored by organizational and management science.

3.2 Organization oriented metaphor theory (Røvik & Morgan) In this section we will examine social science inspired approaches to metaphor theory. In particular the section will deal with two primary approaches: 1. Concepts and distinctions proposed by Kjell Arne Røvik and other organizational scientists, for example, between explicatory and generative effects of metaphors; and 2. Gareth Morgan’s theory of images and imaginization. After the presentation of the two approaches I will conclude the chapter by discussing how the two different approaches could be implemented in an organization. The presented concept will be illustrated further by examples from library and public library contexts.

3.2.1 Metaphor theory according to Røvik and other organizational scientists We will start the presentation by examining what different kinds of impact metaphors are believed to possess according to social science theory. Here, the distinction between “explicatory impact” and “generative impact” is vital (Røvik 2011, 634). Explicatory impact occurs when metaphors are used as tools to develop already existing knowledge (Black 1962; Tinker 1986). Such kinds of impact are restricted to “making the unfamiliar familiar” (Oswick, Keenoy & Grant 2002). Generative impact, however, occurs when novel insights about the target domain are achieved. Such insights can make metaphors into full-blown “surprise machines.” Røvik illustrates the two kinds of impact by referring to his own research on organizational idea-transfer processes. He here compares two metaphors associated with organizational idea-transfer: 1. the traditional approach according to which transfer of ideas can be seen metaphorically as a “management fashion” phenomena and 2. his own alternative virus-inspired metaphor.

44 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

His point is here that the virus-metaphor has more generative impacts compared with the traditional fashion approach. The infectiousness concept, which is an integral feature of the virus metaphor, thus challenges the fashion theory’s notion of, for example, passive fashion consumers and active fashion producers and fashion mediators. Consequently, the new metaphor opens up for quite new and innovative ways of thinking, for example, to operate with complex collaborating, co-production roles instead of simple consumer/ producer dichotomies (Røvik 2011, 647).

A library example of explicatory and generative effects The distinction between explicatory and generative effects of metaphors can also be illustrated by a public library example which has a certain likeness to that just mentioned. Recently, public libraries in the USA have started to consider their users – or to be more precise, some of their IT savvy users – as partners rather than traditional users, clients or customers. The partner metaphor opens up for a broad variety of co-operative arrangements which were more and less unthinkable within the earlier metaphorical framework of user, client or customer. The innovative aspect of the partner metaphor certainly illustrates that generative impacts also are relevant to libraries.

Dormancy Among Røvik’s virus-inspired metaphor framework there are further aspects which could be transferred to library contexts, for example, the “dormancy” feature. Dormancy is here characterized as an important – or salient – feature of the source part of the virus metaphor. Dormancy refers to the fact that organizational activities related to an adopted management idea are often discontinued. Management by objectives (MBO) was, for example, formally adopted by a certain company in 1976. Then, in 1979, a dormant state occurred, lasting until 1983 when the MBO concept was reactivated. Thus, a dormant idea can be “turned on” again. Within library contexts it has also appeared that service concepts which seem to have been obsolete for some time get a renaissance. For example, the client metaphor, which has been challenged by the customer concept since the 1980s, seems to reappear in different shapes from time to time; e.g., as applicable to immigrants, digital illiterates, and the like. Therefore, dormancy and reactivation of dormant user images is not only a phenomenon characterizing management ideas, but also something that could happen in library contexts. A common reaction of staff to service-development



Organization oriented metaphor theory (Røvik & Morgan) 

 45

projects in libraries that apply elements from earlier projects is the dismissive “we-have-already-tried-it-before” attitude.

Organizational implementation I will now address the problem concerning how the different metaphor and image concepts can be implemented in organizations such as, for example, libraries. Both Røvik and Morgan have addressed the issue but in different ways. However, they probably all share the opinion that the primary purpose of using metaphors is not only to support mutual understanding and tolerance, which was a high priority goal for Lakoff and Johnson; they also emphasize that metaphors can support and stimulate innovation, contribute to the development of new pro­ ducts in business contexts, and the like. It is Røvik who recommends probably the most systematic and rationalistic approach to metaphor based development and innovation. We will therefore start with his thoughts about how metaphorical thinking can contribute to beneficial organizational effects. The systematic and rational approach does not mean, however, that he rejects the use of intuition and imagination. In contrast, he recognizes that metaphors can add “magic” to theory development processes. Nevertheless, he also criticizes much earlier metaphor usage for being fortuitous rather than the result of planned strategies (Røvik 2011, 634).

Metaphor usage model Røvik’s model for systemizing metaphor usage contains two main columns. The left contains the essential features of the source part of the metaphor and the right column the target part. Røvik illustrates the model through a depiction of his own virus-inspired theory about how management ideas are being handled by organizations. The left column thus sums up six key characteristics of a virus: infectiousness, immunity, replication, incubation, mutation and dormancy, while the right summarizes corresponding organizational idea-handling processes. One might also say that the right column contains a translation from the source to the target of central characteristics. The translation ensures that the characteristics also make sense in the new target context. A concept like “mutation”, for example, would probably not make very much sense in an organizational context. The word “translation”, on the other hand, has a better chance of being understood in an organizational context. Therefore, it is also important to emphasize that it is not only a matter of pure and mechanical translation; there is also a good deal of interpretation involved. Indeed, Røvik emphasizes that the

46 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

translation process deals more with construction rather than deciphering (Røvik 2011, 635). Table 3-1 Source-target relationships in metaphors: example: viral features and corresponding organizational idea handling processes. Viral features

Corresponding organizational idea handling processes

Infectiousness

Adoption Non-adoption Isolation Expiry Rejection Entrenchment Maturation Translation Inactivation Reactivation

Immunity Replication Incubation Mutation Dormancy

Source: Røvik 2011, 646.

Source and target domains and knowledge imbalances One conspicuous consequence of using Røvik’s model to generate new ideas is that it must be admitted that metaphor importation requires thorough knowledge of both the target and the source domain. Otherwise it is unlikely that a skilled translation of terms and concepts from the source to the target will take place. He admits that most importation of metaphor in the organization science fields suffer from a “chronic imbalance” in disfavor of source domains, which can lead to simplistic or even false metaphorical representations of the source domain. It is evident, for example, that Røvik himself, as an organization science specialist, possesses a deeper knowledge of organizational idea-handling processes than of pathological viral features. Therefore, he is aware that his methodological argument on knowledge imbalances also has consequences for his own research role not being a virologist. However, he assures that he has striven to “dig as deep as possible” into the domain of viruses to avoid the knowledge imbalance problem (Røvik 2011, 636).

Metaphor importation in libraries The same imbalance problem may also occur in connection with metaphor importation in library contexts. However, the amount of knowledge imbalance problems certainly depends on the distance between the source and the target



Organization oriented metaphor theory (Røvik & Morgan) 

 47

domains. Users are much more closely related to clients, customers, and guests than organizational idea-transfer processes are related to diseases and viruses. Nevertheless, knowledge imbalances and interpretation problems can still influence the importation of more closely related metaphors. Sometimes such know­ ledge imbalances are determined not only by lack of knowledge about the source domain but also by prejudices and different ideological convictions. For example, if you are basically skeptical towards the New Public Management concept, it is also likely that you will dislike the importation of the user-as-a-customer concept in your library.

Ability to generate tensions The imbalance notion opens another interesting discussion on the concept of “between-domain” distance in the context of the capacity of metaphors to ge­­ nerate tensions and surprises. Different organizational theorists (Morgan 1983; Cornelissen & Kafouras 2008) have formulated “somewhat paradoxical criteria of metaphors with a high potential for advancing insights about organizations” (Røvik 2011, 635). On the one hand, the metaphor should come from a source domain sharing sufficient similarities with the target domain. On the other hand, the source domain should also be sufficiently different to generate tensions, new insights and surprises. Applying such a yardstick, one could question whether the suggested library user metaphors are sufficiently different from the target user to generate productive tensions. However, not only the conceptual but also the psychological distance between the concepts plays a role here. At least, examples demonstrate that even source domains that are, conceptually, relatively closely related, like customers and guests, have created both tensions and resistance within the library profession.

3.2.2 Morgan’s “images” The “image” concept in organizational contexts was originally coined by Gareth Morgan (1980, 1993). However, in his writings Morgan seems to use the terms image and metaphor as synonyms. For example, he speaks of the “art of using metaphors to find new ways of seeing, understanding, and shaping their actions” (Morgan 1993, i–xxxi). He emphasizes that ideas about organizations are often based on implicit images or metaphors that persuade us to see, understand, and manage situations in a particular way. Images have strengths because they create insights; their weakness is, on the other hand, that they also create blinding

48 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

“ways of not seeing.” Morgan admits that there can be no single metaphor that serves all purposes. Therefore, he sees handling metaphors as more like an art than a science. The same pattern is clearly visible in his very positive attitude towards stories and story-telling, where it is the “resonance that the story creates in the reader’s mind” that is important, compared with the generalizability of a scientific paper. Indeed, knowledge created through “imaginization” is much closer to knowledge developed through art and literature than to scientific know­ ledge (Morgan 1993, 306). Indeed, Morgan’s basic understandings are very much inspired by the challenges of the modern knowledge based world, where he believes that more creative, intuitive, and empowered approaches are needed. In a world where the main challenge is to “facilitate and encourage processes of self-organization” (Morgan 1993, 314) “imaginization” and the use of metaphors represent appropriate responses.

Personal and organizational development Morgan also points out that personal and organizational development through metaphors run parallel: “If we can rethink organizations through metaphors, why not ourselves?” (Morgan 1993, 314). Developments in psychotherapy, medicine, and the field of personal development have utilized images and metaphors to help people gain insights about their current situation. Although this observation is about 20 years old, it is probably still valid.

Action-learning Using metaphors is a means to find new ways of seeing, understanding and – not least – shaping actions. Morgan’s development philosophy is much inspired by the action-learning style of research. Action-learning is an approach that holds that it is possible to fuse the development of theory and practice and to understand more about organizations through direct involvement and problem-solving activity rather than as “more detached academic observers” (Morgan 1993, 296– 312). To Morgan images and “imaginization” represent, fundamentally, a specific way of appropriate thinking when navigating in a turbulent world. Therefore, he considers images and using images as a key managerial skill; he firmly believes that “imaginization” could improve effectiveness and strategies in business companies (Morgan 1986, 1993). In the following, the terms images and metaphors will be used almost synonymously. As Morgan points out, metaphors and images can offer both positive as well as negative insights including diverse professional prejudices and delusions about the users.



Discourses and gazes 

 49

The writings of Morgan contain a number of interesting and often provocative examples of metaphors of organizations, such as “self-organized termite colonies”, “beehives” or “anthills” as alternatives to earlier rational, preplanned, and centralized strategic management models. The close relationship between new management trends and the emergence of new metaphors is remarkable as is the influence of contemporary management theories on chaos, self-organization, and the like.

Library applications A similar pattern can also be observed in the field of libraries where there are several examples – e.g., the-user-as-customer and the-user-as-partner – of inspiration borrowed from broader management trends like New Public Management. Compared with Røvik and other organization theorists, Morgan’s approach to metaphors is certainly less systematic and scientific. The two approaches of Røvik and Morgan thus illustrate the span between a research and a consultancy /action-research oriented approach. I will now briefly present two additional and related approaches with similar but also different focuses.

3.3 Discourses and gazes The concept of discourse is inspired by the French philosopher-historian Michel Foucault (1926–1984) and others like Laclau and Mouffe (Winther Jørgensen 2002). The discourse concept relates to the way we speak about social pheno­ mena. Discourses are, therefore, also likely to catch important aspects of the relationship between a profession and its clients or users.

Foucault Foucault’s methodological approach was characterized by two different but both history oriented frameworks: 1. the archaeology of knowledge, and 2. the genealogical approach (Gutting 2005). Foucault’s archaeology treated systems of thought as discursive formations, whereas the transitions from one system to another were explained through the genealogical approach. User metaphors such as “client” or “customer” could also be analyzed archaeologically as specific discursive formations. Transitions, on

50 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

the other hand, such as the development from the 1970s when the public library user as a client dominated, to the 1980s, when the customer image took over, for example, could be regarded as a genealogically oriented development process. Foucault recognizes the relevance and importance of the economic, social, and political causes of such changes; however, he rejects the relevance of unitary, teleological schemata like Marxist historicism. Rather, he sees changes as due to a number of contingent products of many petty causes and unconnected facts. When considering the transitions from the dominance of one particular user metaphor to another, it is therefore, according to Foucault’s way of thin­­king, difficult to pinpoint a set of universally operating forces. Whereas economic conditions and crises and related ideological developments may have played a role, when moving from the client to the customer image during the 1980s, other factors, e.g., information technology developments, seem more likely to explain the recent emergence of the partner role. It is also important to mention that Foucault’s analyses of, for example, the clinic or the modern scientific hospital (Foucault 2003), are nonjudgmental; he does not view the developments as either good or bad. However, he shows how modernity has enslaved us spiritually through the regimes of bureaucratic and professional control operated by institutions. He thereby questions the history of modernity as a “straightforward story of progress, of advancing social enlightenment, and increasing personal liberty” (Black 2005, 43). Neither can the development of different user metaphors within the library profession be seen as a straightforward story of progress. Among the library profession there certainly exists a segment who would have difficulty in seeing the development from the client role to the customer role as an example of advancing social enlightenment. Although libraries never occurred among Foucault’s cases and examples (Black 2005), obvious similarities and parallels could be identified in the deve­ lopment of hospitals and of public libraries in the nineteenth century. When clinical experience became the basis of medical knowledge, “the medical gaze … engineered a shift in the relationship between doctor and patient” (Black 2005, 421). Like a parent watching over the destiny of a child, doctors became masters of their patients. Black (2005) sees a similar development among British public libraries by pointing at aspects of the discourse of public libraries focusing on control, discipline and order. Indeed, he speaks about the “intrusive gaze” of the librarian’s surveillance. Foucault’s view of the professions devoted to the establishment of “regimes of truth” might also be translated into a public library context. Here, the libra­ rian is seen as a gatekeeper, both holding the keys to culture and knowledge and offering protection from its dangers (Black 2005, 419). The concept of “regimes of



Discourses and gazes 

 51

truth” is also to a certain extent present in the client role where the user is surrounded by different experts who know what is good and not good for the user. Foucault was very interested in studying both knowledge as intellectual structures and as power. In a library context, for example, power could be the power to decide which perceived user information needs are the objective and real ones and which are the subjective and false.

Discourse analyses Analyses of discourses (Forrester, Ramsden & Reason 1997) constitute a central part of Foucault’s approach. Professional discourses concerning library users have been studied in the Swedish public library system by Hedemark, Hedman and Sundin (2005). Their analysis is based on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe’s (1985) discourse theory (see also Winther Jørgensen 2002). Four distinctive user discourses were revealed: 1. a general education discourse 2. a pedagogical discourse 3. an information technology discourse, and 4. an information management discourse. The data on which their analysis was based consisted of articles published in Swedish library journals between January 1999 and February 2002. They selected 62 texts from three professional library journals: Bibliotek i Samhälle [Library in Society], Biblioteksbladet [The Library Newspaper], and Ikoner [Icons]. Many conceptual and methodological similarities exist between the Swedish discourse analysis and the metaphor inspired approach of this book. However, the results achieved appear to be quite different. Indeed, none of the five user metaphors I discuss in this book seems to be hidden behind the four principal professional discourses. Another concept which has been applied by Foucault and others is “gaze.”

John Urry – The Tourist Gaze In his book The Tourist Gaze (2002), the English sociologist John Urry describes how his own use of the gaze concept was inspired by Foucault’s medical gaze, although Urry admits that tourism has very little in common with the serious “life and death” world of medicine. Urry’s book is rather “about consuming goods and services which are in some sense unnecessary” (Urry 2002, 1). However, although medicine and tourism differ from each other there are nevertheless similarities too. For example, both the tourist and the medical gaze are socially organized

52 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

and systematized. Like Foucault, Urry also elaborates on the processes by which the gaze is constructed and how they interrelate with other social practices. An important difference is, however, that – compared with the medical gaze – the tourist gaze is not confined to professionals supported by an institution; many professional experts help to construct and develop our gaze as tourists but the role of central institutions is different than in the library and the health sectors. Moreover, in terms of focus, this book about library user metaphors seems to be more similar to the medical case since it shares the focus on how a profession – librarians – look upon the users of an institution of modernity, the public library, rather than the other way round: how the users look upon public libraries. The Tourist Gaze is however interesting for other reasons, for example, by dealing with how a particular gaze, the tourist gaze, varies by society, by social group and by historical period (Urry 2002, 1–15). Urry, here, certainly, applies both the archaeological and the genealogical approaches. It is also interesting here to deal a little with certain aspects of Urry’s methodology. He carefully defines which social practices could be described as tourism; for example, tourism is a leisure activity and not directly connected with paid work.

Library users and tourists Compared with a tourist, a library user is more easily identified through his or her formal connections with the library as an institution. However, the recent popularity of different outreach activities and partnerships between libraries and other public institutions or private companies is likely to blur the picture somewhat. Urry also tries to make theoretical sense of tourism understood as “fun, pleasure and entertainment.” Here, the quite different contexts of tourism on the one hand and activities like medicine and library work on the other are remarkable. However, as the experience society has developed and experiences and ideas from the tourist sector are being adopted by public libraries (Johannsen 2014b), tourist concepts, metaphors, and discussions, could attract interest among librarians too.

Critical opinions Within the tourist management literature, some have criticized the images gene­ rated by different tourist gazes as a “closed self-perpetuating systems of illusions” and as pseudo-events. Travel agents, hotel managers, and other professionals within tourism are described as “surrogate parents” whose job it is to relieve the tourist of responsibility and protect him or her from the harshness of reality. Such



Organizational idea handling (Røvik) 

 53

critical positions have, on the other hand, been challenged by others who maintain that such critical attitudes towards the tourist industry reflect an upper-class view. All tourists, indeed, embody a quest for authenticity. It is also discussed whether the search for authenticity or something else represents the basis of tourism. Some argue that the key feature of tourism could be to emphasize the difference between one’s normal residence and the object of the tourist gaze (Urry 2002, 7–12).

Experience versus knowledge Some would, nevertheless, find tourism less relevant as a source of inspiration for public libraries because they think that libraries should rather focus on enlightenment and information than on experiences. However, ideas from the experience economy have influenced the public library sector in many countries; tourism, in particular, lies behind recent library development projects in Denmark (see chapter four on the guest metaphor). Also, the recent focus on library architecture and design and on iconic library buildings (Skot-Hansen, Hvenegaard Rasmussen & Jochumsen 2012) seems to operate with related ideas focusing on establishing and sustaining a division between the ordinary and the extraordinary and similar experience economy oriented distinctions and ideas (Urry 2002, 12).

3.4 Organizational idea handling (Røvik) As I will show in the following chapter (chapter 4), each of the five user metaphors has its own history of how it first appeared in a library context, when and how it was received by the profession, when and how it was accepted or rejected, when and how it perhaps was modified and changed, maybe, when and how it was implemented more or less, and how it became obsolete or reappeared in new versions. Depending on which particular metaphor we focus on, the history can be quite different. The customer metaphor, for example, first appeared in library contexts in the 1980s, while the related user-as-a-guest concept was not introduced in libraries until many years later in the 2010s.

Theories on spread of management trends – fashions or viruses? There exist at least two dominating sociological theories about how management trends and concepts spread and travel across national borders and societal sectors. User metaphors can be regarded as a phenomenon related to manage-

54 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

ment trends. It is obvious that the one theory, the management fashion theory, does not fit very well with the empirical observations made concerning the spread of user metaphors. Especially, the conception of fashion as a transient and superficial phenomenon, primarily affecting surfaces, contrasts with the circumstance that some of the metaphors, for example, citizens, clients, and customers, have succeeded in having both long-term and substantial effects. The alternative, Røvik’s virus-inspired theory, on the other hand, seems to allow a more differentiated and nuanced understanding of how management ideas and user metaphors travel into and between modern libraries. The results concerning the research sub-question about possible differences have been presented in the sections on each of the metaphors. Although the history of each of the metaphors is quite different, the search for regularities and common processes also makes sense. An attitude often seen in the library sector towards new management concepts is the rather skeptical view of management concepts as nothing but short-lived fashions. Among the staff it is often whispered that they are particularly anxious whenever their boss returns from a management course or seminar, laden with new ideas about how to change and innovate their library. However, the staff also often find comfort in knowing that the chief’s excitement usually passes after, typically, a rather short time. The view that imported management ideas are short-lived phenomena is also widespread among sociologists and organization scientists. Indeed, Røvik says that “various versions of management fashion theory” have for a long time dominated studies of organizations’ idea-handling processes (Røvik 2011, 631). However, he challenges the notion of popular management ideas as only transitory and superficial phenomena. Furthermore, he is also skeptical towards the assumption that management concepts are seen as mere decorations that do not influence organizational practices (Røvik 2011, 633). Although management ideas and library user metaphors, as already mentioned, are different in certain respects, they also share a number of traits which make theories concerning travelling management ideas relevant as to the topic of this book on user metaphors too. Indeed, if library user metaphors can be regarded as a specific category or a sub-category of management ideas, the discussion of the pros and cons of the management fashion versus Røvik’s own construction, a virus-inspired theory, would be highly relevant also when dealing with the transfer of library user metaphors.



Organizational idea handling (Røvik) 

 55

Libraries and the fashion theory Let us first take a closer look at the question whether the fashion theory fits the experiences with the transfer of user metaphors in the library sector. First, however, a short introduction to key elements of the fashion theory seems to be appropriate. The fashion paradigm started in the early 1990s and has grown conside­ rably since. The starting point for this school of thought has been the observation, based on numerous examples of management ideas, that the lifecycles of the ideas were, typically, bell shaped, characterized by rapid upswings followed by equally rapid downturns. Such lifecycles seemed to be similar to the typical popularity curves of fashions and fads. The notion of a management fashion was defined by Eric Abrahamson (1996, 257), one of the founding fathers of the management fashion theory, as a “relatively transitory collective belief.” Another characteristic feature of the fashion theory is its emphasis on a clear distinction between passive fashion consumers and active producers or mediators. The corresponding common experience shows an active consultant manipulating naïve and uncritical library leaders to involve their libraries and staffs in expensive development and innovation projects. Furthermore, the typical picture will probably be that soon after the consultant has left the achieved project results more or less disappear in the routines of the daily work.

Use of citation analyses Røvik’s arguments against the fashion paradigm are several. First, a number of methodological shortcomings are pinpointed. For example, he is critical that the spread of management ideas has mostly been measured by citation analysis. Røvik finds this method problematic since the citation analysis only measures the intensity of the discourse and how newsworthy the ideas were, without necessarily revealing how and to what extent the ideas were actually implemented. As such there is no clear-cut relation or direct correspondence between how much a case or a concept has been discussed in different media and the real implemented influence or impact of the concept or the idea.

Long term effects A second and even more important objection, however, is that some studies reveal that certain management ideas – contrary to the fashion notion – turn out to have considerable staying power in organizations long after the newsworthiness of the ideas has expired. Indeed, Røvik (2011, 645) points out that “numerous empirical

56 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

observations of organizational idea-handling” do not fit with the basic assumptions of the management fashion paradigm.

Theoretical flaws Røvik not only criticizes the empirical anomalies of the fashion theory; he also, third, attacks its underlying theoretical foundations. Here, he points out that since the management fashion theorists disdainfully consider management ideas as only transitory and superficial phenomena, they fail to see their longitudinal and substantive organizational effects. The situation with obvious anomalies is comparable to what traditionally generates a shift of paradigm, since Røvik points out that these theoretical shortcomings cannot be overcome by modifying the fashion theory. A new framework – or paradigm – is therefore required.

Adoption processes We will here consider two areas where the two theories differ. One concerns the adoption processes where a management concept is received by an organization. It is useful here to have in mind that both the original fashion theory and Røvik’s virus-inspired theory operate at an organizational level, which is situated below the societal and above the individual level. According to the fashion theory, there appears to be a clear distinction between the active, rationally calculating fashion setters and their more or less passive and marionette-like followers. The virus-inspired theory, on the other hand, also makes place for more active consumer roles, an option inspired by the knowledge that viral infections involve a complex dynamic interaction between the virus and its host cells. Røvik also problematizes the character of the adoption processes as seen from the fashion theory’s point of view. Instead of opera­ ting with a simple adoption/rejection dichotomy, Røvik, again inspired by viral dynamics, sees a variety of options where the local actors can “emulate, combine, ignore, reject and enroll ideas;” even more importantly, local actors can actively translate and transform ideas and concepts to make them workable in local contexts. The roles of producers and consumers of new management ideas are much more collaborative than is assumed by the management fashion paradigm. To sum up, a closer look at real-time, organizational management idea adoption processes reveals much more complex processes than just adoption or rejection.



Organizational idea handling (Røvik) 

 57

Library contexts The interesting question is now to discuss to what extent Røvik’s arguments in favor of the virus-inspired theory also makes sense in library contexts dealing with user metaphors. First, it should be mentioned that management ideas and library user metaphors are still different, but nevertheless related things. The popular management ideas examined by Røvik and other researchers could, for example, be Total Quality Management, MBO, and the like. The user images, in comparison, have both a more restricted and, typically, a more informal character. Apart from costumers and guests, the library user metaphors are not integrated parts of larger comprehensive conceptual management frameworks. Therefore it can be quite difficult – if not impossible sometimes to determine whether a certain library or library system or national library system has adopted, or rejected, or something in between, a certain library user metaphor. If the leadership of the library or the local community has decided to implement a certain user image, like the user as a guest, a formal adoption certainly is at hand. But what about si­­ tuations where no clear signals from the leaders indicate preferences as to specific names for users or where only a minority of the librarians support, for example, the new term? Has this library adopted or rejected the term “customer”? It is also often difficult to find out whether a certain user image is offered to the library community by a specific producer or mediator. Furthermore, user metaphors are sometimes offered through top-down processes – this applies, for example, to the guest metaphor – and sometimes the process can be more bottom-up, as for example, the client metaphor of the 1970s. However, the stages and steps related to adoption and implementation of management ideas and library user metaphors might be approximately the same. Therefore, I will, in the following, try to use Røvik’s framework for organizational idea-handling on library user metaphors where it makes sense. For that purpose, a distinction between a number of separate idea handling steps will be made:

Ten basic idea handling processes in libraries Adoption: a formal decision has been made to adopt a certain user metaphor in a library. Non-adoption: a more or less deliberate organizational decision not to adopt a certain user metaphor in a library has been made. Isolation: a formally adopted, but not implemented, user metaphor resides in units often at a top-level in the library – the user metaphor is decoupled from organizational practices.

58 

 Theoretical considerations concerning metaphors, images, and similar concepts

Expiry: the formally adopted user metaphor evaporates, often without a formal decision. Rejection: the decision to stop using an adopted user metaphor – with reference to unsatisfactory results and/or incompatibility with the library’s institutional norms, logics and practices Implementation: the user metaphor is implemented into practice and anchored in the library’s structures, routines, and daily activities Maturation: the user metaphor lingers for a long time in the library before it is transformed into practice. Translation: the user metaphor is transformed during its implementation in the library. Inactivation: activities in the library related to an adopted user image either decrease or are discontinued. Reactivation: an adopted but dormant user metaphor is reactivated. Source: inspired by Røvik 2011, 646.

3.5 Summary In chapter 3 I identified some important aspects of the use of metaphors in professional contexts. One important point was that metaphors are more than poetical and rhetorical devices; they also influence both our daily language and how we think about professional issues. Moreover, an important distinction exists between metaphorical expressions and concepts and literal meanings. The words “user” or “borrower” represent a non-metaphorical language use by focusing, primarily, on the literal meaning whereas “citizen”, “customer”, and “partner” are metaphorical language expressions pointing at something which lies outside the literal meaning. The theoretical considerations in chapter 3 also revealed something about for which purposes metaphors can be useful. The close connection between me­­ taphors and language and thought processes suggests that metaphorical expressions and words are essential when examining and re-thinking how we think about our users; re-thinking about our users might also influence the way we act and deliver services to them. The power of metaphors as a means to create organizational innovation and change, recognized by organization theorists, also indicates that metaphors have potentials far beyond their poetical and rhetorical performances. Typically, new metaphorical user concepts are integrated in inno-

Summary 

 59

vative strategies; sometimes the marketing of new terms for users are, moreover, seen as a prominent part of the change process, for example, when the user-asa-guest metaphor was implemented in some Danish public libraries from 2011. Moreover, the chapter looked at the complexities surrounding the spread of management ideas across organizational, cultural, and national borders. Here, two different theories were compared. According to one, the fashion theory, ideas and concepts are spread like fashions, promoted by designers and companies, and rapidly becoming outdated again. Røvik’s alternative, the virus inspired theory, also recognizes that management concepts can be short-lived. However, it also acknowledges that idea spread patterns and processes are much more complex than suggested by the fashion theory, enabling phenomena like dormancy periods and more diverse actors to appear. A glance at the history of library user metaphors within the last 30 to 40 years suggests that the virus-inspired theory possesses a considerable degree of validity in library contexts. For example, it seems that the client metaphor has been reincarnated several times and in several shapes (towards different target groups such as disadvantaged users, immigrants, and digital illiterates) since the 1970s. Finally, the chapter presented two tables, 3-1 and 3-2, illustrating the interrelationships between source and target elements in metaphors (Table 3-1) and 10 basic steps of organizational idea transfer processes. The content and structure of both tables will inspire the presentation in the following chapter which addresses this book’s key topic: the five library user me­­ taphors. Moreover, it will deal with the origins and the idea history of each of the metaphors as well as examining the theories of social science and humanistic researchers, philosophers, and intellectuals which have contributed to the development of the particular user metaphor. When dealing with the “partner” metaphor, for example, it seems to be highly relevant to refer to Richard Florida (2002) and his influential book on the creative class.

4 Five library user metaphors We will now turn to the presentation of the five library user metaphors. They will be presented in approximately chronological order according to when each first appeared in a library context. The metaphors, in the sequence of presentation, are: 1. Citizen 2. Client 3. Customer 4. Guest 5. Partner That the order of presentation is only approximately chronological indicates that it sometimes can be quite difficult to determine when a certain metaphor appeared for the first time in the library literature. It can be even more difficult to find out when it appeared for the first time in the daily language vocabulary of the profession. It does not make things easier, either, following Røvik’s virus-inspired theory, that metaphors sometimes reappear in new shapes after inactive, dormant periods. An example from libraries could be that although the occurrence of articles on socially disadvantaged users seemed to thin out in the 1990s, compared with earlier decades, the literature on a related topic, immigrants, peaked after 2000. One could interpret such a phenomenon as a reappearance of the-user-as-a-client metaphor in a new shape, where the social disadvantaged users have been substituted by immigrants. However, in both cases, the client-metaphor signals weaknesses and helplessness rather than power and strengths. Nevertheless, it’s obvious that some metaphors, like that of the “partner”, more clearly represent a relatively recent, post-2000 phenomenon, focusing on related concepts like “user participation” and “user-based innovation.” Equally evident seems the fact that both the “customer” and the “guest” metaphors are closely connected to the New Public Management and the “experience society” trend respectively. Customers and guests appeared after the clients, who were, typically, associated with the library history phase of the 1970s and 1980s, when information and enlightenment were the primary goals of libraries. On the other hand, it is much more difficult to provide the “citizen” image with a similar, unambiguous chronological placement. Today, in 2015, one may argue that all five user metaphors are still – more or less – represented in the present public library world. Therefore, the following presentations will focus on the origins, the definitions, and the possible evolution of the five metaphors; the presentations will also deal with the roles the metaphors have played and sometimes still play today in combination with other



Five library user metaphors 

 61

images; also the value and importance of the metaphors in dealing with current challenges will be discussed. Important theoretical frameworks and trends which seem to have influenced the development of the metaphor will be presented and discussed. Inspired by Schulze (2005), the presentations of the five metaphors include characteristics of both their preferences for (“Präferenzen”) and their distancing from (“Distanzierungen”) certain cultural genres. Different names and designations for a certain segment will also be discussed when they occur. It could, for example, be the distinction between appa­ rently similar terms like “customer” and “consumer” and between “partner” and “participant.” In such cases, the discussion will contain arguments in favor of the choice of the preferred term. A common trait of the five user segments is that they all fall within the me­­ taphor category. In the preceding chapter (chapter 3), I have already made a distinction between metaphors and terms which should be taken literally like, for example, “user”, “borrower”, and “visitor.” In cases where two metaphorical expressions compete, like “partner” and “participant” or “customer” and “consumer”, the so-called “metaphorical strength” of the words will count. If the purpose of metaphor use is to generate tensions and surprises, as claimed by some organizational theorists (Cornelissen 2005; Cornelissen & Kafouras 2008; Morgan 1983), a set of “paradoxical criteria” could be maintained (Røvik 2011, 635). In general, metaphor theorists claim that to generate tensions a metaphor should stem from a source domain sharing sufficient similarities with the target domain; at the same time it should also be different in order to facilitate new insights and surprises. It is this double set of criteria that is characterized as “paradoxical.” The problem concerning both literal terms like “patron”, “borrower”, or “visitor”, and some – in library contexts – metaphorical expressions like “consumer” and “participant” as well, is that they are not considered sufficiently different to ge­­ nerate tensions, inspiration, and new insights. As to the metaphors, in particular, a weakness may also be that they do not focus on the appropriate aspects. A “consumer”, for example, is a narrower term than a “customer” and also appears to be less different from the traditional user image than the customer. The specific problem to be dealt with in this chapter is research question 4: –– Which user metaphors or images have been active within the public library sector since the 1970s? The question includes three sub-questions: –– What characterizes the different metaphors in terms of their source–target relationships?

62 

 Five library user metaphors

–– How have the different user metaphors been received and handled in the library sector? –– To what extent have the metaphors influenced different library types – public and academic libraries – equally? The procedure for the examination of the five user metaphors was presented in chapter 3 and contains two main elements: 1. A scheme illustrating the relationships between the source and the target of the metaphor (Table 3-1), and 2. A model of the travel or transfer concepts of the metaphor within the library sector. Ten basic idea handling processes (p.58) The examination of the last of the three sub-questions, concerning the influence of user metaphors within two library types – public and academic libraries, however, will appear as an integrated part of the treatment of each of the five metaphor sections.

4.1 The citizen Traditionally, and in a historical perspective, a citizen is defined as a person who has full rights as a member of a country, either by birth or by being granted such rights. Citizenship signifies the status of being a citizen with both rights and duties (Kymlicka 2005). Citizens are often seen in contrast to “subjects” although both terms indicate a person with at least some rights given by a state. The term “subject” is used when the state is ruled by a monarch, while “citizen” is used in all types of state but especially in republics (Hornby 1989, 203). In general, subjects are often associated with various non-democratic forms of government such as military dictatorships, oligarchy or absolute monarchy, while citizens are considered to be free and equal participants in the political process in democratic societies. However, according to some social scientists, the democratic functions of the citizen in Western societies have been challenged since 1945. The German philo­ sopher, Jürgen Habermas (1929–), claims that, as the mass media in the second half of the twentieth century has been transformed from facilitator of rational discourse to means of mass consumption and consumer interests, the idea of consumption has been conflated with citizenship (Buschman 2007; Habermas 1989, 171). Therefore, not only subjects but also consumer – and customer – roles re­present a contrast to the role of citizen.



The citizen 

 63

Since citizens and citizenship theory deals with participation in political life, one might expect these concepts to have played a significant and permanent role in the public library literature. However, the distribution of published and peer-reviewed articles in LISA( Library and Information Science Abstracts), a database for Library and Information Studies (LIS) literature, does not seem to confirm such an assumption. Table 4-1: LIS articles on citizens Number of articles on citizens 1970–2013 in LISA

Number of peer-reviewed articles

1970–1979 1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–2013 Total

1 7 12 87 120 227

Source: LISA, January 23, 2014 – citizen* (subject) + peer reviewed

Although the increasing numbers of articles might indicate a growing interest in the topic, a characteristic trait is, however, that most of the newer titles deal with the technicalities concerning topics such as e-government, and the like. To investigate the character of the LIS literature on citizen, citizenship, and demo­ cracy further, a review on democracy by Buschman (2007), based on the database Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA), is useful. Buschman concludes that “most LIS work elides the questions democratic theory raises”. This statement opens an interesting discussion concerning the characteristics, interests, and needs of citizens. Concerning the basic democratic rights to free votes, intellectual freedom, freedom of expression, etc., Buschman claims that “democratic theory” and what he refers to as “more nuanced ideas about democracy” beyond what he terms the “familiar Jeffersonian/Madisonian demo­ cratic ideas” (Buschman 2007, 1484; Harrison 2005) are ignored. To counteract, he presents some representatives of “more nuanced ideas about democracy.” Buschman here identifies “three wellsprings of thought”: Jürgen Habermas, Sheldon Wolin, and democratic education. In the following, we will, primarily, focus on Habermas.

64 

 Five library user metaphors

Jürgen Habermas Discourse and especially unfettered discursive exchange is, according to Habermas, the most basic democratic value. A concept like “communication” therefore plays a significant role in his thinking. The conditions of communication in society are important too. As the media, as already mentioned, has been transformed from facilitator of democracy into means of mass consumption, demo­ cracy in the Western world is seriously threatened. To protect democratic values it is no longer sufficient to resist dictatorships and non-democratic governments. One should also fight for an emancipated society with free dialogue and true consensus (Buschman 2007, 1488). Habermas’s focus on communication in general (Habermas 1984, 1996) and, in particular, his emphasis on an “unfettered discursive exchange”, certainly adds valuable elements to the profile of the citizen’s information needs. It also makes sense to point out that growth of communication technology alone, as believed by many, does not necessarily mean more effective democratic participation, since access to the media is not enough. However, his strong linkage between democracy and free dialogue also raises difficult problems: Is, for example, a parliament’s political decision, a parliamentary election or a referendum result, not a legitimate democratic decision anymore, if it is based upon something less than an unfettered discursive exchange? And who decides whether the previous discursive exchanges have been sufficiently unfettered?

Richard Sennett Another sociologist who has tried to identify developments threatening or challenging democracy in Western society after 1945, is the American Richard Sennett (1943–) who in 1974, published the book, The Fall of Public Man (Sennett 1978). It has been characterized as a masterpiece of historical sociology and social history, and describes – like Habermas – the history of public culture and public space from the eighteenth century and onwards. Sennett distinguishes between a private and a public realm. He argues that the private realm is the appropriate place for self-disclosure, intimacy, and the sharing of feelings; while such activities are not relevant for the public realm. Because of secularization and industrial capitalism, the public realm, however, has been slowly destroyed. Psychological categories have both defined and destroyed public life. Indeed, political discourse has become diluted with psychological terms. Sennett’s solution is primarily to reinstate the distinction between the private and the public realms by establishing a more formal public culture and to turn against a self-indulgent culture. According to Sennett, private



The citizen 

 65

feelings, subjectivity and inner experiences should not contaminate the public sphere. In the conclusion of The Fall of Public Man he summarizes: That history is of the erosion of a delicate balance which maintained society in the first flush of its secular and capitalist existence. It was a balance between public and private life, a balance between an impersonal realm in which men could invest one kind of passion and a personal realm in which they could invest another. This geography of society was governed by an image of human nature based on the idea of a natural human character; this character was not created by the experiences of a lifetime, but was revealed in them. It belonged to Nature and was reflected in man. As both secularity and capitalism arrived at new forms in the last century, this idea of transcendent nature gradually lost its meaning. Men came to believe that they were the authors of their own characters, that every event in their lives must have a meaning in terms of defining themselves, but what this meaning was, the instabilities and contradictions of their lives made it difficult to say. Yet the sheer attention and involvement in matters of personality grew ever greater. Gradually this mysterious, dangerous force, which was the self, came to define social relations. It became a social principle. At that point, the public realm of impersonal meaning and impersonal action began to wither. (Sennett 1978, 338–339)

Here, according to Sennett, the threats to citizenship and the public sphere come from a growing individualism. Apparently, however, Habermas’s ideas seem to have been more influential in library circles than Sennett’s, at least when comparing the frequencies of the occurrences of their names in the professional library literature. Common to both Sennett and Habermas is, however, that they both consider the public sphere as threatened.

The decline of the public sphere In an earlier book, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1989), Habermas, examines the historical development of the public sphere (Öffentlichkeit) in Europe and its eventual decay after the Second World War. He describes how the growth of the commercial mass media turns an active and critical public sphere into a passive and consumer oriented one. Furthermore, the establishment of the welfare state has, according to Habermas also contributed to this change; the public sphere has been transformed into a site of self-interested competition for resources instead of a space for the development of a rational discourse. However, Habermas also sees how a revival of the public sphere could take place through the development of the present representative democracy into a delibe­ rate democracy. Here, he emphasizes both the equal rights and the obligations of the citizens. Thus, there are both apparent similarities between the analyses of Sennett and Habermas, for example, concerning their common historical perspective, as

66 

 Five library user metaphors

well as differences as to their focus on different societal forces. They also have in common that some kind of revival of something lost is desirable; their emphasis on the removal of threatening elements such as misplaced private sector intimacy and commercial influences from the public sphere is also a common element.

Libraries and deliberate democracy Here, libraries – and public libraries in particular – can certainly contribute to support the deliberate democracy and citizenship. Concerning academic libraries, the literature, however, contains few references to the citizen metaphor. The main reason for this is apparently not that the academic libraries’ relations to science and academic values have discouraged their use of metaphors and metaphorical language. Indeed, Giesecke (2010) reveals that creative metaphors about libraries are also frequently used in academic library contexts. For example, the highly creative library metaphor “the-library-is-an-ecosystem-that-promotes-biodiversity” has its origins in research library contexts. The reason is rather that the citizen role, as related to democracy and political processes, is considered less relevant in academic and research contexts. Table 4-2: Significant features of the citizen and corresponding features of the library user Significant features of the citizen

Corresponding features of the library user

Possession of human rights Equality Communicative rationality Unfettered discursive exchange

Free and equal access to unbiased information Access to stimulating public debates, discussions Access to non-commercial social media Guaranteed anonymity

Public realm of impersonal meaning and impersonal action

Impersonality

Deliberate democracy Equal autonomy

Access to stimulating public debates, discussions

Source: Johannsen (2014)

Table 4-2 also sums up the informational preferences and non-preferences of ci­­tizens. Fast, reliable, unbiased, current, relevant, and available information, certainly, are among the key expectations citizens have of a library service. Enga­ ging arrangements and discussions are welcomed as well as access to physical meeting facilities and appropriate social media. The library as a showroom for brochures for political or grass-roots organizations have traditionally been appreciated by citizens.



The citizen 

 67

Among elements which citizens turn away from are involvement in commercial or semi-commercial arrangements and contexts and participation in events with too much experiential economy focus. Also, when a library’s approach to political topics is perceived as biased and unbalanced, citizens would feel skeptical. Equality is considered to be an important value. The principles can, however, sometimes meet challenges and initiate discussions, especially, when the issue concerns how to deal with the democratic rights of movements and parties which aim to do away with parliamentary democracy. Should they be offered access to the library’s meeting rooms and facilities and be permitted to exhibit anti-democratic printed brochures in the library?

Citizens compared with other metaphors I will now briefly compare some of the essential characteristics of the citizen me­­ taphor with other selected metaphors. The closest affinity of citizens is probably clients. Not least in the 1980s, it was widely believed (which will be shown in the following section on clients), that given the proper informational support, a dependent client could develop into a self-assured and independent citizen. Both citizens and clients have in common a need for assistance and help, for example, to find some specified local plans, legal texts or political brochures from parties. The most important difference, however, is that citizens primarily need help so that they can help themselves, whereas clients need more direct support. It is important to mention, concerning, in particular, the use of the delivered information, that the citizen’s ability to make political and other fundamental decisions should be respected. As to the library space, citizens, in particular, need a space for deliberation whereas clients have more need for a space for support and advice. The distinctive features of citizens compared with consumers and customers have already been mentioned: the main purpose for a citizen is to have focus on societal questions and to support political decisions and opinions, not to decide about best buys or to find the most reliable dishwashing machine. The guest role is also, clearly, different from the citizen. A citizen does not get a friendly invitation to vote; it is his or her inalienable right. Neither is the partner role like the citizen role. Partners, primarily, participate in the solution of practical and technical problems although the distinction between strategic service issues and strategic library policy decisions is not always totally clear. There are also examples where the citizen term is used to characterize a participative user role, but where the political aspects are missing. Citizen science (Havens & Henderson 2013) is an example. When amateur naturalists, building on a long tradition, are gathering data for understanding the effects of climate

68 

 Five library user metaphors

change, we have an example of citizen science. A prominent historical citizen science example stems from 1900, when ornithologist Frank Chapman organized the first Audubon Christmas bird count.

The spread, adoption, and implementation of the citizen concept in libraries Finally, we will look at how the citizen metaphor has travelled around primarily among the public libraries. Indeed, the idea that public libraries should actively support citizens and citizen activities has been recognized in most Western countries such as the UK, the Scandinavian countries, and the United States. In Denmark, mandatory obligations securing citizens’ rights in public libraries have been guaranteed by law for many years. Although the literature search presented in Table 4-1 shows a somewhat different picture, it seems that the 1970s and 1980s were the decades with most focus on the societal role of public libraries and with the most intense discussion about how public libraries especially could support and stimulate local democratic processes. It is also certain that the development originated from discussions in the UK and the United States about community information provision through libra­ ries. In the decades to follow, it is, however, obvious that the focus of the 1970s and 1980s has changed gradually This development indicates that among the ten basic idea handling processes, adoption and implementation are both relevant, especially during the 1970s and 1980s. On the other hand, although weakened, the citizen role was not rejected either in Denmark and Scandinavia, or in the Western world.

Public Information units in libraries Maybe, at least in Denmark, a certain translation of the original concept has taken place recently. Many Danish public libraries are now housing or operating communication tasks for other local and national public authorities. One can, for example, obtain application forms for various public services at the library, and staff from local authorities are regularly present at the library to answer questions, supervise clients, and the like. Some members of the library staff are worried that the public library, if it is gradually integrated too much into the realm of public authority, will lose some of its neutral image which is considered to be essential to both citizens and community services. On the other hand, the arrangement with public information at the library certainly contains practical advantages and it is certainly appreciated by the users too.



The client 

 69

Library services for citizens Finally, we will briefly take a look at some typical library services targeted towards or specifically suited for citizens. Reference and information retrieval services, verifying, localizing, and delivering reports, data, background information, and the like have already been mentioned as obvious citizen services. The librarian’s role is here likened to a researcher, maybe, also a bit of a consultant, but rarely a proactive spin doctor; the last mentioned role would compromise the neutra­ lity of the library. Also library arrangements about societal issues is a traditional library service for citizens. The awareness of making the staff-less library also useful for local democratic processes has led to increased focus on offering faci­ lities, especially, meeting rooms for local political activities. Among the less traditional services that may interest citizens is the Living Library concept where the user can “borrow-a-person” or “borrow-a-prejudice”. The concept has been tested both in Denmark and in other countries since the first half of the 2010s (Berger 2004; Popielewska 2012). The concept requires the voluntary participation of members of different professions and roles – preferably also some controversial positions – a policeman, an unemployed person, a journalist, etc. The users may then “borrow” the person for half an hour, for instance, to ask questions or discuss issues – and – hopefully – also to remove the user’s unjustified prejudices (see also the section on borrow-a-prejudice in chapter 5).

4.2 The client In contrast to, for example, guests or customers, the role as an often weak client is seldom referred to or mentioned directly in library regulations, signs, and the like. Rather, the metaphor is primarily revealed through their discourses, the way professionals talk about their users as if they were clients. The client metaphor is not intended to be patronizing to the user. A sense of responsibility and engagement in, especially, the social problems of the user seems to have motivated the client metaphor originally.

Clients in public and academic libraries In academic libraries the client role, especially the weak client, appears to be more marginal than in public libraries. Heery (1996), for example, makes a distinction between traditional and non-traditional students (e.g., foreign students, distance learners, and physically handicapped students with disabilities). Minorities and multiculturalism is another client metaphor oriented subject both

70 

 Five library user metaphors

found in public and academic library literature. Shachaf and Snyder (2007), for example, address the topic in academic library contexts.

Both weak and powerful clients Client metaphorical language appears in the professional library literature in the 1970s and afterwards, often in connection with topics like community information services or social services. Here, terms like “information poor” or “disadvantaged” were often used besides terms like the “weaker” and the “non-privileged” segments of society. Indeed, there are many types of clients and they are not all weak and disadvantaged; indeed, clients can also be both rich and powerful. In library contexts, however, clients are often associated with social clients, and not so much with the rich clients of chartered accountants, architects, and the like. However, clients of lawyers have much in common with social clients in libraries, since the legal aspects usually also play a significant role within social security contexts. Social security officials and social workers were emphasized, besides with legal aid lawyers, concerning the professional discussions about which professions and institutions public libraries should or ought to cooperate with. In particular, American Neighborhood Information Centers (in the USA), and Citizen Advice Bureaus and information centers (in the UK) were mentioned in the 1970s and 1980s as potential and recommendable cooperation partners for local community public libraries.

Clients and citizens Compared with citizens, it is a significant feature of clients that their problems are primarily perceived as individual and personal. A client could of course also be interested in more general, political solutions to their individual social security problems; the primary perspective for a client is, however, always to find a personal solution. Another distinctive feature compared with the citizen concerns the element of self-help. A citizen might, typically, only need the library’s help to get the required reliable and relevant information, while citizens are likely to conduct analyses, interpretations, decisions, and actions themselves. On the contrary, clients are often in a situation where pure information is far from enough. They typically also need the librarians’ assistance to interpret often complicated legal texts and to choose the optimal solutions for themselves. Furthermore, clients sometimes also need assistance when making contact with local authorities about specific cases and problems. The problems of clients are often highly complex containing different legal, economic, social, health oriented, and psychological dimensions and aspects which will require different types of com-



The client 

 71

petences to address. Here, the client is, typically, more or less unable to separate which type of expert knowledge is the most relevant in his or her particular case.

Vicious circles Among socially disadvantaged clients the complexity of their problems often leads to different vicious circles where social inheritance, economic problems, and the like create health difficulties, because of, for example, alcohol abuse, which again might cause further social problems, isolation, criminality, etc. That does not mean that the challenges which citizens typically deal with consist of simple and well-defined problems. The difference is rather that citizens themselves often have access to the relevant resources through their networks and education to deal with complex, multidimensional challenges. Often it is assumed that the problems of socially disadvantaged clients are associated with broader economic and political agendas and discussions. To solve their complex problems effectively political and economic changes are required.

Need for political reforms and structural changes Therefore, as will be further described in the section on socially disadvantaged clients, library strategies especially in the 1970s and 1980s were not restricted to relieving the social problems directly; the strategies often included support for broader societal structural and political changes. The different features of the client and the corresponding features of the library user are displayed and summarized in Table 4-3. Table 4-3: Significant features of client and corresponding features of library user Significant features of client

Corresponding features of library user

Individual and personal problems

Differentiated services Survival information Empatic service

Complex problems and vicious circles

Cooperation with other professions

Structural/political perspectives

Focus on non-users Citizen action information

Inequalities

Positive discrimination & priority treatment

Source: Johannsen (2014)

72 

 Five library user metaphors

Three kinds of clients We will now focus on three particular kinds of public library clients: 1. social disadvantaged people, 2. immigrants, and 3. digital illiterates. All three groups have attracted special attention by public libraries in several countries; all groups have also been the object for special consideration, research and survey and targeted and tailored interventions. Although the three selected categories have in common that the public library sector has focused on their weaknesses and on their needs derived from their weaknesses, they are also quite different in many respects. The first kind of difference is related to the nature of the problems that cha­ racterize each category. The socially disadvantaged are, for example, characterized primarily by social, economic, psychological and health problems, whereas the weaknesses of many immigrant groups are related to cultural and language deficiencies. Finally, the weaknesses of the digital illiterates are narrower, only relating to lack of competences within a single, but nevertheless vital area. Within each of the three sub-categories there are also considerable diffe­ rences, especially within the immigrant group. Here, the problems of immigrants who move from one Western society to another seem to be quite different from the problems of immigrants into Western Europe from, for example, Africa and the Middle East. This variety of situations and contexts might also affect how public libraries have historically prioritized library services to different immigrant groups. Examples will be presented below. As to the identification of library science literature on the different groups and subcategories, it is often necessary to search for literature on different library services such as community information rather than on the specific user group in question because of the way the literature is indexed in relevant databases such as LISA.

Socially disadvantaged groups It is interesting that the literature on community information services apparently culminated in the 1980s with 105 records from 1980 to 1989 (Table 4-4).



The client 

 73

Table 4-4: LIS articles about community information services and public libraries Articles on community information services and public libraries 1970–2013 in LISA

Number of articles

Number of scholarly (peer reviewed) articles

1970–1979 1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–2013

75 105 77 20 4

8 26 27 20 3

Total

281

84

Source: LISA November 29, 2013 – “community information services(su)” AND “public libraries(su)”

It is, furthermore, interesting that a closer look at the publication pattern in the 1970s reveals that after 1975 the number of publications explodes whereas few were published during the first half of the 1970s. This pattern indicates a connection to broader societal trends. Although, the bibliometrics indicate the 1970s and especially the 1980s as the community information heydays, a number of pro­ minent texts to be mentioned below stem from the end of the 1980s (Martin 1989; Usherwood 1989). However, in the following decades, the interest in providing special library services for the weaker elements of society continued. However, the target groups changed during the 1990s and 2000s somewhat from disadvantaged groups in general towards immigrants and, later, towards digital illiterates. The ideological structures behind the library service efforts have also changed, from socialist and Marxist oriented frameworks in the 1970s and 1980s towards positions with more focus on identity questions, communication, and different multicultural inspired theories later on. An additional category is digital illiterates, those who have difficulties navigating in a digitalized world and, especially, within a public sector which forces also elderly people and senior citizens to be able to address social security services digitally. These will be treated as another example of an important segment of public library clients.

Clients’ needs in the 1980s In Community Librarianship: Changing the Face of Public Libraries, Martin (1989, 72–73) explains that “many libraries either ignored the disadvantaged or else gave them the kind of standard, undifferentiated service that largely failed to meet their needs.” He defines library related needs not only in terms of materials and methods but also as regards “the entire basis for and philosophy of library

74 

 Five library user metaphors

service.” Martin further claims that recognition of the need to do something for the disadvantaged and to afford them a measure of “priority treatment” marked a “major advance” in British public librarianship in the 1970s. As to the question who the disadvantaged are and what the term means, a list of general criteria were put forward to describe what Martin calls “the victims of disadvantage.” A list of people most likely to be classed as disadvantaged would include: “the economically deprived, including the poor and the unemployed; ethnic and sexual minorities; people in institutions; deprived young people and senior citizens; people with language and literacy problems; and the physically and mentally handicapped” (Martin 1989, 72–73). It is important to note that here disadvantage not only comprised elements such as an unfavorable position in society and a minority group status; it also – more or less – meant a lack of opportunity to gain entry to the socio-economic mainstream. Therefore, disadvantage, was a matter not only of insufficient resources, but also of structural factors in terms of a lack of “power and insufficient access to the means of redress or improvement, including information.” It was, furthermore, emphasized that the homeless person or the person hopelessly in debt, in general, was not disadvantaged because of the person’s own ina­ dequacies; the basic cause was rather “more deep-seated” societal forces “preventing the equitable distribution of resources throughout society” (Martin 1989, 72–73). Martin further highlighted the right to know “about services and resources that can improve the quality of their lives; the responsibility of service providers to ensure that people actually know about their services; recognition of the fact that any efforts to achieve equality of access will mean that some people will need special help; and that people should be involved of determining or meeting their own information needs.” (Martin 1989, 91–93). A similar reasoning – but also different in showing more explicit political preferences and a more radical tone – characterizes Bob Usherwood’s The Public Library as Public Knowledge from the same year, 1989. The book was published by the British Library Association. Like Martin, Usherwood also talks about the “victims of social injustice” and he understands libraries as powerful agents to bring about change in society (Usherwood 1989, 7). However, he also admits that, although libraries can expand educational opportunities, “they can really succeed only as a part of a broader movement committed to reducing the structural inequalities in British society. Such a movement, however, will require both professional and political commitment.” (Usherwood 1989, 23). What “political commitment” could mean was apparently clear for most readers at the time, considering the profound influence of Marxist theory and socialist and left-wing political philosophies and ideology throughout the text. Writing in the late 1980s, the results of the 11-year premiership, from May 1979



The client 

 75

to November 1990, of British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (1925–2013), with neoliberal policies, privatization, firm control of public expenditures, social unrest and high unemployment, provided a somber background. According to Usherwood, a society should be judged on how it treats “less advantaged people” and not by the “cheap and nasty values all too prevalent in the eighties” (Usherwood 1989, 8). Throughout the book, notions concerning class, society and the existence of a generic conflict between a dominant and a subordinate class appear in diffe­ rent contexts. It is claimed that cultural standards in society reflect the values of the dominant class, supporting Karl Marx’s famous statement from The German Ideology that the “class which is the ruling material force is at the same time [the] ruling intellectual force” (Usherwood 1989, 11).

Library services for clients The understanding of the part of the library user as subordinated victim also influences the way public library services are delivered and distributed in several respects. “Positive stock selection policies” is mentioned as one way libraries have sought to overcome “structural inequalities.” In the city of Manchester, for example, “positive policies” have been implemented to remove from library shelves material which depicts people of particular races in a derogatory or incorrect way; in Sheffield the director of Library and Information services maintains that the library should provide materials which “positively reflect” the needs of people in that city. As an adequate strategy to achieve such a purpose, a “balanced approach to subject coverage” by making efforts in order to “counterba­ lance the prevailing white, middle class, sexist and militaristic view promoted in the output of mainstream publishers” (Usherwood 1989, 13) was recommended. Similar ideas from the United States were found; for instance, through an analysis of library provision in Oakland, California, which found that a large part of the budget was allocated to materials which were “disproportionately used by middle and upper income groups.” Furthermore, it was emphasized that establishing equality of opportunity is not always enough. Sometimes, the “correction of racial and social inequa­ lity” requires “positive discrimination in favor of disadvantaged groups.” Again, revolutionary intentions become visible when Usherwood seems to agree with a statement of Bunch (1982), indicating that the public library should not only try to “redress the balance” by fulfilling its duty to serve all community; the library should also strive to become part of the “process of social change” (Usherwood 1989, 21).

76 

 Five library user metaphors

Cooperation with other professions Indeed, a combination of specially trained library staff working together with specialists from other agencies was seen as an adequate solution. The “better” services were considered those “which respond to human situations as they are, rather than according to professional and, frequently, middleclass preconceptions of information need” (Martin 1989, 92–93). It is interesting to notice that the exploitation of advances in information technology at the time was seen as an effective means to spread community information services both in rural areas and inner cities. In the United States, examples such as The Information Place (TIP) project in Detroit were found of community information services challenging and redirecting traditional approaches to information services towards meeting “the every-day information needs of ordinary citizens” (Martin 1989, 94–95).

Focus on non-users The suggested new priorities were remarkable, since it was admitted that the groups most affected by unemployment were not traditionally users of the public library. An emphasis on attracting and serving the non-users, therefore, re­­ presents a particular characteristic of ways of thinking in the 1980s. It contrasts, in particular, with the focus on customers, retaining customers, and customer loyalty characterizing the years to follow. In the 1970s and 1980s, unemployment was considered among the most crucial challenges (Martin 1989, 99). During the 1980s and onwards, other priorities such as customer satisfaction, economic growth and innovation entered the library.

Victimized users The distinctive trait of a victim, a term sometimes used about socially disadvantaged users, is certainly not that the victim has information needs, since all library users have information needs. Rather, the particular situation of the victim is based on a combination of information needs and other needs in terms of lack of resources and other social and educational weaknesses. This combination creates special difficulties because the victim is usually considered not to be able to recognize what are his or her real information needs. The victim concept thus often includes a distinction between “objective” or “real” information needs and “subjective” or perceived information needs. The latter might be entertainment and leisure reading, whereas the real or “objective” needs could concern literature and texts about how to change his or her present unfavorable situation (the individual perspective); further, information about how to change the



The client 

 77

society that creates such social and cultural inequalities (the collective or societal perspective) was a recommended next step.

Subjective and objective information needs and “false consciousness” The distinction between “subjective” and “objective” information needs is probably related to or may be directly inspired by the notion of “false consciousness” or irrational forms of consciousness and “alienation”: both inspired by socialist, especially Marxist, ways of thinking. The people are here often seen as passive victims who live under the domination of the ruling class or the ruling classes and have no critical reflection as to whether the dominating ideas are either true or in their own rational interests, while such dominating ideas appear to them as “apparently disinterested” (Rosen 2005, 623–624). The ideas of dominating classes and their interests are in socialist theory related to the distorting effects of bourgeois ideology (Torrance 2005, 631). In general, the notion of ideology is defined as ideas, beliefs and attitudes consciously or unconsciously held which reflect or shape understandings or misconceptions of the social and political world. Ideology exists in two major senses: (1) a pejorative, something which should be unmasked, and (2) a non-pejorative assertion (Freeden 2005, 438). References to “political commitment”, processes of social change and focus on redressing the balance by authors on community information, are likely to be interpreted as the result of the influence of socialist and Marxist ways of thing on library professional literature. We also have an example of a highly instrumental approach to the user where helping the user serves a higher purpose of societal change.

Clients and victims Compared with the victim concept, client is a much broader and more neutral term. Indeed, there exist social clients who may be also victims; but prestigious levels of society have clients, too, who are often powerful business people with access to impressive social, economic, and political resources. Another difference between clients and victims is that clients are typically not thought of as involved in class conflicts. Where concepts like “false consciousness” are used about victims, such notions do not make much sense when talking about identity searching post-modern individual clients. The differences are – among others – that whereas some professionals consider collective organization and class consciousness to be vital to the victim, the identity searching post-modern person is, primarily, looking for individual solutions. The differences between client, the more neutral term, and victim are discussed by Bunch (1982) in his book, Community Information Services – Their

78 

 Five library user metaphors

Origin, Scope and Development. Here, he presents considerations concerning the nature of the clientele of community information services in a number of countries including Britain and the United States. He describes the clientele as belonging to the “lower socio-economic groups” or as “disadvantaged through an inability to obtain, understand, or act on information that affects their lives”(Bunch 1982, 4). A definition like that has far-reaching consequences for the image of the user of community information services. Traditionally, libraries will focus on assis­ ting their users to obtain required and needed information or library materials. In some cases, librarians are also likely to help the user to understand the content and messages of procured texts. However, libraries usually do not interfere with how the user should act on the provided information. The user receiving extended information service provision containing interpretation and guidance on how to act is certainly supposed to lack not only access to information, but also judgment as to how to use the provided information. Before us, therefore, is a user type who is not able to define his or her own information needs properly. Furthermore, he or she is thereby not only a client who needs professional assistance, but also a victim of societal imbalances and structural inequalities.

Information needs of clients Taking a closer look at the types of information provided by a community information service, two types are identified: 1. survival information related to health, housing, income, legal protection, political rights etc. and 2. citizen action information needed for effective participation as individual or member of a group in social, political, legal and economic processes (Bunch 1982, 2). The two types, indeed, reflect two different user metaphors. Survival information, here, mostly applies to the individual needs of social clients or victims, whereas citizen information clearly shares characteristics with the citizen metaphor.

Libraries and unemployment A characteristic trait of how the relationship between public libraries and people with social problems such as unemployment was understood structurally in the 1970s and 1980s was the character of the problems not only as a major social issue, but also as an example of societal oppression. Influential library organizations at the time, such as the British Library Association, therefore considered



The client 

 79

it an important statutory duty of public libraries to address both the general and the special needs of the community including the problem of unemployment. Such policies were in a way remarkable, since the groups most affected by unemployment were not among the traditionally users of the public library. A number of key tasks for the public library concerning the unemployed were identified. These tasks included: 1. efforts to improve public awareness of unemployment, 2. assistance to unemployed people and their families through the provision of information about welfare benefits, 3. training schemes, and 4. contributions to the process of local economic regeneration through information services to local business and industry (Martin 1989, 98–99). Such ambitious goals illustrate the multi-dimensional character of the community information movement. Some traits, obviously, pointed towards political radicalism; others could, however, be seen as precursors of the online public library business information services of the 1980s and 1990s. We will now turn to another underprivileged group, immigrants, which has recently been focused on by librarians and the library profession.

4.2.1 Immigrants Compared with other socially disadvantaged users, immigrants and ethnic minorities like, for example, Britain’s black and ethnic communities, are sometimes considered as people exposed to magnified cultural barriers by the additional issues of race and ethnicity (Audunson, Essmat & Aabø 2011, Muddiman 2000, Roach 1998). For both groups, the disadvantaged and the immigrants, social exclusion seems to be an important issue. Nevertheless, immigrants seem to be even more heterogeneous than the different sub-groups of socially disadvantaged users.

Who are immigrants? In many respects, the term “immigrant”, is not particularly precise. Sometimes, it is limited to people born outside a certain area, e.g., Europe, or people born in another state than where they actually live; however, descendants of immigrants are often treated as immigrants, although they are not born in another country. Furthermore, some immigrants, for example, from other Western / First World countries, e.g., Scandinavian countries, Australia, the United States, are

80 

 Five library user metaphors

not normally included in the group of immigrants in Denmark or in other European countries. In Europe, immigrant library services, for example, normally only include services to immigrants from countries outside the EU, North and South America and Australia (Berger 2001, 14). Similar muddy definitions exist concerning languages, distinguishing between “immigrant” and “non-immigrant languages.” In a public library context, such definitions may be sometimes misleading and less precise. Arabic speaking immigrants from North Africa, for example, often demand texts and books in non-immigrant languages like French, whereas immigrants from India and Pakistan could be interested in books in English.

Non-discriminative names In the United States, as well as in Denmark and in other European countries, there had been ongoing discussions in library circles on how to find or invent non-discriminative and non-derogatory names for immigrant groups. Terms like “New-Dane” or “Danish-with-a- Pakistani- background”, and the like, have been suggested. However, it has not always been easy to find terms which could gain a universal acceptance both among the immigrants themselves and among the indigenous inhabitants of a country. Efforts to avoid stigmatization have been common. In the 1960s, people who came to Europe to find work were, originally, called “foreign” workers; later this term was found condescending; it was therefore substituted by the term “guest” worker. These examples bear witness of efforts to prevent victim identities from developing through the language we use about people. Such European trends, similar to what has happened in the United States where the term “negro” has become substituted by more politically correct terms such as “Black” or “Americans-with-an-African-background”, and the like, have pervaded the public library sector too. Similar efforts are observed concerning other minority groups, for example, sexual minorities where the term “homosexual” has been substituted by “gay. In the following text the term “ethnic minorities” will be used to describe the group of immigrants, descendants of immigrant guest workers, refugees, and the like.

Multicultural librarianship Multicultural librarianship, traditionally, deals with at least three different stra­ tegies: 1. segregation 2. assimilation, and 3. integration (Berger 2001).



The client 

 81

In modern research literature, the three terms refer to different personal or poli­ tical strategies or policies in the Western world to handle ethnic minorities. These strategies also have a significant influence on how libraries, in general, and public libraries, in particular, deal with their different ethnic minority users. Segregation indicates a policy where the receiving countries try to keep the immigrants permanently apart in ghettoes and similar arrangements. Assimilation signifies the opposite strategy, where the country and its national institutions try to stimulate the immigrants to adopt the language, cultural habits, behavior and values of the country’s majority. Integration, likewise, emphasizes adoption, but stresses reciprocity and equality of the adjustment process between the majority population and minorities (Berger 2001, 11–21; Jönsson-Lanevska 2005). Such strategies are interesting because they throw light on a characteristic difference compared with the group of socially disadvantaged clients. The status of the latter as social clients was in any case considered unfavorable. Therefore, assimilation was the only option either as, for example, to become a citizen with a job and with active participation in political processes or, for example, a politically conscious working class hero. To immigrants, certainly, more options were available reflecting the three different strategies. Often, different attitudes towards bilingual education reflect differences between assimilation and integration strategies. Bilingual education is also an important public library issue, because it creates demands for multi-lingual materials in the library. A strategy based upon integration is, for example, more likely to focus on bilingual education than an assimilation strategy. Historical examples and interpretations often play a role in the discussions about the different strategies. Referring to a North American context, one sometimes hears it said that when the grandparents or great-grandparents came to America around 1900 not knowing any English, they didn’t receive bilingual education – and still they made successful careers. However, one could argue that the world is much different since their great-grandparents arrived. According to Benavides (1989), these early settlers “made it”, not because they did not receive bilingual education, but because the society then was able to absorb them into the workforce. They could continue to plant corn and milk cows in German – and still the corn would grow and the cow give milk. We have, however, jumped from an agricultural society to a high technology society, where little education today mostly means little or no opportunity tomorrow. Referring especially to the rapidly increasing Hispanic population in the United States, Alfredo Benavides (1989), recommends bilingual education to facilitate Hispanic children to contribute to the future economic well-being of the United States.

82 

 Five library user metaphors

Immigrants as clients or victims The discussion about the above-mentioned different strategies adds important aspects and nuances to the discussions about victims and clients; however, compared with the discussions about socially underprivileged groups, a number of new contexts and issues have been added. In general, a considerably higher degree of tolerance and sensitivity towards different cultural norms has entered the discussions. The immigrant category consists of several sub-groups and demarcations. The word immigrant, as opposed to refugee, denotes a person who has left his or her native country voluntarily and settled in another country; if he or she wishes, he or she can return to the native country. On the contrary, a refugee cannot normally return to his or her native country (Jönsson-Lanevska 2005).

Immigrant languages Normally, in public library contexts the term “immigrant” does not, as mentioned, include all foreign nationalities and languages. The Danish Central Library for Immigrants, guiding and serving all Danish public libraries in serving immigrants and refugees, for example, has library materials in 70 languages. The largest collections are in Arabic, Persian, Serbo-Croatian, Tamil, Turkish, Urdu, and Vietnamese. In Sweden, languages such as English, French, German, Norwegian and Danish do not belong to the immigrant languages (Jönsson-Lanevska 2005). Therefore, when we talk about immigrants and immigrant languages in library contexts, we do not usually include immigrants from other Western countries and languages such as English, German and French. Especially, when we talk about more or less victimized immigrants, we in the Western world mostly refer to immigrants from non-Western countries such as Turkey, countries in the Middle East, Africa and Asia. A special case are contexts where ethnic minorities who have lived in a country for generations are treated as if they were immigrants. Sometimes, for example, persons born in the United States, like Black Americans, have been treated as immigrants there.

Ethnic minorities Sometimes such groups are, as already mentioned, termed “ethnic minorities”, which is probably a more precise and adequate name. Ethnic minorities thus include both people born in a given country and people who have immigrated from another country. Sometimes immigrants are treated different depending on from which part of the world they come from. The history of public libraries, espe-



The client 

 83

cially in the United States, contains examples of discrimination of certain specific ethnic minorities. In the 1970s, there seemed to be a widespread consensus that minority groups, at least in the United States, were victims of inequalities in library services. More disputed was, however, the question whether such inequalities were caused by conscious intent or not. One author, MacCann (1989a, 97), for example, was quite certain that conscious intent lay behind lack of equality between European immigrant groups and Black Americans. In her essay “Libraries for immigrants and ‘minorities’” she pinpoints the contrasting history of librarianship vis-à-vis these two groups. On the one hand, she emphasizes how creative librarians were, for example, in Chicago, already in 1905, to “smooth the path of the newcomers.” The librarians “recruited judges and naturalization officers to help them disseminate information about the library’s Americanization classes”, translated letters, explained official documents, and took foreign women to the doctor in order to help them explain their symptoms. Indeed, we here have a very early example of extended public library community information services. Even after the United States government had begun a series of laws restricting immigration in 1921, aid to immigrants was a major goal of the American Library Association. Also, as early as 1904, librarians stated as an overall rationale for such multifarious activities that immigrants had fundamental rights as taxpayers. MacCann’s central point is, however, that all the principal arguments in favor of public library services to European immigrants, with little variation, could have been – but were not – used to support library services to African American communities. African Americans were not immigrants but constituted an ethnic minority. Yet, the library profession around 1900 mobilized itself for advancing the interests of immigrants and not African Americans. On the contrary, Blacks were treated as a permanent American underclass. The Black American example illustrates another important aspect of the client role, namely, the extent to which the library can influence, both in a positive and a negative way, the position and status in society of certain groups. Black Americans are according to such reasoning an example of a group where the library profession, in practice, has contributed to sustain the underclass status of the group. Discrimination occurred, for example, when the library in Charlotte, North Carolina, received from the Carnegie foundation $25,000 to build a library to serve whites only and spent just $5,000 on building a library for African Ame­ ricans. Moreover, the book collection of the latter consisted of “discarded books in an advanced state of decay” (MacCann 1989a, 101–103).

84 

 Five library user metaphors

Blame-the-victim attitudes and self-critique Another aspect of the victim role and the discussion of what to do to help victims and to prevent victimization is the occurrence of so-called blame-the-victim arguments. Such arguments maintain that exploited groups are the producers of their own exploitation. To deal with such assumptions, sociologists have offered different conceptual frameworks, focusing on the definition or construction process related to societal problems. Here, the outcome of the process of constructing a social problem depends on the balance of power between the various actors involved. Another typical characteristic of professional attitudes to minorities and discrimination in the 1980s was the way in which the self-critical aspects were a constituent part of the discussions and also how private affairs were involved. The circumstance that many American librarians were white and that they had often managed their careers and families by “exploiting women of color as domestic labor force” were mentioned as relevant elements in professional discussions about social responsibility and blame-the-victim attitudes (MacCann 1989a, 112–113). Such discussions apparently share traits of the discourses concerning socially disadvantaged users, although the self-criticism of the library profession appeared to be more pronounced about immigrants and ethnic minorities than about disadvantaged users. Terms like “under-served” about certain population groups are used to focus on the library’s responsibility for existing inequalities (Vårheim 2011, 14). As to the library literature on immigrants in public library contexts, it peaks later, in the 1980s, compared with the literature on community information and socially disadvantaged users. The number of publications on immigrants has markedly increased since 2000. Table 4-5: LIS articles about immigrants and public libraries Articles on immigrants and public libraries in LISA 1960–2013 1960–1969 1970–1979 1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–2013 Total

Number of articles

Number of scholarly (peer reviewed) articles

2 44 57 43 72 21

0 1 7 6 19 12

239

45

Source: LISA November 27, 2013 – “immigrants(su)” AND “public libraries(su)”



The client 

 85

However, there were also similarities, for example, as to the geographical distribution of reported experiences with immigrant library services. Among the cases mentioned, Scandinavian (Norway and Sweden) and Anglo-Saxon (United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia) countries dominate. Among the peer reviewed articles there are only three contributions from other countries: one from Spain, on multicultural library services (Lopez 2012), one from Israel, on differences in the services provided to two groups of immigrants from the former Soviet Union and from Ethiopia (Shoham 2008), and one from Germany, about library services for the unemployed, socially disadvantaged and minorities in Hamburg (Kappus 1987).

Theoretical sources of inspiration Another remarkable difference concerns the character of the applied theore­ tical frameworks. Whereas literature on information needs and library services for socially disadvantaged users often contains references to authors and works inspired by socialist and Marxist mindsets, articles on immigrants and public libraries seldom contain such references. Instead, they refer to several other sociological and cultural theories. References to concepts like “multi-culturalism” occur frequently and the raison-d’être of services to immigrants is, typically, represented by broader societal goals like integration or assimilation. An example of an ultimate higher order goal or aim of library services for immigrants is that the services should contribute to the development of a “harmonic multicultural society” (Jonsson-Lanevska 2005). Goals are often formulated in broader terms than, for example, providing access to information collections, the internet and the like. Participation in political processes is also considered a legitimate goal, but not revolution and societal change anymore. Among the many individual theories and concepts applied, are found: –– low-intensive meeting places (Audunson 2005, Aabø 2010, 2012), –– social capital (Vårheim 2011), –– information grounds (Pettigrew’s theory) (Durrance 2004), –– immigrant adaptation (Herlitz’s three-phase model) (Jonsson-Lanevska 2005), –– social responsibility frameworks (MacCann 1989, 1989a), etc. Among the different social and cultural values referred to, the following are ty­­ pically mentioned: –– multiculturalism, –– cultural pluralism, –– inter-cultural dialogue,

86 

 Five library user metaphors

–– social inclusion, –– tolerance, –– cultural diversity, and the like. Often a double purpose characterizes public libraries’ efforts towards immigrant groups, it is seen as an important goal, on the one hand, to assist recent immigrants or refugees to achieve integration and, on the other, to support them in their efforts to maintain their original cultural roots (Garcia-Guillen & Tomic 2011). Some library strategies towards immigrants are likely to focus on the immigrant as a modern individual, while others are more likely to emphasize their social, cultural, and religious relations to certain national, ethnic, or religious communities or collectives. This issue has far-reaching practical as well as theoretical consequences, since many immigrants come from countries and cultures with very strong collective cultural, political and religious structures. We will now present some of the frameworks which are in use in the public library sector concerning services for immigrants.

Library services for immigrants The distinction between low-intensive and high-intensive arenas represents one model which influences how library services are delivered to immigrants. The dichotomy catches the difference between high-intensive arenas or spaces, where we can live out interests, values and cultural preferences with people who share them, as opposed to low-intensive arenas where we meet people with different preferences and values. The essential point about low-intensive spaces is that they are more likely to facilitate meetings between people who are usually not exposed to one another. In a multicultural context, high-intensive spaces may represent an element that might lead to fragmentation by representing and enforcing cultural or political barriers. An example of a high-intensive arena in the local society could be the church. Here, for example, you are not likely to meet many Muslims. Since tolerance presupposes that we are exposed to other values and preferences than our own, there is a need for low-intensive meeting places. Audunson (2005) draws three main conclusions concerning public librarianship. 1. Libraries today, in a multicultural context can facilitate democracy and de­­ mocratic values by providing low-intensive meeting-places that can promote communication and cross-cultural contact. 2. Developing multicultural librarianship not only means tailor-made services suiting ethnic and cultural minorities. Multicultural librarianship also means



The client 

 87

developing arenas or spaces where people belonging to different cultures are exposed to each other. 3. Redefining the public library’s role as a multicultural meeting place can revitalize the importance of the library as a physical space.

Comparing immigrants and social disadvantaged clients Low-intensive meeting-places Such reasoning is certainly different from earlier ideas on alienation and false consciousness. Indeed, respecting other cultural values and preferences of the target group, tolerance and dialogue have substituted concepts like “alienation” and “false consciousness.” There is, however, still room for tricky questions concerning cultural habits, head-covering, domestic violence, etc. It is interesting, however, that the idea of low-intensive meeting places in a way conflicts with central community information values like “positive discrimination” and “prio­ rity treatment” of social clients. Another distinctive feature of the ethnic minority library literature compared with that regarding the disadvantaged and community information is the presence of new ultimate purposes and goals like, for example, social capital. Social capital Vårheim (2011), for example, examines whether public library programs directed towards immigrants are likely to create trust and generate social capital. His article is related to the research project “PLACE: Public Libraries – Arenas for Citizenship” conducted by researchers at Oslo School of Architecture and Design, Oslo University College and the University of Tromsø. According to Vårheim, social capital is associated with almost any positive societal development: health benefits, democracy, economic growth and community development. Therefore, it has become a central question for research as to how social capital can be generated. His survey is based on unstructured interviews in June 2007 with 14 librarians – most of them directors – from the United States; the directors represented 12 different library systems. In certain respects, the situation in the United States differs from that of Europe concerning the nature of its ethnic minorities. In the United States, the Hispanic population is among the fastest growing of the minority groups and underuses library services. In Europe, the discussions about ethnic minorities and public libraries are more focused on immigrants and descendants from the Middle East and Pakistan. According to Vårheim, recent research shows that public institutions are granted positive roles as instruments for creating social capital. However, our

88 

 Five library user metaphors

knowledge about the role of specific institutions like libraries is less complete. Concerning social capital, he introduces a central distinction between: 1. “generalized trust” ( towards most people), and 2. “particularized trust” (in only those known by the individual and in a parti­ cular domain). Another important distinction of his is between: 1. “bridging social capital” and 2. “bonding social capital.” Bridging social capital refers to wider networks and many weak ties whereas bonding social capital is associated with stronger ties and more closed networks. Researchers assert that marginalized groups, such as most immigrant po­­ pulations, possess low social capital (Putnam 2007). Therefore, it is of particular societal interest to identify by which mechanisms social capital is created. Here, there are two main theoretical frameworks which try to locate the creation of social capital; one points at civil society and voluntary associations, and the other calls attention to universalistic and impartial public institutions. Studies that try to specify what creates trust and social capital are, however, rather inconclusive as to the direction of causality. Is it, for example, segregated neighborhoods that create more distrust between groups or the other way round, increased distrust that creates segregated neighborhoods? The relationships between bonding and bridging social capital are characterized by different perceptions among researchers. Evidence from Denmark suggests that public libra­ ries are most successful in promoting integration when they provide universal services rather than focusing on the original cultures of the immigrants (Elbeshausen & Skov 2004). The explanation is that participation in library programs is likely to stimulate and create contact. This contact, which may diminish prevailing prejudices, may also contribute to creating generalized trust and bridging social capital. Vårheim emphasizes that although immigrants are very distrustful of government institutions, it is probable that public libraries are among the “least distrusted” public institutions and therefore have a comparative advantage in creating trust. Furthermore, he sees it as a sign of trust that in the US immigrants participate in different educational classes: for instance, in English language or computers, civic courses, and General Educational Diploma classes – run by the libraries themselves or in a few cases through a partner organization. Civic courses teach the syllabus for the US citizenship exam while General Educational Diploma classes give access to university level education. Vårheim sees the mechanisms linking participation in library driven immigrant classes and social capital as such:



The client 

 89

Contact with the library institution and meeting others in the same circumstances will probably enhance this institutional trust in the public library as well as trust in fellow program participants. This may spill over onto most library users, and may in the long run turn into generalized trust and bridging social capital … There are clear indications that public library programming ran as described in the paper will create social trust. It is demonstrated that public libraries through their programming towards immigrants are employing policy tools that probably generate generalized trust and social capital among their newly recruited patrons. (Vårheim 2011: 18).

As to the different attitudes of the American library directors towards immigrants and social capital and trust, Vårheim makes a distinction between “activists” and “constitutionalists.” The activists focused on social integration whereas the constitutionalists emphasized citizens’ rights and literacy. In spite of the diffe­ rent views on the main purposes of the public libraries, the interviews did not reveal any particular differences as to the type of main library activities directed at immigrant groups. English courses, computer skills classes and civic classes were offered in both activist and constitutionalist led libraries. The differences are conspicuous between today’s social capital strategies, directed at immigrants, and the strategies of the 1980s, targeted towards the struggle against false consciousness among socially disadvantaged people. Educational and teaching activities seem now to play a much more central role for immigrants than earlier provision for the socially disadvantaged, where community information services and other types of more direct supporting interventions were recommended. Information grounds Another approach related to the study of public libraries’ contribution to social capital is based on the theory of information grounds which was presented in a journal article in 2004 (Fisher et al. 2004). The article deals with experiences gained through an exploratory, qualitative study of how immigrant customers in New York City used and benefitted from programs designed to impart coping skills and improve proficiency in English. New York is interesting, especially in the context of library services for immigrants, for having one of the largest and most diverse immigrant populations in the US. The two programs offered by Queens Borough Public Library were: (1) the New Americans program, and (2) the Adult Learner Program. The New Americans Program focused on improving immigrants’ coping skills and supporting cultural aspects of transitioning into American life. The Adult Learner Program addressed English language and literacy skills. The usage of the programs was impressive. The Adult Learner Program had an intake of about 6,000 students a year. In 2002, the two programs were attended by 591,000 parti­

90 

 Five library user metaphors

cipants; to market them more than 10 million multilingual brochures yearly were distributed; The study was based on evidence from interviews with and observations of 45 users, staff, and other stakeholders. It is important to mention here that it was the staff of the Queens Borough Public Library – not the researchers – who both selected the individual user participants and also conducted the interviews with them. Such a methodological procedure is likely to influence negatively the extent to which the results are representative of the average immigrant’s experience with library services in New York. The conclusion found that successful introduction to Queens Borough Public Library can lead immigrants to a “synergistic information ground” that can help meet their broad psychological, social, and practical needs. The positive outcomes cover both so-called “building block outcomes” that support immigrants’ entrée to American life and personal gains helping them to become integrated into the fabric of the community. The fundamental conceptual framework of the study is “information beha­ vior”, defined as how people need, seek, give and use information. The significant difference between “information behavior” and related terms like “information seeking” is that information behavior also includes information use. However, the key concept of the study is not information behavior alone, but the related concept of “information grounds.” Information grounds are physical places characterized by a “social atmosphere” that fosters both “spontaneous and serendipitous” and purposeful sharing of information in multiple directions. Beauty salons, ball parks, tattoo parlors, and classes in coping skills and second languages organized by public libraries but located in different buildings at different times, are examples of information grounds. Information grounds are defined as “synergistic environment” created by people who have come together to perform a task. An information ground can therefore be understood as a place where people gather accidentally for many different purposes. Information sharing is often a byproduct of social interaction, since people gather for primarily instrumental purposes. Information needs are not presented in documented ways such as in community information centers and reference desks in libraries; instead, the participants’ information needs emerge through casual social interaction – small talk chitchatting about life in general; typically, information is shared serendipitously. Information grounds are important concerning public library services to immigrants because “the better we understand where information grounds are situated for different populations as well as how they emerge and exist, the better we can design ways of facilitating information flow therein” (Fisher et al. 2004, 757). The information ground concept has a number of similarities with Audunson’s (2005) low-intensive arenas through their informal character and, maybe,



The client 

 91

also differences, for example, that information flow is only a byproduct of social interaction within information grounds. A prominent similarity is, however, that libraries can function as both low-intensive arenas and as information grounds. Libraries as rich information grounds also make them ripe for facilitating other types of information flows, for example, to facilitate dissemination of information on breast cancer for African American women, on HIV/AIDS, and the like. To what extent libraries can achieve that depends, however, very much on the cha­ racter of the social atmosphere, which concerns issues of both design and phy­ sical space as well as the attitudes and behaviors of the staff. Among the essential staff qualifications, Fisher et al. (2004) emphasize the ability to handle and navigate through the immigrant’s “daunting labyrinth” of psychological, social and physical problems of connecting with American society and their need for emotional security when facing the many traumas of transition. The information grounds concept is also interesting because it focuses on the space of the physical library in a time with much focus on both outreach and virtual services. Regarding Vårheim’s (2011) library director interviews conducted in 2007, there are two primary comments. The first concerns the methodological aspects. Vårheim’s study was based on interviews with public library directors represen­ ting 12 library systems, whereas in Fisher et al. (2004) the data derived from one New York library, Queens Borough Public Library. An additional difference was that providing services to Hispanic minorities was a common trait in most of the library systems studied by Vårheim, while the Queens Borough Public Library served a more heterogeneous ethnic population. Among the similarities were the different educational teaching programs offered by both Vårheim’s 12 systems and Queens Borough Public Library. In a comparative context, it is interesting to consider to what extent Vårheim’s “gracious place” library, characterized as a place that is welcoming and big enough for everyone and as a communicative infrastructure beyond policy regimes and political bickering, also represents an information ground. Vårheim (2011, 14) does not directly answer this question, but he emphasizes that the information grounds approach is closely related to his own study of social capital and, furthermore, that Fisher et al.’s (2004) study reveals mechanisms connecting the information behavior of immigrants and the creation of social capital. It is thus highly probable that the two surveys point in the same direction. Immigrant adaptation (Herlitz’s three-phase model) The Swedish approach to delivering library services to immigrants differs in several respects from the US project described above. First, the societal goal differs. Whereas the projects described in Vårheim (2011) and Fisher et al. (2004) emphasized integration , the study of Jönsson-Lanevska (2005) describes the offi-

92 

 Five library user metaphors

cial Swedish policy as focusing on creating a “harmonious multicultural society” with bilingualism and with focus on preserving the cultural identity of the immigrants. Multiculturalism is looked upon as a positive phenomenon, associated with democracy and freedom: Immigrants’ adaption into the new culture cannot be achieved at the expense of the immigrants’ heritage languages and their native culture. Assimilation must not take place: personal identity must be preserved even if the old habits and customs are supplemented, and exist side by side, with the new ones. Two cultures instead of one, two languages instead of one – a person is enriched not maimed. (Jönsson-Lanevska 2005, 138–139).

The strategy is also described by Jönsson-Lanevska as “additive biculturalism” which means that it is important not only to ensure that the immigrant masters the new language, but also preserves his or her heritage language and native culture. Indeed, the American surveys (Fisher, Durrance & Hinton 2004, 763) also recognize the importance of emotional security and to maintain contacts to their native culture but the overall perspective is nevertheless different. The empirical basis of the Swedish study includes interviews with librarians from three diffe­­rent libraries in the Swedish town of Borås. The interviews took place in May 2003. However, the Swedish article refers to a relevant theory, Herlitz’s immigration adaption model. The theory and the three-phase model was developed by the Swedish sociologist G. Herlitz; the model maps three periods of adaption into a new culture: Phase 1: a honeymoon – a positive phase dominated by great expectations, Phase 2: a disappointment and crisis phase – characterized by confusion and by the rejection of everything connected with the host country and glorification of the native country, and Phase 3: a balancing phase with cultural integration and successful adaptation.

It is obvious that libraries can use the model in their design of services directed towards immigrants and refugees. The authors mentioned above also operate with different step-by-step approaches to integration. However, Herlitz’s model is interesting because it introduces an element of discontinuity whereas, for example, the development of trust and social capital appears more as a continuous process without significant setbacks. Like authors on community information services, Jönsson-Lanevska also considers the need for new roles and qualifications. She finds the introduction of the new services of psychologists and pedagogues desirable in libraries. Also working with immigrants contains challenges in terms of ability to work spontaneously, to be involved in educational activities and to function as adviser, leader



The client 

 93

and psychologist. Considering the distinction between individualistic and collectivistic approaches, Jönsson-Lanevska’s and Herlitz’s ideas seem to be especially influenced by collectivistic values.

4.2.2 Digital illiterates Clients in the third category are different from both the socially disadvantaged and immigrants in terms of the complexity of their problems. The problems of the digital illiterates are in fact restricted to problems concerning computer literacy (Coleman 1989). Typically, in the Western world, digital illiterates are especially challenged when the public sector plans to completely digitalize access to public services. Often, elderly people who need help from the public sector are most negatively affected.

Digital immigrants and natives In the literature, such more or less computer illiterate groups are referred to as “digital immigrants” versus the “digital natives” who master the new technology (Prensky 2001). Although Prensky’s classification has been criticized heavily and is considered to be controversial by many, considerable public and societal in­­ te­rests concern the digital immigrants, because their backwardness is believed to delay economic and technological development, in general, and the modernization of the public sector, in particular. Therefore, surveys were conducted in many countries to estimate the number and share of the computer illiterates compared to the total population. In Denmark, for example, a survey from 2007 (Teknologisk Institut 2007) divided the population into four groups based on their digital competencies: 38 percent of the Danish population was categorized at the two lowest levels: people who had never used a computer made up 20 percent, while 18 percent were characterized as having only weak computer competencies. Not only public sector issues play a role. It is also believed that computer competencies could improve the employability of people. The state and the public sector are therefore, for several reasons, eager to do something to reduce the number of computer illiterates; especially, the educational sector deems it essential to prevent the younger generations from being computer illiterate. Within the library sector many professionals and leaders consider they have something to offer elderly “digital immigrants.” Typically, the solution has been to offer tailored training programs targeted towards different groups with weak computer competencies.

94 

 Five library user metaphors

Nevertheless, there are sometimes interrelationships between digital illiteracy and different social problems associated with poverty, immigrant status, language difficulties and the like. Often, however, older people who have not earlier experienced either social or language problems are particularly the focused of information literacy contexts. A literature search in LISA for peer reviewed references on information li­­ teracy in public libraries (conducted December 9, 2013), produced 41 references covering the years from 1998 to 2013. Among them many contained various reflections, strategic considerations and the like. Only a minority of the retrieved items were based upon primary empirical data from original surveys. The following presentation will build upon nine selected surveys (including my own 2009 research report on a Danish lifelong learning project) from Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, England and and Scotland, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, and the United States. Especially, I will focus on reports on experiences with public library based information literacy training and teaching activities targeted at elderly people (Crawford 2012; Eve et al. 2007; Hart 2006; Johannsen 2015; Julien & Cameron 2008; Koning 2001; Newton 1998; Preddie 2009; Xie 2009).

Definitions of information literacy Information literacy is the central concept here. One applied definition is: “the ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively use that information for the issue or problem at hand” (Eve 2007, 402). Such a definition certainly allows many interpretations and therefore also many reasonable answers: When is there a need for information? Should the need, for example, be perceived by the user or is an objective need sufficient? What does it mean to use information “effectively”and that a problem is “at hand”?

However, the definition is useful because it points at the difference between li­­ teracy in terms of being able to read a text passively and information literacy in terms of understanding and being able to make use of a given text. Since the literature on information literacy stems from about the year 2000, it makes sense to compare the approaches of the twenty-first century with earlier ways of handling the problems. Here, some obvious differences occur. Whereas references and concepts derived from political, socialist positions were relatively common in the late 1980s, they seem, as already mentioned, to have disappeared more or less from the information literacy literature. Even authors who were rela-



The client 

 95

tively explicit on political issues in 1989 seem to take a more neutral stand in the twenty-first century. As an illustrative example, compare Usherwood (1989) with Usherwood et al. (2005).

Information literacy services Another significant difference concerns the nature of the library services or interventions suggested. The community information interventions typically included assistance and help not only to identify and deliver the needed information, but also help to utilize, for example, to translate, the information in terms of making it understandable and to interpret, for example, legal information, on behalf of the user. The typical interventions suggested in information literacy contexts in the twenty-first century, usually, do not include such pro-active services. Rather, they suggest internet courses, hands-on instruction and teaching, and similar informal and lifelong learning offerings. This development marks a move from finding information on behalf of the user to showing the user how to find and retrieve information. The nature of the partners and partnership relations also has profoundly changed, comparing social disadvantaged with computer illiterate users. Like in the heyday of community information, in 2007 the discourse also dealt with engagement with user communities and with “wider policy agendas” (Eve et al. 2007, 399) relevant to people’s needs and interests. However, the preferred partners are no longer primarily social workers and broader political movements. Today, if anything, the alignment of library goals with local, national, and European policy agendas is emphasized. On the local level, social workers are no longer seen and recommended as the primary partners for public libraries. They have, typically, been substituted by proposals for partnerships with other educational actors. Finally, a new element appeared in the recommendations as how to communicate with the target groups. The communication should now not only be relevant to user needs, but also “fun and enjoyable” (Sommerlad et al. 2004, 399). This additional element of humor, indeed, according to my own evaluation report (Johannsen 2015), appears to have had a significant positive influence on the image of librarians and, especially, on the image of librarians as teachers. Among users, for example, students, library instruction lectures and sessions have certainly often had an image of being both useful and systematic but extremely boring. Information literacy and similar information and communication technology courses seem to have changed that negative image, at least, regarding the Danish courses I evaluated in 2009 (Johannsen 2015).

96 

 Five library user metaphors

Target groups and needs First, we will look at which peculiar target groups and needs were involved, what the specific purposes of the interventions were and what kind of public library services were offered. The latest survey reported the experiences from a Scottish project. The report (Crawford & Irving 2012) was based on five interviews with participants in the training program and one interview with a teacher or tutor. The interviews were conducted in August 2009. The primary purpose of the training programs was to increase the employability of people in the area of Inverclyde which had high unemployment and “pockets of multiple deprivation.” It was also noticed that the interviewees were highly motivated. Xie (2009) presented an evaluation of a United States project whose aim was to teach older adults to access and use high-quality Internet health resources; 131 older adults aged 59–89 participated in the study between September 2007 and July 2008. The study, in many respects, was methodologically more advanced than the Scottish. The sample, for example, was much larger and therefore also more reliable; furthermore, the study design included both a pre-test and a post-test, and statistical tests were applied to determine the level of significance. Julien and Cameron (2008) and Preddie (2009) both concern a specific study of information literacy training in Canadian public libraries. Preddie (2009) represented a so-called “evidence summary” of the Library Quarterly article, “Information literacy training in Canada’s public libraries” (Julien & Cameron 2008). The summary was based on the Evidence-based Library and Information Practice’s (EBLIP) Critical Appraisal Checklist (Glynn 2006). The study by Julien and Cameron (2008) investigated information literacy skills and was based on a mixed methods approach including two different qua­­­litative research methods: semi-structured interviews and observation. Five Canadian public libraries representing different demographic settings were selected and 28 public library staff members and 25 customers were interviewed. The interview questions focused among other things on users’ perceptions about their level of information literacy, the nature of their exposure to Information Literacy training and their desire for further training. The public library staff members were asked similar questions. When presented with a standard definition of information literacy, 13 (52 percent) of those interviewed claimed that they were information literate, eight were ambivalent, and four admitted to be information illiterate. It is interesting that most of the 15 interviewed disagreed that paucity of information literacy skills was a deterrent to accessing online information efficiently and effectively. About 80 percent of the library staff, on the other hand, posited information literacy training as an important role for public libraries. Especially, they defined two roles as essential: (1) library staff as teachers and



The customer 

 97

agents of empowerment, and (2) library staff as “public parents.” The latter role encompassed assistance, guidance, problem solving, and filtering of unsuitable content.

Diverging perceptions of librarians and users In general, the library staff expressed the opinion that their users’ skills were low and that this resulted in their avoidance of online research and inability to choose appropriate information sources. Although the generalizability of the study was limited because of too few respondents, it is interesting because it highlights the dichotomy between public library users’ mostly favorable perceptions of their own state of information literacy and the opposing views of the library staff (Preddie 2009). This dichotomy has essential importance when dealing with library user me­­ taphor issues. If the distance between the library staff’s perceptions as to the lack of important skills and serious incapacities and the user’s self-perception is too wide, there is a risk that the motivation of their users will diminish. However, the fact that the diverging perceptions concerning the information literacy level of library users and staff are identified as an important issue represent a progression compared to the more patronizing attitudes of the community information discussions of the 1970s and 1980s. We have now been through some variations of client oriented library user metaphors. Despite the differences between how clients and their needs and roles were perceived in the 1970s and 1980s and now, a common element has been that the user is in an unfavorable situation where the library can offer different types of help. According to the next metaphor, the customer, the user, can also have non-satisfied needs which the library can deal with in different ways. However, the context is quite different, integrated in quite different conceptual frameworks, and using quite different vocabularies. That will be the topic of the next section.

4.3 The customer “Customer” and “consumer” are two related terms. Both are, traditionally, defined as a person who “buys goods and uses services” (consumer) or who “buys something from a tradesman, shop, etc.” (customer) (Hornby 1989). In both cases, the act of buying plays a significant role. However, in business textbooks on marketing a much broader definition of customer appears. The importance of the customer concept is underlined through a Peter Drucker quotation: “There is only one valid definition of business purpose: to create a customer.”

98 

 Five library user metaphors

At its simplest, if you do not have any customers for the product or service your organization offers, then there is no reason for continuing in existence. Drucker is here in accordance with Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, who as far back as 1776 wrote that consumption was the sole end and purpose of all production. Indeed, modern marketing thinking emphasizes that if customers are those that use, consume, buy or recommend a product or service, then clearly most organizations will need to maintain customer relationships, often with a variety of different customers. Customers appear in many different guises and may be described differently by organizations in different fields. However, a customer-orientated approach can apply equally to a food manufacturer or to a public sector organization. About 45 different names for customer can be listed, including “consumer”, “user”, “recipient”, “client”, “patron”, “member”, “co-worker”, “reader”, “listener”, “guest”, “tourist”, “taxpayer”, and “voter” (Adcock 1995, 5–6). It is furthermore characteristic that the use of the term “customer” is not always associated with the full adoption of a marketing oriented customer philosophy. Fisher, Durrance and Hinton (2004), for example, call their users “customers” although their project is a typical social project. In other cases, terms like “customer-based” and “patron-driven” are used almost synonymously (Bridges 2014, v–vi). In general, however, it seems that the word “customer” is much more frequently used than, for example, the word “client.”

Divergent professional attitudes In spite of the very broad definition of “customer” just mentioned, the attitudes among many library professionals towards the use of the customer concept in library contexts, sometimes, have been rather hostile (Allcock 1995). The number of professional journal articles using the “customer” term about library users is shown in Table 4-6 below. Table 4-6: Library & Information Science articles about customers Articles on customers in LISA 1980–2013

Number of scholarly (peer reviewed) articles

1980–1989 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–2014

4 112 207 169

Total

492

Source: LISA December 5, 2014 – “customer”(headline) AND “peer reviewed”



The customer 

 99

The figures suggest that the customer term had its breakthrough in both public and academic library contexts in the 1990s. In the same decade, the critical opi­ nions, too, started to appear. Opponents (e.g., Allcock 1995; Budd 1997; Buschman 2014; Johnson 1995) emphasized the commercial character of the customer concept while others underlined the societal and moral obligations of both public and academic libraries. Critics also paid attention to the relationships between the launch of the customer concept in public sector contexts and the highly controversial New Public Management trend. On the other hand, the customer concept was also welcomed by some library professionals and researchers (e.g., Pluse 1991; Rowley 1997, 1997a, 2000). Both in academic libraries (e.g., Arthur 1994; Gibson 2010; Hussey 2011; Kessler 2000; Millson-Martula & Menon 1995; Wang 2006) and in public libraries (e.g., Dunstone 1993; Pluse 1991; Pybus 1992; Winkler 1994) the customer label has been used in many different contexts, for example, concerning: –– Customer loyalty (e.g., Hernon 1998), –– Measuring customer satisfaction (Esson et al. 2012; Hussey 2011), –– Customer service training (e.g., Arthur 1994), and –– How to deal with customer expectations (e.g., Gibson 2010).

Customers and fee-based services The customer concept has also been associated with fees and fee-based services in libraries. However, although the dictionary definitions explicitly mention the customer as a person who buys something, the marketing textbook, on the other hand, does not define the act of buying as a necessary ingredient for a customer. In the same way, Dutch library users are not automatically customers because they pay a yearly amount for using the public library. Customer orientation seems to be a question of mindset, the adoption of certain marketing oriented conceptual frameworks, and vocabularies rather than determined by the act of paying.

The ultimate quality judge An important element here is that, according to marketing theory, the customer is seen as the ultimate quality judge. Such statements have been criticized by both public and academic library professionals for being against the basic purposes and legal foundations of public and academic libraries. It has been claimed that such a populist, marketing user-oriented approach is incompatible with a serious enlightenment agenda. However, this perception seems to be a bit unjust, since often in the private sector also a variety of intellectual products and services at different quality levels are being offered to customers.

100 

 Five library user metaphors

In principle, the customer is the ultimate arbiter of quality, but certainly, a customer can always decide to ask the librarian to identify the best, the most sophisticated or the most prized novel. Neither is it the duty of the library always to provide whatever its customers demand. Just as in customer-provider relationships in the private sector, it is also quite legitimate to tell a library customer that the demanded information or book does or does not belong to the library’s stock or – in a polite and considerate way – to explain that the requested title is not purchased for quality reasons. Nevertheless, it is obvious that market mechanisms also can be harmful to certain quality literature providers and authors.

Marketing vocabulary in libraries Another effect of customization is the introduction of marketing procedures and vocabulary in libraries. User satisfaction surveys are conducted, segmentation procedures implemented, marketing and branding campaigns planned, and – often expensive – marketing companies consulted to make logos, signs, brochures, and the like. Visibility and openness towards acquisitions is another prominent customer feature. In Danish public libraries, for example, it is now possible for library users to gauge the demand for specific book titles in terms of expected waiting times through the library’s online catalogue. In academic libraries correspondingly, customer-based collection development has become a hot topic (Caminata 2014). Competition has also entered the world of public and academic libraries. Among the positive results of an increased competitor orientation – at least in Danish public libraries – it should be mentioned that it has contributed to loosen the historical restrictive separations between the private and the public sector. Local partnerships between libraries and private companies have become easier to establish and resulted in, for example, library cafés, to the delight of the users. Finally, marketing terms have also influenced the development of services in public libraries, among others, through the introduction of commercial product life cycles thinking. The mentioned features are summarized in Table 4-7 below.



The customer 

 101

Table 4-7: Significant features of the customer and corresponding features of library users Significant features of the customer

Corresponding features of library user

The ultimate judge of quality, or, the customer Customer orientation is always right Segmentation Marketing oriented procedures, measures, vocabulary etc.

Marketing library services Branding

Demand orientation

Demand for services made visible Customer-based collection development

Competition

Identifying competitors Competitor analysis Partnerships

Product life cycles – introduction, growth, maturity, decline

Innovation & service development in libraries

Source: Johannsen (2014)

Indeed, the introduction of the customer concept and marketing principles in public libraries is still a controversial issue among many professionals. However, there is no doubt that the introduction of modern marketing principles has contributed to make public libraries more visible and to the development of an increased sensitivity towards users’ needs and preferences.

Sources of inspiration The primary inspiration, certainly, comes from the New Public Management theoretical framework and its practical toolboxes (Ferlie et al. 1996; Clarke & Newman 1997; Lane 2000; Levy 2010; Mayne & Zapico-Goni 1997; Pollitt 1990, 1998), especially, the marketing oriented aspects of New Public Management. Trends like Total Quality Management (TQM) have also contributed to the applications of customer concepts in the library sector (Wang 2006).

Customer services The increased customer orientation, in general, has influenced traditional library services in different ways, two of which are: 1. a number of fee-based services have appeared, especially in public libraries, as a supplement to the free user services (see also chapter 5). In Denmark, for example, many public libraries established business information services in the 1990s.

102  2.

 Five library user metaphors

a second consequence is an increased transparency where hitherto hidden processes and data have become open, for example, waiting times for specific library materials (see chapter 5).

It is, however, difficult precisely to determine which changes are caused by the customer concept and New Public Management thinking and which are rather due to, for example, developments in information technology. Increased transparency, for example, would probably have been much more difficult without certain information technology innovations. We will now continue the presentation of user metaphors with a metaphor that has several similarities with the customer, namely, the guest.

4.4 The guest According to a dictionary, the word “guest” has four different meanings: 1. a person invited to visit one’s house or being entertained at one’s expense, 2. a person staying at a hotel, boarding house etc., 3. a visiting performer taking part in an entertainment, and 4. a person specially invited to visit a place, participate in a conference, etc. (Hornby 1989). Definition 2 involves payment by the guest, while according to definition 3 it is normally the visiting performer who receives payment; definitions 1 and 4 involve no transfer of money from guest to host. Compared with the preceding user me­­ taphors, that of a guest has some particular characteristics. First, it is not a very common metaphor in library contexts (Johannsen 2014b). One commentator (Reed 2008) judges that the term “guest” is preferable to “customer” because it has less commercial overtones and seems to fit better the informal relationship between librarians and the people they serve. Recently, in 2011 and 2012, the guest-host relationship was introduced in a number of Danish public libraries. In academic libraries the guest role has apparently not been applied since the concept is not particularly relevant in an academic, research setting. Second, the guest role in library contexts is tightly integrated in the innovation strategy of “host-liness”, focusing on the librarian as a “host.” This integration is probably tighter than, for example, that of the customer role in New Public Management strategies. The definition which is closest to the mentioned “library guest” project is certainly number 2, combined with elements from definition number 1. As to



The guest 

 103

the origins of the guest-host conceptual framework, one may argue that it has much older traditions in library contexts than 2008. Indeed, before 1920, informal furnishing, inspired by the domestic living room, was recommended for public libraries. Architectural historian Nan Dahlkild points out that “the look of Danish public library buildings between 1909 and 1927 could be regarded as ‘the library as home’ with solid dark furnishing, often national romantic decorations and pictures … the ideology of the library movement at the start of the twentieth century emphasized the library’s relation to local communities and people’s homes” (Dahlkild 2011, 319). His book on library architecture contains a picture of a public library interior from 1916 which illustrates the intended homeliness of public libraries at that time (Dahlkild 2011, 123). The guest metaphor has also been applied elsewhere. The Cerritos Library near Los Angeles, in particular, has prioritized not only spectacular effects but also the creation of a certain atmosphere. To emphasize the personal contact the library users are consequently referred to as “guests” (Jochumsen & Hvenegaard Rasmussen 2008, 7–17).

Tourist industry inspiration The 2011–2012 Guest-Host library project was, guided by a consultant from Danish Host, a company with experience in the tourist industry. Therefore, many of the ideas and concepts applied in public library contexts in Aalborg were imported – in modified or translated versions – from tourist industry environments. The Danish guest-host project was certainly not characterized by high-brow theoretical frameworks. Popular books on how to live decently and be nice to others, and on service-profit chains (Heskett et al. 1994), served as project guidelines. The obvious close relationship between guest and tourist make it relevant to include some recent studies examining the metaphorical relationships between library users and tourist types. Here, an interesting case study, where concepts and experiences from tourism have been applied to public library contexts, has recently been reported (Eriksson, Michnik & Nordegaard, 2013). In June 2011, researchers from the Swedish School of Library and Information Science in Borås conducted 182 structured interviews with library visitors for a research project on the social functions and values of libraries. Analyzing the interviews, the Swedish researchers recognized a “metaphorical similarity” between how informants talked about library use and how human travel is described. That discovery led to a search for literature containing theoretical concepts and models about indivi­ dual tourist motives and expectations. Five collective tourist patterns were here identified: 1. recreation tourists,

104  2. 3. 4. 5.

 Five library user metaphors

cultural tourists, action tourists, compromisers, and individualists.

The identified tourist patterns were hereafter used as an analytical tool to examine empirical data from the interviews with library users. The analytical setting contained the following three roles: 1. the public library user as the charter-holiday tourist 2. the public library as the charter-holiday destination, and 3. the librarians as the staff or natives at the destination. The interviews were then examined in order to find out if and to what extent all five charter tourist styles were represented. The five tourist styles can be consi­ dered as a kind of user metaphors, constructed by library science researchers. The findings of the Borås study are both interesting and thought-provoking from the perspective of strategic library development. It was observed that the attitudes and values of most of the interviewed users were very similar to those belonging to three out of the five above tourist styles in particular: (1) the recreation tourists, (2) the cultural tourists and (3) the compromisers. Characteristic traits of the recreation tourist are their longing for relaxation and their avoidance of intensive environments and activities. Recreation tourists seek a calm and pleasant retreat far away from everyday life. Cultural tourists differ from recreation tourists by being knowledgeable and driven by a search for authentic cultural experiences. They dislike mass tourism and identify themselves as independent, individual travelers. Compromisers seek a balance between relaxation and cultural activities. Less prominent among library users were the approaches of action tourists and individualists in the interviews, although traces of the two styles also could be found here and there. Action tourists travel in order to experience something new, exciting and exceptional. They prefer to do something unusual and they enjoy new experiences. Individualists are characterized by making very little difference between their everyday life and their travelling experiences. The five tourist styles are then translated by the researchers into a public library context. Here, for example, the cultural tourist library user has an analo­ gical counterpart in the library user whose aim is to learn. The revealed pattern becomes even more interesting when compared with recent discussions about future public library roles and functions and a new model for public libraries (Jochumsen, Hvenegaard Rasmussen & Skot-Hansen 2012). According to this new model, the public library is described as an arena



The guest 

 105

for inspiration, learning, meetings and performances. Here, Eriksson, Michnik and Nordeborg (2013) see clear parallels between Andersson and Skot-Hansen’s (1994) classical description of the public library as a cultural center, knowledge center, information center and a social center and the preferences of the recreational and cultural tourists and the compromisers. Furthermore, they also find similarities between the new model’s arenas for “inspiration, learning, meetings, and performances” and the attitudes and preferences of the action tourists and the individualists. These findings obviously address the central cultural policy question whether the new model should be seen as an instrument fit to attract the typical present public library users (recreational and cultural tourists and compromisers), or whether the new model should be seen rather as an excellent means to make public libraries more attractive to present non-users segments such as action tourists and individualists. From a theoretical point of view also, the 2013 study of Eriksson, Michnik and Nordeborg raises interesting perspectives. One is the process of describing a user metaphor to making recommendations as to the design of new library services and facilities. It seems obvious that, for example, action tourists enjoy fun and challenging environments. But does this certainly correct observation necessarily imply that it should also be the library that should try to meet those needs for fun and challenges? Could an alternative strategy not be to offer something quite different – a calm place for relaxation, reflection and contemplation? Very often human needs are more complex than we think.

Unexpected user preferences Often library developers are surprised by unexpected human needs and prefe­ rences. In academic libraries, it was some years ago thought that internet access to information sources would make traditional reading rooms superfluous. However, in academic libraries the reading rooms today are more filled up than ever. It is therefore not always possible to make simple deductions from assumed user preferences in one context to their preferences in other contexts. One cannot be sure that users will demand the same type of experiences when travelling as when they visit a library. Maybe the action tourist resembles the cultural tourist when he visits a public library? The question about the importance of different contexts, also opens another perspective concerning the relationship between tourist user styles and related theoretical frameworks, especially inspired by the experience society concept. Actually, there are certainly obvious similarities between the five tourist styles and central concepts of the experience society. The influential German socio­

106 

 Five library user metaphors

logist, Gerhard Schulze (2005, 125–168) operates with three main categories of esthetic preferences concerning German people’s everyday lives: 1. a Highbrow scheme (Hochkulturschema), 2. a Triviality scheme (Trivialschema), and 3. an Excitement scheme (Spannungsschema) –– where the last, especially, in many respects is similar to the action tourist style. Schulze emphasizes that the excitement scheme is the youngest of the three mentioned collective styles. It emerged in the late 1950s in certain rock-and-roll sub-cultures. Significant features were new, impulsive styles of dancing (e.g., Jitterbug, Boogie-Woogie, Twist) and an anti-authoritarian lifestyle. Whereas people belonging to the highbrow scheme enjoy contemplation when listening to classical music, visiting museums and art galleries and reading and the triviality scheme adherents prefer a cosy atmosphere (in German: Gemütlichkeit) listening to pop hits, watching TV quizzes and reading medical romances, the excitement scheme segment likes action, rock music, thrillers and visiting pubs, cinemas and the like. Schulze suggests that the basic philosophy of life for the latter group is narcissism, whereas adherents of the triviality scheme support the ideal of harmony and highbrow people aim at perfection. There are also certain similarities between some of the preferences of the creative class as described by Florida (2005, 70–74) and the action segment of Schulze, for example, the twofold opposition of both the creative class and the action segment against the use of traditional, cultural institutions and against petit bourgeois cultural interests and lifestyle.

Communication as hosts Included in the host-guest concept are profound changes in certain communication patterns and traditions in public libraries. The principles have been summarized in the word “host-liness”, a code which characterizes the service norms aimed at. First, it was considered important that a professional librarian should refer to library users as guests and not by traditional terms like borrowers or users and especially not as clients. Indeed, one question within the before-and-after test which was conducted concerning the Danish library guest-host project in 2011–12 was: “The staff make me feel like a guest rather than a client”; 60 percent totally agreed before the project was run and 61 percent after (Johannsen 2014b). Second, as a host you should always greet and have eye-contact with your guest when you meet him or her; and not only when he or she addresses the staff with questions or wishes for information or services. Indeed, much atten-



The guest 

 107

tion is focused on eliminating situations where members of the library staff tried to prevent user contact by hiding behind their desk or computer screen or by looking down to avoid eye-contact.

Pro-activity Pro-activity is certainly an important value within the host-liness code. Although values like an informal and homely atmosphere and flexibility are emphasized, host-liness is considered a highly measureable goal where progress can be gauged through methods like mystery shopping. The ability to suggest relevant and attractive services that the guest had not thought about before but anyway appreciated afterwards was another important ingredient in the host-liness service package. The characteristics are summarized in Table 4-8 below. Table 4-8: Significant features of a guest and corresponding features of library users Significant features of guest

Corresponding features of library user

Measureable host-liness

Mystery shopping

Personalized and tailored services

Focus on communication and interviewing skills Alternative suggestions

Homely and informal atmosphere

Helpful and smiling staff

Flexibility, non-bureaucracy, non-standardization

Flexible services Individualized services

Exciting quality,

Positive surprises Pro-active services

Source: Johannsen (2014)

Guest services Examples of guest services are presented in more detail in chapter 5; they include pro-active extra sales, floor walking, uniforms, and intensified welcome efforts. Aspects or elements of guest-host relationships are aimed at in library contexts. Staff-less library practices often aim at creating a domestic atmosphere with coffee and sweet biscuits served. Some libraries emulate in their furnishing a living room atmosphere, and also the borrow-a-prejudice concept (see chapter 5) tries to stimulate a friendly and informal mood. We will now address the last of the five library user metaphors, the partner.

108 

 Five library user metaphors

4.5 The partner The last and probably also the latest example of an influential library user me­­ taphor, is the user as a “partner”, a metaphor which has been associated with the creative class and which – among others – has influenced several recent and prominent library building projects. Here, the question has been raised whether new libraries should be designed designed as “cultural havens for the creative class” or as libraries for all (Black 2011, May & Black 2010, Mehtonen 2011, Skot-Hansen, Hvenegaard Rasmussen & Jochumsen 2012, 16). Apart from a few academic library examples such as a recent project at Kent State University Library in the US, is reported by Seeholzer (2013), where a student-led service-delivery-project, maintained solely by students, have been developed, most user partnership projects stem from public library contexts.

Definitions The distinctive feature of the partner is not that he or she enjoys and receives a library service, but rather that he or she personally contributes to produce and/or to design the service. The user becomes a partner, although an unpaid one, of the local library. The role needs to be specified further, since many library services will require the co-operation and participation of the user. The dialogue between the user and the professional, for example, is an essential part of the service where the user is expected to play an active role. To attend a library arrangement and stay at a staff-less library requires a certain level of active participation from the side of the user. Such active user roles are, nevertheless, not typical partner roles.

Partners, participants and volunteers A “partner” is something different than a “participant.” He or she is involved in producing or designing the service without being hired to it. A partner will usually get no payment for his or hers efforts. Terms related to partners are parti­ cipants and volunteers. A participant is broader than a partner. A user who parti­ cipates actively, for example, in a library arrangement by asking questions is not, however, a partner. Therefore, we will use the “partner” instead of the related term “participant.” A “volunteer” is also a term akin to “partner.” Volunteers, for example, do not get paid for their efforts. However, volunteers in libraries, typically, take on routine tasks whereas the partner is involved in more advanced activities such as product development projects, co-creation, user-driven innovation, and the like. The creative partner, in particular, is interested in contributing



The partner 

 109

to creative processes like developing new or changed services – not in participating in the daily work of the library. Usually, the creative partner also moves around higher circles in terms of closeness to decision-making processes than the volunteer. The traditional volunteers in public libraries usually only make decisions concerning routine tasks and practical details. This also gives the creative partner a certain elitist flavor. Furthermore, the partner role is active, independent and open-ended. The partner is not – or not only – a participant in focus group interviews with a fixed agenda or an interviewee whose role is to deliver data. On the contrary, empo­ werment is a feature that characterizes the context in which the creative partner is active. Neither is his or her role like a hired consultant with specified tasks and deadlines. Motivation and passion more than material rewards drive the creative partner. Finally, the informal character of the creative partner should be mentioned. He or she is not tied to the library through formal contracts or other obligations and he or she is not a part of the staff. It is, especially, creativity and innovative talents that libraries demand from partners whereas volunteers usually deliver working capacity.

Partner roles in practice Let us now consider a recent library example concerning partnership-like user roles. In 2008, the Danish Kulturministerium [Ministry of Culture] published a report, titled Reach Out! – Inspiration to user involvement and innovation within the cultural sector (title translated by CGJ) (Kulturministeriet 2008). The report or “catalog of inspiration” contained about 30 cases, among them three library examples. In the common introduction to the report, some central conceptual issues were discussed. It was emphasized that the theme of the report was user involvement, user-driven innovation and user-centered design. The term “volunteer” was not mentioned at all, although, in the Anglo-Saxon world, especially in the United States, there has been a long tradition of using volunteers in public libraries. Obviously, the report was not about volunteers but something distinctly different. First, it was emphasized that user involvement in cultural institutions was inspired by developments in business contexts, and based on anthropological and sociological approaches. Here, the American Silicon Valley design company, IDEO, which is known for inventing, among others, the computer mouse, was explicitly mentioned as a source of inspiration. Below, we will take a closer look at IDEO’s approach and experiences concerning user involvement in design processes.

110 

 Five library user metaphors

The Reach Out! report, therefore, did not deal with the use of volunteers for practical routine tasks within a public library. On the contrary, user involvement and user driven innovation was understood as something about making the users active participants and co-producers and making use of their wealth of ideas and abilities to innovate. It was also emphasized that the ideas of user involvement were inspired by a special Scandinavian tradition of cultural democracy. Indeed, such diverse origins, containing both business applications and cultural demo­ cracy, provided the partner role with more complexity than other metaphors like “citizen” and “customer.” The report stressed that the innovative element was not that the users delivered data about their satisfaction or their needs, but that their role was to be co-developers both as test users participating in experiments and as users directly present in the library engine room as co-developers in dynamic interaction with professionals and even on their own as a kind of “lead users” (see Kulturministeriet 2008, p.14).

Approaches Two different approaches to the “partner” concept, each with two dimensions, were presented: 1. Passive deliverers of information: a. Few participating users b. Many participating users 2. Active co-developers: a. Few participating users b. Many participating users The popular focus group approach, here, represents a passive user role with few participants involved, whereas the quantitative user-survey represents a passive role with many participants. The active roles with users as co-developers included both solutions with few users involved and solutions with many users involved such as user boards, hearings, experiments and, very important, internet-based communication using social media (Kulturministeriet 2008). Certainly, the role as partner and creative co-developer mostly deals with the combination of high activity and few users involved. But how were these ideas and concepts translated into library practices?



The partner 

 111

Library examples This question could be answered by considering how libraries were involved in the three cases out of the 29 cultural sector projects in the Reach Out! report which involved libraries – one academic library and two public libraries.

The State and University Library project The State and University Library project was certainly the most traditional. It was a field study involving 16 users and aimed to construct three Personas or archetypical user models, each characterized by specific patterns of need and library uses: 1. the “busy bee” 2. the “library enthusiast” and 3. the “drive-in user” According to the schema mentioned above, the State and University Library case did not involve partnerships with users; rather, the role of the few participating users was as passive deliverers of knowledge.

The Aarhus public library project The project of the Aarhus public library was quite different. Here users, primarily children aged 9–13 years, were actively involved in an “experimentarium” collecting ideas about contents, furnishings, and competences about the library of the future. The project’s idea of “mind spotters” seemed to be even more innovative. Here, young people aged 14–20 years were involved as “mind spotters” to develop new library services. It is important to mention here that the young “mind spotters” also were encouraged to realize their ideas themselves, e.g., a self-directed reading circle, talks on their own stories, and 24-hour film-marathons. The purpose was, certainly, to explore the creative and innovative potential of the users. The many sub-projects which ran from 2006 to 2014 were all related to the public library’s involvement in the establishment of a 200 million-plus dollar multimedia house in the Danish provincial city, Aarhus. The project has been supported twice – in 2004 and in 2013 – by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation with million-dollar donations. The Aarhus public library case falls certainly within the category of few users as active developers (six mind spotters were involved). The slogan “Unleash the users” expressed that purpose.

112 

 Five library user metaphors

The Roskilde public library project The third project was by Roskilde public library. This project also tried to create partnerships with users as idea generators. For many years, public libraries have supplied boxes for complaints but also for proposals and suggestions from their users. Typically, the answers from the library staff and the leaders were made public. However, there was usually no dialogue involved – only questions and answers. The Roskilde project moved one step forward by involving the users in discussing what consequences the different suggestions should have. Social media turned out to be a perfect tool to create a dialogue, allowing users to make comments, tags, likes or further suggestions or changes to the proposals. The end result should be increased user involvement and increased transparency of the library’s own innovation and development. Therefore, it also made sense that the project was labeled “user-driven development of concepts” from start to finish. Such features certainly placed the Roskilde public library project within the ca­­ tegory of many users as active developers. Indeed, the Internet based approach made the involvement of not only few but many users realistic.

Why focus on the partner role? It is obvious that many libraries today, like the cases mentioned above, have experimented with different ways to involve their users. One may ask why this trend has appeared, and why the innovative co-creator has become so prominent today in many libraries and cultural institutions. Does the trend only represent a short-lived fashion or are more deep-rooted political, economic, social and technological factors involved? The Reach Out! report itself points out a number of challenges making more user involvement necessary. The first factor mentioned has to do with social or demographic developments, for example, that the younger generations, those under 40, apparently have different preferences as to cultural consumption than their predecessors. Younger people typically prefer rock concerts and cinema visits to theater, art museums and classical concerts. As to public libraries, in particular, the share of potential users who never use a public library increased, in Denmark, from 45 percent to 61 percent from 1987 to 2004. Also the competition from Google is mentioned as a challenge. More dialogue is here believed not to change the preferences of the younger generations, but instead to enable public libraries to develop new services and adjust their existing offerings by meeting the users where they are. The emerging experience society is mentioned as a second factor making more user-involvement necessary. To develop new and attractive experiences, permanent dialogues with users seem to be necessary. The experience society has



The partner 

 113

also been high on the agenda in public library circles, for example, by influencing the architecture, design, and furnishing of libraries. Finally, regard for quality is mentioned as a reason for increased user involvement. Based on experiences from the art sector, it is believed that open working processes in cultural productions, for example, open source theaters, can enhance the quality. The experiences from the Roskilde public library, for example, indicate that quality improvements can also happen through user involvement in decision-making processes. Besides the examples from the Reach Out! project (Kulturministeriet 2008), a number of similar initiatives have appeared in the Scandinavian countries. Among them, one significant concept is Makerspaces, which means spaces and rooms for innovation in the local community as a kind of people’s laboratories for development of ideas created by citizens. At the international “Next Library” conference in Aarhus in 2013, a historic shift in the role of libraries was presented as a shift from “sender of neutral information” to “facilitator and active helper who ensure, as ca­­ talysts, that ideas in society are developed and realized” (Danske Biblioteker 2013, no. 4, 8–9 “Makerspaces – hvad går de ud på?” [“What is Makerspaces”]). Such initiatives might even move one step further than the Reach Out! project. Indeed, the purpose now seems more to facilitate and support creativity in society than the narrower goal, to utilize creative users to make libraries more innovative. Makerspaces are, for example, also found in Finland (Meetingpoint in Helsinki) and in Copenhagen Fablab (Valby). David Lankes in his 2012 book, The Atlas of New Librarianship, says: “The mission of librarians is to improve society through facilitating knowledge creation in their communities.” This statement is very much in accordance with the thoughts behind creative partners although their societal role is more emphasized than their library development functions. The partner features mentioned above are summarized in Table 4-9 below: Table 4-9: Significant features of the partner and corresponding features of the library user Significant features of partner

Corresponding features of library user

User-driven innovation

Makerspaces

Co-creation

Users as idea generators

Driven by mutual interest

Dialogue Motivation Passion

Voluntary – not hired

Active, independent and open-ended Mind spotters

Source: Johannsen (2014)

114 

 Five library user metaphors

Theoretical frameworks I will now present some theoretical frameworks and authors who in different ways have influenced how we think about library users as creative partners or co-developers. There are several sources of inspiration for partner roles in libraries. We will take a closer look upon three of them: 1. the ideas of the American design company, IDEO, 2. Eric von Hippel’s lead user concept, and 3. Richard Florida’s creative class concept.

IDEO on involving users IDEO has gained experience with involving users in new ways and since IDEO has also been involved in library development projects in the United States and Europe – supported by Belinda & Bill Gates Foundation – it is natural to try to catch some of IDEO’s distinctions and experiences. In two interesting books, The Art of Innovation (2001) and The Ten Faces of Innovation – IDEO’s Strategies for Beating the Devil’s Advocate & Driving Creativity throughout your Organization (2006), Tom Kelley, the brother of IDEO’s founder, David Kelley, describes the peculiarities of how IDEO interacts and cooperates with users in the innovation and creative processes of the firm. Indeed, it is emphasized very often that the observation of real people plays a significant role in the firm’s business strategy: We’re not big fans of focus groups. We don’t much care for traditional market research either. We go to the source. Not the “experts” inside a company, but the actual people who use the product or something similar to what we’re hoping to create. (Kelley 2001, 25).

This citation also reveals another essential feature in IDEO’s approach to invol­ ving their users. IDEO certainly believes that you should go beyond putting yourself in your customers’ shoes, because IDEO believes that it is not enough to ask people what they think about a product or an idea. This is especially true about innovative, new-to-the-world products or services. Kelley explains: “Customers mean well – and they’re trying to be helpful – but it’s not their job to be visiona­ ries” (Kelley 2001, 27). Seeing and hearing things with your own eyes and ears is therefore considered to be a “critical first step” in making improved and innovative services (Kelley 2001, 28). The process is called “human factors” or “human inspiration” by IDEO.



The partner 

 115

Observation and innovation Indeed, observation plays a significant role in innovation processes which is reflected in IDEO slogans such as “innovation begins with an eye” (Kelley 2001, 26–52) or the metaphor “observation-based spark.” How observations of children using toothbrushes helped IDEO to discover that smaller hands actually need fatter toothbrushes, provides a good example of the link between observation and innovation. Thus observing customers doing something is an essential ingredient in IDEO’s user involvement practices. The thinking of IDEO has both similarities and differences compared with the Danish library examples mentioned above. The differences are clearly explained by Kelley when he emphasizes that it is not the job of involved customers to be “visionaries”, which translated into library contexts means that it is still the job of the library to be creative and to develop new and innovative services. It’s not kids who suggest that the toothbrush should be fatter, but the developers who get the innovative idea of making fatter toothbrushes by watching kids brushing their teeth. There is, therefore, still a division of labor between the user as a creative partner and the library. This point of view is even more emphasized in The Ten Faces of Innovation (2006). Here, Henry Ford is quoted: “If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they [would] have said a faster horse.” Kelley comments that: good companies still make a habit of listening to their customers. Just don’t confuse that proven business practice with how you go about hunting up the next big breakthrough. That’s not likely to come from asking people what needs improvement or fine-tuning. It’s probably going to be something your customers haven’t even thought of (Kelley 2006, 37).

Another similar citation from the book is: “Customers usually can’t tell you how to create disruptive innovations.” (Kelley 2006, 33). What IDEO advocates concerning users are “field observations and quick prototyping” (Kelley 2006, 26). This distinction between the role of customers and staff, is certainly somewhat mirrored in the terms, “mind spotters” (the creative users) and “mind keepers” (librarians) used by the Danish, Aarhus public library. However, it seems as if von Hippel’s term “lead users” (see below) moves one step further than IDEO’s sharp distinction between developers and users. The lead user is obviously not only familiar with his own needs, but also able to modify or discover new solutions. Lead users are characterized by being especially engaged or advanced and the ambition to satisfy the lead user is compared to much more challenging than meeting the wants of the lowest common denominator (Kulturministeriet 2008, 14; von Hippel 2005).

116 

 Five library user metaphors

IDEO’s approach to what kind of users should be involved is also interes­ ting. Indeed, immediately, it seems reasonable that the average user and the typical behavior should be prioritized. However, IDEO urges us to be aware of the “endless variety of the human nature” (Kelley 2001, 36). Indeed, the “crazy user” and the women and men who do things a “little differently” (Kelley 2001, 41) can be quite inspiring to observe. This point illustrates that the partner concept does not necessarily involve social or cultural elite users. On the contrary, Kelley criticizes companies for having ignored “stupid customers” (Kelley 2001, 41). This distinction between how users would like to interact with products and services compared to how they should be used properly according to norms and regulations also seems to be highly relevant in public library contexts. Having considered both why and how users should be involved in the library’s service development processes, we will now continue taking a closer look at von Hippel’s lead user approach which is different from IDEO’s.

Von Hippel’s lead user and user-centered innovation The Austrian economist and MIT professor, Eric von Hippel (1941–) (von Hippel 2005), has authored several influential books on innovation, for example, Demo­ cratizing Innovation, where he develops the concept of innovation and, especially, the “lead user” concept. Von Hippel has emphasized the role of the user in the innovation process. Furthermore, he has used Australian libraries as a case to demonstrate the importance of lead-user innovation (von Hippel 2005, 25–27; Morrison et al. 2000). However, it should be mentioned here that von Hippel’s user concept is broader than the usual. Actually, he defines users of products and services as both firms and individual consumers that expect to benefit from using a product or service. In contrast, manufacturers benefit from selling a product or a service. Thereby, users are unique in that they alone benefit directly from innovations. “Lead users” are characterized by being ahead of the majority of users in their population with respect to an important markets trend. They also expect to gain high benefits from a solution matching their particular needs.

User-centered innovation Since lead users are at the leading edge of the market, the products or services they develop for their own use are also likely to appeal to other users as well. Indeed, several research reports indicate that many innovations reported by lead users have also proved to be commercially attractive. Thus, von Hippel maintains that user-centered innovations offer great advantages over the manufacturer-cen-



The partner 

 117

tric innovation development systems. Indeed, he sees user-centered innovation as part of a trend towards democratization of innovation. In the traditional ma­nufacturer-centric model, a user’s only role is to have needs, which manufacturers then identify and fill by designing and producing new products. Here, he points out that a growing body of empirical work shows that innovation by users provides a necessary complement to manufacturer innovation.

Library applications In a library context such perspectives sound attractive, especially in a market with highly heterogeneous user needs. Furthermore, von Hippel points out that an incentive which can drive individual user-innovators to innovate could be that they may also value the process of innovating because of the enjoyment of problem-solving and learning. Thus, the problem-solving process in itself, rather than the solution, can be a goal for the user. This combination of valuable innovations and highly motivated users certainly appeals to some library leaders. Furthermore, there are empirical findings that show that users often freely reveal what they have developed, which means that they voluntarily give up all intellectual property rights; consequently, all interested parties are given access to the information about the product or service they have developed (von Hippel 2005, 1–17). As mentioned, 102 Australian libraries using computerized OPAC library information systems were among von Hippel’s examples (von Hippel 2005, 25–27; Morrison et al. 2000). Although, he admits that libraries “might not seem the most likely spot for technological innovators to lurk” he nevertheless concludes that 26 percent of the 102 Australian libraries, which were users of OPACs, had modified their OPAC hardware or software “far beyond the user-adjustments capabilities provided by the system manufacturers.” The survey confirmed the status of the libraries that had modified their OPAC systems as lead users; it also estimated the commercial value of the user-developed innovations in the OPACs. In the present context, however, von Hippel’s library case differs somewhat from most cases where libraries try to practice user-driven innovation through their users. The main difference is that it is the library staff – and not the end-users – who act as lead users and who improve the OPAC. On the other hand, the reasons described and motivating mechanisms revealed by von Hippel all seem to be highly relevant in library contexts too. I have now presented two different approaches to how users can be involved in product and service development: 1. the IDEO approach, where the designer observes the user carefully, and

118 

 Five library user metaphors

2. the lead user approach, where the user plays a more independent and signi­ ficant role in the design and product development process. We will now look at different suggestions as to what kind of users could be interesting for libraries to engage, and interested, not least, in getting involved in development processes. We have already noticed a distinction between the elite and advanced users which are preferred in lead user-like contexts, and the users with difficulties which IDEO recommends. The creative class to which we will now turn is, however, characterized more by sociological features than by their product development interests and competences.

Richard Florida and the creative class The American sociologist and economist, Richard Florida’s (1957–), thoughts and works concerning the emergence and role of the creative classes have gained wide attention also in the library sector (Florida 2005). In many respects, there are some similarities between the creative class of Florida and the creative partner in library contexts. Therefore, Florida’s thoughts and concepts on the creative class seem to be relevant. Although, Florida, does not explicitly mention libraries as an element which attracts members of the creative class, his attitude to libraries, in general, appears to be quite positive. Florida was born in Newark, New Jersey. About the Newark of his childhood he writes, that it was a “lively, ethnically diverse, and thriving city” and an “energetic and vibrant place … filled with shops and large department stores, incre­ dible museums and libraries, a mosaic of ethnic neighborhoods ...” As a teenager he spent “countless hours” at the Newark Public Library roaming “those magnificent stacks, searching through all sorts of books in the urban affairs section” and that “armed with endless resources from the Newark Public Library” he began writing papers on the nature of cities, housing and urban affairs (Florida 2005, 8–11). Indeed, such remarks indicate that public libraries have had a highly po­­ sitive influence on Florida’s own intellectual journey. Such statements mean it is also certain that his attitude towards libraries, in general, is positive. It is also evident that Florida highly values the importance of arts and culture for a region’s or a city’s ability to attract talent. In his analyses, he emphasizes the importance of the contrast between the old industrial economy and the new creative economy. In the old industrial economy, regional competition “revolved around the competition for firms. The location decisions of firms drove regional economies, and the locations decisions of people followed from the location of



The partner 

 119

firms, who in turn based their decisions on natural resource endowments, transportation systems, and labor costs.” (Florida 2005, 68). The creative economy has dramatically changed that situation, according to Florida. The ability to attract high-skilled people is now the key to regional competitiveness. Sociological factors, therefore, become as important, if not more important, than pure economic and technological factors. A place’s ability to “capture the imagination, dreams, and desires of young creative who are making location decisions” is now essential (Florida 2005, 68). Here, the presence of certain amenities is crucial. Florida makes an interes­ ting distinction between the amenities of the industrial and the creative economy: The industrial economy emphasized big ticket amenities like professional sports, the fine arts (e.g., opera, classical music, and the theater), and cultural destinations (e.g., museums and art exhibits). Creative economy amenities typically revolve around outdoor recreational activities and lifestyle amenities. (Florida 2005, 70–74).

What it is that attracts the creative class is described in a special Coolness Index that measures a region’s appeal in terms of amenities like: “nightlife, bars, restaurants, and so on” (Florida 2005, 74). Interesting, and also somewhat surprising, considering his rather positive attitudes towards libraries, is that they are not mentioned among the amenities that make a city or a district cool. In answering the question, “What does talent want?”, a large number of visibly active young people, access to a wide range of outdoor activities, a vibrant music and performance scene, night-life experiences, a clean and healthy environment and a lifestyle supportive of diversity, are mentioned explicitly (Florida 2005, 83–84), but not user friendly and well equipped public libraries. Perhaps the observation that “creative workers working long hours need to access amenities almost instantly on demand” (Florida 2005, 85) could possibly indirectly indicate a need for virtual library access and staff-less libraries with long opening hours. Florida’s analytical framework, presented in several books including his best-seller title, The Rise of the Creative Class (2002), includes both economic and sociological aspects. Based on detailed statistical evidence, Florida claims that economic wealth and growth are more and more related to the presence of a well-educated segment of creative people, the so-called creative class. It should be mentioned here that some of Florida’s calculations have been questioned by other economists. Members of this creative class include both technology workers and artists. Indeed, within the present stage of economic development the creative class in the United States in 2001 made up more than 30 percent of the work

120 

 Five library user metaphors

force. He argues that the creativity of this particular societal layer is the key to survival and growth under the present and future world economic conditions.

Urban renewal and cultural institutions However, Florida’s analysis really becomes interesting for cultural institutions and libraries when he considers urban renewal and talent migration and how cities and local communities can attract members of the creative class. Indeed, the public sector seems to play an important role in making a place attractive for people belonging to the creative segments. Indeed, he identified, based on statistical evidence, three areas: the “3 Ts of economic growth” as Technology, Talent and Tolerance, which count when creative people decide where to live. In contrast to earlier times Florida emphasized that job opportunities seemed to play a more reduced role at the time he was writing (around 2000). More, important were the cultural and environmental facilities and attractions. To attract creative people, generate innovation, and stimulate economic deve­ lopment, a place must possess all 3 Ts. The San Francisco Bay Area, Boston, Washington, D.C., Austin and Seattle were all mentioned as places which had succeeded in putting all the T’s together. They are therefore characterized as truly creative places. (Florida 2005, 27–45).

Measuring and ranking the attraction of places To measure the attraction of certain places Florida constructed three indexes, a bohemian, a gay and a diversity index, to form a ranking system for the creative class. His considerations on cultural institutions and offerings, where he emphasized that traditional cultural institutions like theaters, operas and museums were not particularly attractive to the creative classes, are also interesting from a library’s point of view. Do they also belong to the category of traditional cultural institutions? According to Florida, members of the creative class prefer spontaneous street events in which they themselves can participate. Indeed this distinction and view upon cultural attractions seems to be very similar to the considerations around the Danish Reach Out! project mentioned above. A comparison between Florida’s creative class and the creative partner metaphor reveals many similarities. Apart from differences and variations both the creative class and the creative partner involve younger, well-educated people with specified and demanding requirements as to cultural institutions and as to when and how they wish to get involved in the activities of, for example, their local public libraries. They both, definitely, do not belong to a generation who



The partner 

 121

feel honored if a library asks for their advice or assistance. They are rather driven by forces like motivation and passion.

Critical opinions The strategies of many libraries in Europe, North America, and Australia had been rather uncritically to adjust according to the preferences, styles and taste of the young creative class. Especially, their media use has nearly become a role model for public libraries who have emphasized the need to be visible and present in social media and who in their marketing have tried to adapt to the multi-tasking, ever communicating lifestyle of the creative class. However, one may ask what the local public library in reality can offer a user group which prefers access to a wide range of outdoor activities, a vibrant music and performance scene, nightlife experiences, a clean and healthy environment and a lifestyle supportive of diversity? Obviously, the most difficult preference to match is a wide range of outdoor activities. Indeed, a Danish public library was present in 2014 at a national rock music festival in Roskilde; in general, however, libraries are seldom associated with outdoor activities. Night-life experiences are also difficult to offer, although some staff-less public libraries sometimes close as late as 10 pm. Public libraries have also participated in “cultural night” arrangements in Copenhagen. On the other hand, libraries are known as tolerant places supporting diversity, and allround cultural activities. But what will be the consequences of styling the public library towards the taste and the particular cultural preferences of creative class? Certainly, the economic incentives will work and attract dynamic taxpayers but what about the weaker and elderly elements of society which the library should also serve? Indeed, Audunson (2005) recommends neutral, low-intensive meeting-places to promote social communication and cross-cultural contacts. However, it is questionable whether a library place designed to fit the preferences of the creative class could also function as a neutral, low-intensive meeting-place in Audunson’s meaning of the word.

Tara Brabazon and the Google generation Another critical opinion raised against the creative class concepts in library contexts concerns the segment’s enthusiastic attitudes to the internet, social media, and information and communication technologies. Assuming that a typical member of the creative class is a young computer-literate person, a “digital native” belonging to the “Google generation”, it is, hereby implicitly accepted

122 

 Five library user metaphors

that members of this generation also are likely to stimulate innovation and economic wealth. Indeed, few have questioned this cohesion. The way members of the Google generation constantly navigate on the Internet and the way they heavily utilize different social media and blogs are also counted as valuable characteristics of the creative partner, which should be emulated and supported by public institutions including libraries. Many public libraries around the world, for example, attach importance to being visible on social media. The English-Australian professor Tara Brabazon (1969–) should be mentioned among the few critics of the Google generation notion. In several books and articles (e.g., Brabazon 2006, 2009), she has criticized what she sees as a harmful, recently changed balance between information and knowledge and between experience and expertise. With an expertise within media literacies and online learning, Brabazon attracted some media and online attention in 2008 by “banning” students from using Google and Wikipedia during their first year of study. The purpose was to encourage citizens and students to “dig below the obvious, superficial and opinionated to discover the difficult, the scholarly and the informed” (Brabazon 2009). Although Brabazon is not particularly excited about Google, which she thinks encourages a “culture of equivalence”, she recognizes, for example, the arrival of Google Scholar in 2004 as a welcome intervention. In general, she is skeptical towards techno-enthusiasm and, especially, she sees a dangerous “anti-expertise agenda” behind phenomena like wikipedia: “The ideology of Wikipedia assumes that if more people are involved in the process of writing entries, their accuracy will increase. Popularity and participation determines truth.” (Brabazon 2006). The consequences of the resulting “flattening of expertise” are that future students will lack literacy skills and strategies to sort the trash from the relevant. She points out that both libraries and teachers, for example, have an important mission to inform students and others about the consequences of the ranking procedures of Google. What is, furthermore, interesting about Brabazon, is her attack on what she calls incorrect and unproven statements about the Google generation, young people and their use of technology. A British report, from University College, London, Information Behavior of the Researcher of the Future, better known as the Google Generation Report (2007), is here referred to. Among its findings is the conclusion that digital literacy and information literacy do not necessarily go hand in hand. Polemically, Brabazon cites the point of view that information does not want to be free – it rather wants to be labelled, organized, and filtered so it can be discovered, cross-referenced, and consumed.



The partner 

 123

Finally, Brabazon criticizes concepts like “wisdom of the crowd” and the “excessive egotism of the social networking sites” for being: “avenues for self expression and self validation for already empowered people.” Hereby Brabazon definitely does not see Web 2.0 as digi-democracy; on the contrary, she considers it to be a “country club on a computer” for like-minded people. She also talks about: “pseudo-democracy in the literature of wiki-enabled collaborations” (Brabazon 2009). However, Brabazon has not only criticized the Google generation; she has also contributed constructive proposals to move students and citizens from searching to researching (Brabazon 2013). One could consider Brabazon’s critique as a specific critique of the Google generation and of public institutions which uncritically boost the information behavior of that generation. However, her critique could also be widened to cover aspects of the creative class notion and maybe also some dimensions of partnership ideas and practices in libraries. There is still a considerable difference between the way IDEO and von Hippel involve users in product development and the way users are involved in library development processes, where the involvement often becomes a purpose in itself. Brabazon’s questioning of the blessings of the Google generation and digital natives and the mixing up of everything – e.g., entertainment and information, makes it obvious that her critique is also relevant in library contexts. We will finish the section on the partner metaphor, which is the most recent of the five metaphors, by asking some fundamental, cultural political questions involving libraries all over the world: –– Are the public libraries about to forget their weak and non-empowered users? –– Do the libraries overestimate the creativity and innovative capabilities of user-generated content? –– Has enthusiasm for Google, the social media and wiki-enabled content damaged science, scholarly learning and knowledge? –– Have some public libraries been moving too far in their efforts to attract and please youngsters by being present on diverse social media, with the risk of compromising parts of the original role of libraries to provide information and enlightenment? Such questions are relevant not only for educational institutions but also for libraries. It seems that many libraries and librarians are understanding and face such challenges by, for example, starting to teach students that Google is not enough for producing reliable evidence and conducting exhaustive literature searches (Hjørland 2014).

124 

 Five library user metaphors

4.6 Summary Chapter 4 has presented five user metaphors which have in common that they have all, at different times and to a different extent, influenced discussions and discourses of the library profession within the period from about 1975 to 2014. However, there are also considerable differences between the five metaphors. Indeed, the variations are so many and so profound that it is difficult to measure them all according to one, single dimension. As to the way in which the metaphor appears in the professional language usage, citizens, customers, and guests have in common that they are referred to directly: –– the library’s customers appreciate the new library building –– the library serves the citizens of Oslo with information –– the library guests appreciate the new welcome procedures. Library users seem, however, seldom to be referred to directly as “clients.” Why the metaphor is considered to be still valid is due to the circumstance that the users are indirectly referred to in many community information texts as if they were social clients. Finally, the usage of the partner metaphor lies between the direct and indirect where partnerships between a library and some of its users can be referred to as partnerships or synonymous expressions, for example, “mind spotters” and the like. The description of the different needs and preferences of the five metaphorical segments also varies a lot. The needs and preferences and also the non-prefe­ rences of citizens, clients, and creative partners are all relatively well defined and often supported by sociological and demographic knowledge. Sometimes even a distinction between subjective and objective needs is made, either to supplement or sometimes even to substitute personal preferences, especially when dealing with socially disadvantaged users and certain immigrant groups. Customers and guests, on the other hand, do not, in general, reflect well-defined socio-demographic categories with specified needs. The norm is here more abstract but ne­­ vertheless a norm, namely to aim at the optimal customer satisfaction. The status and independence of the user also vary according to which me­­ taphor one chooses. The citizen represents the most independent position. Here, the library’s assistance, in principle, is restricted to providing relevant and reliable information and evidence. At the other end of the independence dimension, we find the client who not only needs assistance to find relevant information but often also to translate, interpret, assess quality, and utilize the information. In terms of independent judgment, the partner is often placed beside the citizen. The customer and the guest, again, are different to place unambiguously while

Summary 

 125

some customers will demand much personal assistance whereas others prefer self-service. A common theme has also been to discuss to what extent a certain metaphor was perceived as controversial or neutral. Without doubt the “customer” is the most controversial metaphor but “clients” and “partners” are also discussed because they both can cause positive discrimination of, for example, socially disadvantaged clients and creative partners. The guest is also a somewhat controversial metaphor, partly because of its connection to the customer concept and partly because, according to some professionals, it does not fit well into a library context. The citizen is then back as the less controversial metaphor, at least in democratic countries. Concerning relevance within different library types, it appears that some metaphors hitherto are primarily found in public library contexts. Thus, citizens, clients, and guests, are primarily found in public library contexts. Customers, and to a certain degree, partners, are found in both academic and public library connections. As to the spread of the different metaphors an exhaustive answer would probably require detailed studies of specific institutions, national contexts, and time periods. In more general terms, the customer concept is obviously a strong concept which has influenced public and academic libraries on a global scale from about 1990 and onwards. On the other hand, we have the guest metaphor, which until now has had a much restricted spread from 2011 onwards to about 25–40 Danish public libraries. The client was a global public library trend from about 1975 to the 1990s when it was challenged by the customers metaphor and New Public Management thinking. However, the concept has proved to be vigo­ rous and has had an ability to re-emerge in different shapes as directed towards, for example, immigrants and computer illiterates. The latest metaphor, the partner, emerged around 2000, and has also become a global trend. It appears to be popular although it might be a little bit challenged by the client metaphor.

5 Library services and user metaphors We will now apply the metaphorical and sociological user concepts presented in the preceding chapters to a selection of different library services. The overall purpose of this chapter is to deal with research question number 6: “What cha­ racterizes the interrelations between different library services and different user segments and user metaphors?” Most of the chosen services are public library services although some of them also have been applied by academic and research libraries. The key question of the chapter deals with determining the role of segments and user metaphors in the design and production of library services. To what extent does focusing on specific user segments and metaphors make any difference – and if they do so – what kind of difference do the specified target groups make? And to what extent are different library services intended and designed to fit the needs of specific user segments? Many of the services are found in libraries worldwide although not necessarily occurring in all libraries. Two criteria have been applied in the selection process. First, I have tried to avoid very traditional and common services like return of books and reference services. Instead, an effort has been made to find less traditional services like, for example, “borrow-a-prejudice” (in a certain week the local library invites different professions, e.g., priests, police, politicians, etc. to act as objects to be borrowed by users for half an hour or so). The concept has been tested in public libraries in Denmark, Poland, Australia and elsewhere. Second, I have also – as much as possible – selected services of which I myself have first-hand knowledge, a knowledge that, typically, has been established through various library project evaluation jobs for national library authorities, primary in Denmark and Scandinavia. Among the several project evaluations the four latest are: 1. staff-less public libraries (Johannsen 2012, 2014b) 2. host-and-guest relationships in public libraries (Johannsen 2014b) 3. social media user education projects in public libraries concerning (Johannsen 2015), and 4. fee-based services in public and academic libraries. (Johannsen 2004a, Johannsen 2004b) Finally, I have also paid attention to the global dimension by including experiences from libraries all over the world. Such experiences are, however, often mostly based on secondary information sources. The eight selected library services are (in alphabetic order): 1. Community information services (public information, homework assistance for pupils, and computer literacy courses)



2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Community information 

 127

Borrow-a-prejudice campaigns Digital reading groups Fee-based services Guest-host services Mystery shopping Online message services Staff-less public libraries

Some of the eight services are what we can call “staff-intensive”, e.g., community information, information literacy courses, some fee-based services, and most guest-host services, while others are “staff-extensive” like online message services. Also definite self-services like staff-less libraries are among the chosen examples. Some services are partly staff-intensive and partly staff-extensive, for example, borrow-a-prejudice campaigns and digital reading groups, where the staff are, typically, only present during parts of the service delivery process. Finally, one of the listed services, mystery shopping, having an entirely internal focus does not really belong to the category of “user services.” Mystery shopping is certainly not a user oriented service in the traditional sense of the word. It is, nevertheless, included because the mystery shopping process is based upon certain considerations of user image and because users can benefit indirectly from mystery shopping.

5.1 Community information (public information, homework assistance for pupils, and information literacy courses) Community information services (Estabrook 1979) are related to information services and classic reference work. The user has a need for information, he or she transforms it into a question which he or she addresses to the library or to the reference desk. The librarian or the reference librarian then probably interviews the user to understand better the nature of the problem and thereafter finds an answer in various handbooks, bibliographies, databases, etc. Finally, the user receives the answer(s) and makes use of it/them. That is the typical library refe­ rence context. However, community information services often take place in contexts different from the just mentioned normal situation. Sometimes the user is not able to define and express his or her information needs properly. Moreover, often the answer delivered can be insufficient since the user also needs help to interpret and to utilize the received information. What is often needed are two elements

128 

 Library services and user metaphors

which, traditionally, are not included in the classical library reference service package: interpretation and action. To transform a reference service offered to everybody into a specific client service, targeted towards socially disadvantaged people – at least – the two extra elements, interpretation and action, are needed. Here, the challenge is to achieve an appropriate balance between, on the one hand, helping and supporting the client and, on the other hand, avoiding paternalistic behavior and stigmatizing the user.

Interpretation Interpretation, typically, means that the reference librarian or the information specialist not only finds the text of a specific law, for example, on social security, but also determines whether the given law text is relevant to the user’s specific context and specific case. Since this particular interpretation task often requires legal advice, librarians have learnt to avoid delivering their own interpretations by distinguishing between retrieving the law text and determining the specific re­­ levance of the text. However, since the information found is rather useless for the user without an interpretation belonging to it, librarians within the community information tradition have developed different solutions involving, for example, the participation of social workers, legal aid, and similar resources with the ne­­ cessary legal background. However, sometimes even referral to an expert source is not enough, so the librarian should therefore also act as practical contact maker to the proper local authorities, legal aid offices, and similar instances. Such contact makings are considered outside the traditional library service package by some members of the library profession. The social service example shows that what distinguishes a traditional library information service for all from a targeted information service for socially disadvantaged clients is, primarily, the presence of elements like interpretation and action. More basically, the wider perspectives of the two services are also different. The traditional reference service has a relatively narrower perspective focusing on delivering fast and correct answers, whereas the community information service, including assistance to interpretation and action, is focused upon solving social problems. The example shows that targeting a library service towards the needs of specific user segments might imply transforming – sometimes even radically – the nature of the service and how and by whom it is produced. Public information communication is also different from community information services. Public information is, typically, defined as information produced by local or national public authorities; it is related both to reference work



Community information 

 129

and to community information. Public information services include the presentation by the library of a variety of brochures, pamphlets, videos, local plans, and the like. Often the exhibition of materials produced by local and national societies, political parties and movements, and various associations are included in libraries’ public information activities. Public information units in libraries are also sometimes staffed by, for example, social security and welfare officers who are capable of both interpreting and taking action when they are confronted by library users with social problems. The solution with more or less independent public information departments inside the public library seems to solve the problems concerning interpretation and action. However, it also creates new ones. From a citizen point of view, the perception of the library as a place which can stimulate and support debates on societal questions might be affected negatively if the library becomes totally integrated in the local public administration machinery. If, for example, a citizen likes to discuss the functioning and legi­ timacy of the public administration, the library’s image as a pure and independent information center might be questioned if the public administration and the public library are perceived as one uniform institution. Indeed, values such as neutrality and balance are essential as seen from the citizen’s point of view. On the other hand, the presence of a public information department at the library might also attract types of user who otherwise seldom visit the library, Nevertheless, we also here notice that the intention of targeting a library service towards a specific user segment – in this particular case: citizens and socially disadvantaged clients – has certain consequences as to the service deli­ very set up. To the citizen the independency of the library is considered a value for a provider of facts and opinions about political issues. The social client who feels that he or she is being treated unjustly by the local social security authorities might also feel that his chance of getting an independent second opinion on his case is diminished when a public information unit, staffed by the same local security authorities, is now dealing with the library’s social security oriented questions. However, the social client has, typically, also a much stronger interest in finding a practical solution than the citizen.

Homework assistance Homework assistance for pupils has recently been established in many Danish public libraries. The assistance is primarily run at the library’s premises by volunteer students. Although homework assistance is open to everyone, the service has been designed to address the problems of pupils from homes where it is difficult to work in peace or where the parents are not able to help because of language, educational, and cultural challenges. Pupils with an immigrant background are,

130 

 Library services and user metaphors

for example, an important target group for the homework assistance efforts of Danish public libraries. Library based homework assistance is an example of a service specifically designed to serve the needs of a specific socially challenged user segment. To avoid a stigmatizing image the service is, however, marketed as open for all.

Computer literacy courses The final example of a library service aimed at specific disadvantaged groups is information – or rather, computer literacy – courses offered by public libraries. An important source of inspiration for the courses was the American concept of “23 things” which emphasized the establishment of a playful approach to learning and two-way communication, interaction and flexibility. Especially in academic library environments, libraries had for many years undertaken library instruction and offered various information and literature searching courses. In public libraries, it was however first the arrival of online searching and, in parti­ cular, the arrival of the Internet that started the development of a variety of diffe­ rent Internet and social media courses. The background of the Danish public library computer literacy project was the shocking results of a report published by Teknologisk Institut [Technological Institute] in 2007 on the information and communication technology (ICT) skills of the Danish population. The report indicated that as much as 38 percent of the population were so-called “ICT illiterates”, with either none or only weak computer experiences. Moreover, out of the 38 percent, 20 percent had never used a computer. Four levels of ICT skills were identified in the report. Level 0 contained people with no computer skills and level 1 possessed only weak skills. The purpose of the courses was seen in this context, explicitly, to reduce the widespread ICT illiteracy. Indeed, an important societal goal was here entrusted to the country’s public libraries. I had the opportunity to evaluate the results of the efforts. Among the sub-projects was a computer literacy course aimed at families – both parents and children – in Herning in Jutland. The course contained both virtual and physical elements with sessions at the library; it lasted seven weeks with 25 participants – parents and children. The idea was that the children during the course should teach their parents how to navigate on the Internet whereas the parents should make the children aware of dangers on the Internet such as sexual harassment and the like and provide guidance on how to avoid or reduce such dangers. Compared with traditional library instruction courses, the Internet courses delivered by the participating libraries – at least the ones I evaluated from 2007 to 2009 (Johannsen 2015) – contained some significant differences. First, the cur-



Borrow-a-prejudice campaigns 

 131

riculum was much more flexible and sensitive towards the likes and dislikes of the participants. Stimulating activating teaching and two-way communication actually revolutionized traditional library searching courses. From a user segmentation point of view, the interesting thing was that diffe­ rent means were mobilized to avoid stigmatization of the computer illiterates. The playful mood was one but also the relaxed but always serious atmosphere and the establishment of mutual confidence contributed to the generally successful course evaluations. Indeed, the widespread less than favorable image of library instruction courses as boring and irrelevant was effectively eliminated. Also the inspiration from the “23 things” concepts and tool box was important although the courses were not entirely self-driven. The presence of teachers and teaching distinguished the courses from the original “23 things” concept (Gross & Leslie 2010, Popp 2013, Stephens & Cheetham 2011). A comparison with community information in the 1980s could be interes­ ting, since both cases have to do with user groups with weaknesses. However, the basic attitudes exposed by the library profession seemed to have become quite different. The elements of victimization and patronizing were undoubtedly much more prominent in the 1980s than in the 2010s. The working metaphors behind computer literacy courses thus borrow traits from both customer and also from partner roles more than from the classical client metaphor. That computer skills are also necessary to maintain the role of citizen raises the question whether this role should also be included. However, one should also be cautious to imagine direct links between social media activities and democratic involvement since many of the courses have touched upon subjects and sources where the de­­ mocratic potential seems to be less prominent. However, it is a widespread perception that democracy and social media use are positively interrelated (Charalabidis & Loukis 2012, Johansson 2004).

5.2 Borrow-a-prejudice campaigns “Borrow-a-prejudice” is a library service based on a concept which was originally developed by the organization, Stop the Violence. In 2004 the concept was tested under the headline “Borrow-a-prejudice” at a branch library (Blaagaarden) in Copenhagen for two days. Here, library users could “borrow” a priest, an Arab, a journalist, a Muslim, an animal rights activist, a communist, a politician, a police officer, and a deliberate work shy person for a 30-minute conversation over a cup of coffee. During the five lending hours, 40 loans of the nine “books” (= persons) took place. The project was repeated in the summer of 2005.

132 

 Library services and user metaphors

The idea of the “living library” was born in Denmark in 2000 as part of a go­­ vernment initiative that rallied around the non-governmental organization Stop the Violence (STV). During the Roskilde music festival of that year in Denmark the co-founders of STV were given the opportunity to present their activities. They organized a human library where one could “borrow” persons representing professions and opinions which are often seen through the prism of stereotypes and subsequently have a dialogue with the borrowed person. In this way people could meet and have conversations with people from different backgrounds, sexual orientations, nationalities, or religions. The living library idea does not necessarily require a real library. Nevertheless, it has been an advantage that public libraries are seen as a neutral ground for discussion of controversial societal questions and that they thereby can help to re-vitalize social debate, providing a means to re-establish the library as a meeting place (Berger 2004). The concept has also been tested in other countries. Popielewska (2012) discusses, based on Polish experiences, the objectives for the project, controversies related to it, how to organize a living library, and whether the living library represents a threat to traditional libraries. The Human or Living Library concept is an innovative method designed to promote dialogue, reduce prejudices and encourage understanding. The main characteristics of the project are to be found in its simplicity and positive approach. In its initial form, the Human Library is a mobile library set up as a space for dialogue and interaction. Visitors to a Human Library are given the opportunity to speak informally with “people on loan”; this latter group could be extremely varied in terms of age, sex and cultural background. The Human Library enables groups to break stereotypes by challenging the most common prejudices in a positive and humorous manner. It is a concrete, easily transferable and affordable way of promoting tolerance and understanding. Originally, the Human Library concept was developed by a young and idealistic youth organization called “Stop the Violence.” The organization was started by five Copenhagen youngsters after a mutual friend was stabbed in the nightlife in 1993. The brutal attack on their friend, who luckily survived, made the five decide to try and do something about the problem. In a few years the Danish organization had 30,000 members. In 2000, Stop The Violence was encouraged to organize activities for the annual Roskilde music festival, northern Europe’s biggest summer festival, to raise awareness of anti-violence, encourage dialogue and build relations among the festival visitors. Since then the methodology has become part of the human rights education program supported by the Council of Europe. Today a majority of the program is hosted within the public library sector. Others are located in educational institutions, festivals, book fairs and other re­­ levant settings.



Digital reading groups 

 133

The background of the concept clearly points in the direction of services targeted at citizens. Although a “prejudice” is defined as an opinion not based on experience or reason, according to which socially disadvantaged clients can also be prejudiced, the emphasis on the dialogue form points towards the citizen role because the responsibility for the outcome very much depends on the user who “borrows” a person. The customer role is more unlikely because the element of entertainment is not very conspicuous. Customer oriented variants would emphasize other aspects such as fame, excitement, and the like, with dialogue partners such as movie stars, famous football players, and musicians and not priests, Arabs, journalists, police officers, and the like.

5.3 Digital reading groups Digital reading groups is an example of a library service innovation initiative which explicitly intents directly to change a both unfavorable and outdated spinster image of librarians: Discussions of librarians’ image and its reception by a wider public are numerous and always followed by the statement: we have to market ourselves as information specialists, cultural workers, information architects and so forth. Still, librarians are to a large extent identified with dull spinsters whose prime concerns are meticulousness and organizing books in a sphere of efficiency. This stereotype does, however, not correspond with the reality for many librarians in public libraries, businesses and organisations. Surprisingly enough … librarians themselves play an active role in the constant reconstruction of their stereotyped identity. In a changing society that demands new competences from librarians they often look backwards creating an image connected to an old librarian as a bogey instead of looking into their professional competences when (re)defining their identity. (Balling et al. 2008, 56).

To be more specific, the cited article discusses how new digital settings challenge the well-established library promotion of literature in the direction of more communication, dialogue and discussion with users. Balling, Henrichsen and Skouvig (2008), inspired by the work of McGarthy et al. (2002), emphasize the importance of stereotypes as aids to explanation and as an important part of both cognitive processes and actions where one simply navigates in the world by categorizing it. They attempt to substitute the spinster stereotype with a modern, communicative moderator role within digital reading groups. Historically, the reading group phenomenon can be traced back to the salons and coffee houses of the eighteenth century. Reading groups as we know them, however, appeared at the same time as the modern public library– often as a tool to provide underprivileged groups

134 

 Library services and user metaphors

with access to knowledge. Library reading groups declined in the 1960s. Today, reading groups have experienced a revitalization. In the groups, participants find a community where they can share thoughts, feelings, opinions, fears and joys with like-minded people (Long 2003). The Danish 2007 project is greatly inspired by the British reader development organization “Opening the Book” (van Riel & Thomas 2007). “Opening the Book” focuses on a reader-centered literature promotion instead of the traditional book – or author-centered literature promotion. Reader-centered reading groups focus more on the experience of reading and less on an academic approach to literature. The aim is not just to establish a better understanding of the book for each participant, but also to share reader experiences. The Danish “Reading Club” case involved 34 librarians and 270 readers spread over 23 different groups. The project was based in a literature promotion homepage shared by the majority of the Danish public libraries (www.litteraturssiden.dk). The evaluation was based on e-mailed qualitative questions targeted toward both users and librarians regarding their experiences with discussing literature on the web. The interesting thing concerning the digital reading groups, compared with traditional reading groups, was that the group members were spread all over the country and participated in the discussion when and where it suited them. In particular, the flexibility was a feature which the members emphasized when asked about the advantages being in a digital reading group.

Individuals and librarians The biggest perceived disadvantage of both members and moderators was that the dialogue was both slow and sluggish. The tasks of the librarian moderators were to create a profile for the group and for themselves, and to take responsibility for the group. Consequently, the librarian to a large extent stands up as an individual and not merely as a librarian. The themes, for example, “Books on Food”, “English Novelists”, “French Temptations”, and “Book Club of Forgotten Books”, and the first four or five titles were chosen by the librarian, whereas future titles could be chosen by the group jointly. There were no rules regarding themes, but the librarian played the role of moderator.

Expert and conversation partner roles The role of the librarian was thus double; both as a provider of books or titles and as a participant. An interesting aspect for the librarian was to find a balance between the role as expert (providing the group with knowledge concerning the author, the period and the genre) and the role as an equal conversation partner.



Fee-based services 

 135

Indeed, digital reading groups not only forced the librarian to act in a more personal way, they also turned the communication roles of sender and receiver upside down, making room for flexible dialogues and also for the members to play the role as experts in case where they had a certain knowledge. The possibilities offered in a Web 2.0 context could be seen as a development tool where librarians could practice new ways of communication and promotion. In the future, there will certainly be a growing demand for more user-centered library promotion that requires both personality and individuality, and also professional expertise from the librarian. However, there is still a need for a stereotype or metaphor that is able effectively to signal such a combination of specialized knowledge and professional communication. In terms of preferred user metaphors, the described development of digital and certainly also physical reading groups, represents a movement away from a passive client role towards something else. The citizen role containing elements like independence and empowerment could probably fit according to some dimensions. However, reading groups seem to be oriented more towards leisure and experience oriented contexts whereas the citizen role points at political and constitutional processes. Another target could be the role as partner because the new reading group concept just pays attention to the users’ roles as equal conversation partners although their role are not as independent as the classic creative partner role. Also the critical customer whose preferences and choices are considered to be of vital importance could be a goal for the new reading group concept although the commercial connotations, maybe, would not fit in literary contexts.

5.4 Fee-based services Fee-based services in libraries can be many different things. Johannsen (2004a, 2004b) distinguishes seven different categories: 1. Special user services (on-demand home deliveries) 2. Library development consultancy 3. Teaching & courses 4. Library operating tasks 5. Business Information searching 6. System & Web design support 7. Cultural arrangements Also, the customer can vary a lot, ranging from companies and institutions, including other libraries, to individual customers. Indeed, according to Danish

136 

 Library services and user metaphors

experiences from the early 2000s, other public libraries were the primary targets of several consultancy-oriented services, such as, service categories 2, 4 and 6. A number of Danish public libraries thus have generated income by selling their experience within innovation and organizational development, implementation of new technology, and interior design to other libraries. A recent example from Denmark is the library in Aalborg which has sold courses on guest-management to more than 25 Danish public libraries. Also local institutions – authorities, schools, university colleges, kindergartens – have bought services, for example, concerning assistance with Web design, tailored courses in legal information retrieval, or out-sourced the operation of college libraries to public libraries. Existing library users, therefore, have not been among the primary buyers of fee-based library services. Sometimes they pay for admission to a cultural event arranged by the local public library and sometimes they buy some second-hand library books, but such incomes are mostly considered to be just “peanuts.” Delivery of library materials directly to the user’s address was once thought, optimistically, to become a veritable money-machine; the concept, however, disappointed a lot because the interest among the library users proved to be minimal. Private companies, too, have become a least important customer segment after 2000; certainly the emergence of the Internet was the primary course behind the disappearance of most of the demand for public libraries business information services which existed in the 1980s and 1990s (Johannsen 2004a, 2004b). The lost success among external customers of public library fee-based services– apart from a few established business information services – is primarily due to two different causes. First, when a public library begins to insist on payment for its services – or for some of its services – the library customer is no longer a metaphorical costumer – the-user-as-a-customer – he or she has become a real customer. And real customers who are expected to pay can be both more complicated to serve and to handle than the metaphorical customers. Here, the distinction between “nice to have” and “need to have” could be useful. Many would think that it could be nice to have one’s library loans delivered to one’s doorstep, but only few are willing to pay the costs. In a suburb near Copenhagen, librarians had got the impression from local lawyers among their acquaintances that it would be appreciated if the local library began to market and sell expertise on searching for legal information. However, when the library started its service the demand proved to be nil and the service was closed down within a year. Again the lesson was that “nice to have” is not the same as “need to have.”



Guest-host services 

 137

A second element, which may contribute to explain the difficulties of feebased customer services in libraries, is the challenges concerning the legitimacy of letting some library services be free and some fee-based. In other cultural institutions, such as museums, a clear distinction could be drawn between what you buy in the museum shop and what you experience in the museum. Sometimes, you can even have a situation where access to the museum’s permanent collection is free and access to special exhibitions are against payment. Such clear and therefore also easily understandable distinctions are more complicated in libra­ ries. Also the idea of letting certain more wealthy users pay for library services would also be more or less impossible in modern welfare state contexts.

5.5 Guest-host services The user-as-a-guest concept has not yet been tested in many libraries around the world. In Denmark, the first project was run in the city of Aalborg in Jutland in 2011–2012. After the project was finished in July 2012, the Aalborg libraries started a partnership with the company, Danish Hosts, in order to spread the experiences achieved among Danish public libraries. Later, more than 25 Danish libraries have participated in courses on establishing host-and-guest relationships and services organized by the Aalborg libraries and their partners. A guest-host service is here understood as a library service containing a strong element of “host-liness” thinking and host-liness concepts. The idea of introducing “host-liness” in libraries was inspired by initiatives within the tourist industry. Ideas inspired by “experience economy” frameworks (Pine & Gilmore 1999) have also influenced the concept. Indeed, the intention to provide the guest with memorable experiences lay behind the decision of the Aalborg libraries to engage in the 2011–2012 guest-host project (Johannsen 2014b). The data referred to below stems from the Aalborg main library project. Besides, two other public libraries in Jutland, Herning and Silkeborg, participated on the side lines. Aalborg has about 110.000 inhabitants. The survey is based on qualitative data collected locally in 2011 and 2012. Besides, a quantitative beforeand-after user survey was conducted to measure whether the project activities had made any differences to the library users. More than 400 questionnaires were randomly distributed twice and returned by the users – or the “guests” as they were called – before and after the project was finished. Moreover, 23 qualitative interviews were conducted with both leaders and staff. Furthermore, data from the “mystery shopping” session conducted formed a part of the evaluation data. The project is the first public library examples of a full scale implementation of host-guest relationships.

138 

 Library services and user metaphors

Renewing welcome efforts An example of a typical guest service could be the re-thinking of the library’s welcome efforts, which took place during the Aalborg project. Usually, about 11,000 new public library users are registered each year in Aalborg. During the project the procedures were renewed. One of the more remarkable changes was that a guided tour around the library was offered to the new users as a mandatory element (only the offering was mandatory, the user, of course, could always say “No, thank you”). The printed brochures and materials delivered to the newcomers were also re-thought and modernized. Offering a guided tour was not believed by the staff to be an attractive offer. However, it turned out that many more users than expected accepted the invitation and were guided around. It is interesting to consider whether the extra welcome efforts are motivated through rational or emotional considerations. Is the purpose practical to avoid being disturbed later by unnecessary user questions or is it to create a certain positive emotional feeling towards the library? The second option is certainly the one most in accordance with the guest philosophy, while the first is likely to be valid in other contexts.

Staff uniforms Another guest service – or service feature – was the introduction of uniformed staff in libraries. Uniforms are not unknown in public service contexts – policemen and hospital staff all wear some kinds of uniforms. However, why, exactly, should it be a way to express “host-liness” to wear a uniform or a uniform-like dress? Certainly the explanation has something to do with visibility and being recognizable. Normally, it is not a problem for guests to recognize who is their host; however, in the anonymous atmosphere of a library the situation is diffe­ rent. It seems, moreover, to be easier to act as a host if the possibilities of confusion with other users are reduced. However, the situation is somewhat parado­ xical since the steps – wear a uniform – taken to make users feel more like guests also might contribute to create distance and thereby a less domestic atmosphere. The before-and-after user surveys conducted indicate, however, that host-liness and uniforms might co-exist. After having introduced uniforms or rather uniform-like dress the amount of users who “totally agreed” that it was easy to recognize the staff rose from 52 to 63 percent. Here, a flexibility was demonstrated, dependent on the particular situation and context. Sometimes a key-hanger was enough while in other contexts a specific T-shirt was considered adequate. Initially, the question of uniforms was expected to create resistance; however, the gradual and consistent approach seemed to make the implementation less controversial than expected.



Guest-host services 

 139

Extra “sales” A third special guest service tested in Aalborg in 2011–2012, was “extra sales.” The term needs a little explanation. First, the service was not fee-based and involved no user payments. The name was simply taken over from the tourist industry. Actually, the service required that one or two staff members took place in the entrance of the library where they in a moderate but still offensive and proactive way started to promote and recommend certain book or music titles, for example, a biography, to arriving users. To prepare the staff, they were offered a one-day sales course. Maybe the proactive style was not particularly guest-oriented; however, on the other hand, the personal recommendation contained the same elements of enthusiasm and excitement as if one – as a host – was recommending book titles from one’s own book shelves. The essential part of the service was, apparently to reproduce an atmosphere of enthusiasm, openness, and intimacy in a professional context. A remarkable observation based on the above-mentioned examples is that the creation of a personal and friendly atmosphere often requires a certain element of standardization such as mandatory welcome offerings, uniforms, and scheduled proactive recommendations. We might find the same mechanisms at the cashier desk in supermarkets where mandatory greetings like “Have a nice day”, although they are very far from being spontaneous or voluntary, nevertheless, at least sometimes contribute to a friendly and positive atmosphere. It is evident that the image as guest and practicing as host are closely interrelated. Compared with the role as creative partner, where there are several corresponding service deliverer roles, the guest-and-host relationship contains fewer degrees of freedom. To measure the degree of acting as host present in a library, a row of Likert-scale questions were asked to the guests. The more they indicated that they agreed with the different statements, the more they felt that they were treated like guests and not like clients. Examples of how the staff could show that they treat the user as a guest were: if the staff member is easy to recognize, makes you feel like a guest, suggests alternatives when, for example, a book or a DVD is not available, offers an individualized and tailored service, surprises you in a positive way and is able to uncover your real needs as a guest. Many of those characteristics mentioned usually are also associated with good library service in general. Apart from the explicit question about being treated like a guest rather than a client, the question on personalized services, unlike standardized services, refers to specific qualities for guests. Another specific feature about services for guests is that waiting times could be longer as a consequence of host service policies. Indeed, whereas the Danish guest project resulted in improved user satisfaction on 8 out of 10 parameters, waiting times were perceived as acceptable by a lower percentage after the

140 

 Library services and user metaphors

project which was considered a consequence of more tailored and individualized services (Johannsen 2014b). Especially at the beginning of the project, certain aspects of the package were met with staff resistance. Indeed, the idea of mystery shoppers, or hidden tests, raised all kinds of objections. Some found that the hidden tests were unethical and likely to cast doubt on the competences of the staff, while others regarded it as waste of time to handle artificial questions. Also the idea of uniforms raised resistance. Finally, the concept of “extra sales” met opposition. It was not because of the apparently commercial aspect since no money was actually included in the “selling” efforts, but rather because many librarians found the task of directly recommending certain titles too offensive and aggressive. Their dislike was obviously rooted in more unobtrusive and re-active traditions of delivering service on demand. Thus, three of the five key host-liness services were met by resistance. The remaining two, floor-walking and welcome efforts, were not received parti­ cularly enthusiastically either.

5.6 Mystery shopping Mystery shopping (Tesdell 2000), or hidden or unobtrusive testing, which are the preferred library sector terms, means that you test the quality of a certain service by using trained mystery shoppers who, disguised as ordinary users, make requests, ask questions, and the like. Afterwards, the shoppers report about their experiences in a standardized way to, for example, the marketing bureau which has been hired to conduct the tests. Then, the bureau will report further back on the results to the leaders of the library who originally ordered the test. Finally, the library can utilize the results to start up quality improvement initiatives through dialogues with and courses, training, etc., for the relevant staff members. As such mystery shopping is not what we usually would call a user service. However, it is likely that the user will benefit later from the test results, especially if they lead to improved library services. The question whether mystery shopping is associated with specific user metaphors is, however, not a simple question to answer. Historically, mystery shopping has been associated with customers in supermarkets, shopping malls, and the like. In library contexts, hidden or unobtrusive tests are also known through numerous tests. However, the test results have seldom been used in practice (Czopak 1998). In Denmark, for example, the first unobtrusive tests were conducted in library school contexts in the early 1980s. However, it was first in 2012, more than 30 years later, that the concept was implemented in practice. It first happened in connection with the host-guest project,



Mystery shopping 

 141

where 53 professional mystery shoppers during nine weeks visited the Aalborg main library. In Norway, however, hidden tests were used in practice as early as 1994 (Johannsen 1998, 2014b). In spite of the clear business and customer related origins, mystery shopping is a flexible tool which can be used to test the quality of all kinds of services: those offered to the user as citizen, client, guest, and partner. It only depends on how the test is designed. If, for example, the intention is to measure the quality of a typical client service, it is important that the questions and the criteria fit that purpose. The amount of empathy in the service provision, for example, could here be a prioritized dimension to measure, which, of course, then should be reflected in the questions, the instructions of the mystery shoppers, etc. The key to effective mystery shopping applications is certainly close cooperation with both the independent consultant who conducts the test and, which is especially impor­­tant, with the library’s staff. Validity of the test questions and the test procedure is essential. When, for example, empathic questioning techniques are judged to be decisive for the effectiveness of the service, valid measures for empathy must be selected and used. A plain, standard quality test which may, for example, focus primarily on the time spent and the correctness of the answers given by the staff would not be particularly effective when elements like empathy are in focus. In the Danish guest-host project, mystery shopping was used, among others, to test the host-liness of the service by focusing on interview aspects like nuanced and multi-dimensional examining, for example, whether the staff suggested attractive alternatives if the requested titles were not available, whether the staff members allowed feedback from the user, delivered qualified assistance, etc. Indeed, it is a common myth, which was effectively denied by the guest-host experiences, that mystery shopping only focuses on service-mindedness and staff attitudes and neglects professional quality criteria and competences. Nevertheless, mystery shopping is typically used in situations and contexts where the users are seen as customers (or guests), although alternative contexts are highly feasible. A citizen-oriented hidden test would, for example, then focus on how balanced and neutral the service provider appears when, for example, suggesting and presenting alternatives. A test targeted towards clients’ services could, as already mentioned, focus on aspects like empathy, ability to explain complex connections and possible consequences, and the like. Therefore, the nature and design of the hidden test is highly dependent on its particular purposes and contexts. A hidden test also proved to be effective in dealing with internal myths about the relationship between ability to deliver quality service and aspects like age and gender, and competences and qualifications among staff members and staff segments.

142 

 Library services and user metaphors

As demonstrated by Table 5-1 below, age and experience is not at all a barrier to achieve above average performances. The counts are interesting because they show that neither high nor low age prevents staff from delivering above average service. Indeed, top quality service is a possibility both for the newly hired youngster and for the “grey gold.” Table 5-1: Results from mystery shopping test at Aalborg main library 2012 – age – percentages Age 20–29 30–39 40–49 50– Total

Above average

Below average

12% 18% 17% 53%

28% 12% 16% 44%

100%

100%

As to gender, the result also showed that both sexes were able to deliver quality service above average. Indeed, the figures in Table 5-2 do not show that female staff members deliver more appropriate service quality than their male colleagues since the 10 percent of unspecified contributions could blur the picture Table 5-2: Results from mystery shopping test at Aalborg main library 2012 – gender – percentages Gender Female Male Unspecified (the service included contributions from more staff members) Total

Above average

Below average

70% 30% –

57% 33% 10%

100%

100%

To achieve a successful use of hidden tests or mystery shopping first it is impor­ tant that the testing procedure is implemented by a professional company with experiences in mystery shopping. Since many libraries have financial difficulty in hiring professional mystery shoppers, different alternatives have been tested. However, the level of training of the shoppers might influence the evaluation results (Kocevar-Weidinger et al. 2010). As the task of evaluating the quality of



Online message services 

 143

mostly individual and personal performances is highly sensitive, it is probably an advantage to let an external unit conduct the evaluation (Calvert 2005). Second, it is important that staff members are familiar with and have confidence in the applied evaluation criteria (Calvert 2005). The host-guest project applied a multi-dimensional, nuanced quality concept with more than 20 diffe­ rent dimensions. What was even more important was that the staff not only got a detailed presentation of procedures and criteria beforehand; they were also invited to comment and to suggest alternatives to specific questions. Internal feedback processes should also be carefully planned to ensure a constructive dialog concerning future improvements. Therefore, both transparency and discretion are important when dealing with mystery shopping procedures.

5.7 Online message services Many libraries have introduced different kinds of individualized service messages and other information on library processes and user demands. Recently, a number of public libraries in Denmark have started to send e-mail alerts to users when delivery deadlines for loaned materials approached. There have been some discussions about the service since a significant part of the income of Danish public libraries actually stems from user fines for late returns. The question is now whether this alert service can be considered as: a feature to help disorganized clients; a user-friendly customer service, or a recognition of some basic ci­­ tizen’s rights. Actually, some years ago, a discussion took place before the public libraries in Copenhagen started to alert their users of overdue books. During the debate, contributions and inputs representing all three reasons were expressed.

Queues, waiting times, and direct or indirect recommendations Some internal library process data could be interesting to users also. For example, data on expected waiting times – number of days, weeks, or months – for certain popular library materials is useful for the users who want to borrow the title. That a book has been borrowed by others could also be a selection criteria for users who are wondering what to read next. Finally, recommendation of specific titles by librarians or other users could be helpful when making decisions on what to borrow. In most libraries all three kinds of services are available: 1. the user can find out online the size of the waiting list and the associated expected waiting time for borrowed materials 2. which titles have been borrowed and just returned by other borrowers, and

144 

 Library services and user metaphors

3. which titles have been recommended by staff members and other users. Such examples certainly involve several user roles and metaphors. The partner role, for example, is represented by the user assisting the librarians in recommending certain titles, while the customer role is promoted through features like available data on waiting time – stimulating that information on the demand of others users should play a significant role when the user makes his decision on cultural consumption. Indeed, some libraries even produce best-seller – or rather most loaned – lists to stimulate demand. The interesting thing about the examples mentioned above is not only that they reflect an increased customer orientation in the public sector. Rather, the interest in data on the demand for specific titles could be seen as a step towards increased transparency in the public sector. When the demand for certain titles, genres, and types of literature is available to everyone, discussions on cultural policy issues will be less based on myths and prejudices and more upon solid grounds of evidence. What from an individual user’s point of view can be seen as a typical customer oriented feature might in a broader societal perspective appear also as a citizen’s interest to ensure more qualified political debates.

5.8 Staff-less libraries Practical experiences with un-staffed or part-time un-staffed public libraries are not commonly found in public libraries. However, apart from Denmark where presently most public libraries offer staff-less opening hours, the concept is being spread to a number of countries in both Europe and Asia, for example, Singapore and Taiwan (Johannsen 2012). In Denmark, a staff-less library, typically, signifies a public library which is open for 20 hours, distributed on five or six days a week, with staff, and about 80 hours un-staffed all seven days a week. All facilities and functions are available during the un-staffed hours. The user can borrow and return books and other library materials, read newspapers and journals, access the Internet, do homework, and utilize the library’s premises for meetings and social events. The concept of staff-less libraries has been made possible, prima­ rily, due to various technological advances in terms of surveillance technology (video monitors and sensors), automated entry, and loans and return systems. The question whether the establishment of a staff-less library should be seen as a service improvement or the opposite very much depends on the context. If a library branch is usually open 20 hours a week with staff and 80 un-staffed hours per week are added, most people would say that a service improvement has taken place. Otherwise, if, for example, 25 weekly staffed hours are transferred into 20



Staff-less libraries 

 145

staffed and 80 un-staffed hours per week, then the service improvement is obviously more questionable.

User perceptions What do we presently know about how the users feel about staff-less libraries? In 2011 I conducted a survey, financially supported by the Danish Center for Library and Media (Johannsen 2012, 2014b). The data for the staff-less library survey were collected through an electronic questionnaire during the autumn of 2011. The questionnaire was sent to all 97 of Denmark’s municipalities. The response rate was above 90 percent. Based on the evidence from the quantitative survey, 15 libraries were selected, representing both high-end and low-end performances concerning visits and loans, for further examination. Furthermore, supplementary data were collected from a variety of sources, such as a library software companies, interviews, etc.

Growth rates Another, although indirect, indicator of the success of the staff-less libraries in Denmark is their continuing growth. In 2012 there were 104 units and counts from the Danish Center for Library and Media from December 2014 refer to 247 units. Furthermore, 78 percent of the local communities report increasing visits and 65 percent growing numbers of loans. Besides increased demand, user surveys prove increases in user satisfaction too (Jørgensen 2013). The survey did not directly reveal how satisfied the users were about staffless libraries. However, the numbers concerning the utilization (visits and loans) of the libraries during the staff-less hours give a clear indication of how users have received the new service. Are staff-less libraries then designed and targeted towards specific user segments? Sometimes, staff-less libraries are interpreted as a citizen oriented step, while the citizens get increased access to the premises of the local library which can be used as meeting places, enabling debates and facilitating local democracy. However, staff-less library services can also be seen as a customer oriented feature adjusting library services to users with odd working hours. The customer focus is however also visible through the circumstance that many professionals have perceived staff-less libraries as primarily a market and customer oriented initiative against the users’ real interests which are interpreted as always having a qualified professional assistance ready at hand.

146 

 Library services and user metaphors

Nevertheless, client oriented justifications have also been put forward emphasizing that increased access to safe and calm library rooms supports social disadvantaged people with poor or unstable housing conditions. Certainly, the actual design of the staff-less library can highly influence which of the user segments is likely to benefit the most. Furnishing the library, for example, affects the possibilities of using the library for different purposes such as relaxing, working, writing or discussing with others.

5.9 Summary The eight services represent a variety of purposes, intentions, means, and types operations from staff-intensive to staff-extensive and staff-less and from services produced in the physical space of the library to more or less virtual services. Another common trait is that the services never exclude any particular groups or social categories. Many of the services are nevertheless designed with particular user needs in mind. The borrow-a-prejudice campaign is certainly targeted towards citizens, whereas community information services, services for immigrants and computer and internet literacy courses clearly point at target groups with clients’ features in common. Typical demand oriented customer services are found among the feebased services, of course, and among many of the new, more or less personalized online messages from the library to its customers. It is no surprise either that guest-host-services are specifically directed towards library guests. None of the services are however targeted towards the user as a partner. In digital reading groups, the independence of the participants is emphasized but the participants are, on the other hand, not encouraged to design or re-design the overall framework of the reading group service. In other cases the links between a specific service and a specific segment could be more partial. Obviously, the concept of staff-less libraries can be utilized to encourage local democracy by inviting local groups to use the library’s meeting room facilities for political discussions. However, most of the staff-less opening hours the facilities certainly seem to serve more individualized, leisure time purposes. It also happens that the same results have different, but positive effects on different segments. Increased transparency, for example, which is a likely result of library online messages, a distinct customer value, could certainly also contribute to citizen values by qualifying the cultural policy discussions about prio­ rities by adding more evidence based knowledge to the debates.

Summary 

 147

If the services are viewed from a diachronic perspective, an interesting difference becomes visible when comparing community information services of the 1970s and 1980s and the related but more recent immigrant and computer literacy services. The latter operate with much more independent and empowered clients than the socially disadvantaged categories of the 1980s. The cultural resources of immigrants are certainly considered with more respect by library professionals than the preferences for popular literature of the social clients were earlier. Another characteristic trait is that the relationship between a segment and certain services is not at all a static one. Although, for example, borrow-a-pre­ judice seems to be a classic service for citizens, the concept could quite easily be transformed and utilized for very different purposes, for example, by playing down the prejudice perspective and substituting it with, for example, borrow-a-famous-sportsman, a reality star, and the like. In other cases, however, such a transformation would be more difficult. An aspect which has not been focused on here so much concerns the marketing of different services where the extent to which a certain service, explicitly or implicitly, is associated with specific segment could be considered and reconsidered.

6 Library user metaphors and the experience society In the preceding chapter, we took a closer look at a selection of eight different library services in order to find out to what extent the different services were targeted towards specific user segments. Moreover, the intention was also to demonstrate how a library service could be adjusted to fit the needs and preferences of different segments. Especially, this second purpose will be further investigated in this chapter which will focus on research question 6, concerning the role of the different user metaphors within an experience society context: How do the five user metaphors identified fit into an experience society context?

The experience society is interesting because it is believed by researchers, for example, Jochumsen, Hvenegaard Rasmussen and Skot-Hansen (2008), to influence library services. As the following quotation illustrates, the development of the experience society has caused that not only provision of information and knowledge, but also the production of experiences and “expressive dissemination” to become legitimate public library purposes and activities: However, during the last two decades the need for a rethinking of the library as a space for inspiration has become obvious due to the rise of the so-called “experience society”. The “experience society” refers to the basic concept that the experience dimension is increasingly taking up more space in our everyday lives … Thus, experiences and the quest for experiences have become a very important component in many people’s lives, in their development of identity and not least in their consumption of culture. This can be connected with the concept of the experience economy, which describes how any business wanting to survive in a market where the competition for the attention of the customers is tough, and the possibilities for consumption endless, can no longer succeed by just offering goods and services. Instead the individual firm must be actively engineering new experiences, and each product must be able to tell a story that will leave distinct emotional tracks (Pine and Gilmore 1999). Also, the public library finds itself in an intensified competitive situation. The distance between the library’s offers and the new bookshop with a smart cafe´, comfortable armchairs and the opportunity to read the latest books and periodicals on the spot, has narrowed. Why not choose the bookshop if it offers an altogether more cool experience (Hvenegaard Rasmussen et al. 2008).



The experience society 

 149

As a consequence of this development “experience”, “story-telling” and “expressive dissemination” have become marked in cultural institutions and also in the everyday life of public libraries” (Jochumsen, Hvenegaard Rasmussen & Skot-Hansen 2012).

6.1 The experience society Descriptions of the experience society in library contexts have often relied – more or less – on the classic work of two American economists, B. Joseph Pine II (1958–) and James H. Gilmore (1999), The Experience Economy – Work is a Theater & Every Business a Stage, as the central source. However, when dealing with different user segment’s experiences, alternative approaches could be even more interesting, such as, for example, the thoughts of the German sociologist, Gerhard Schulze. Not only did Schulze’s book on the experience society appear seven years earlier than Pine’s and Gilmore’s, but his approach also differs from Pine’s and Gilmore’s by focusing less on economics and business perspectives of the experience society and more on its sociological aspects. Indeed, in his book first published in 1992, Die Erlebnissgesellschaft – Kultursoziologie der Gegenwart (2005) (which was translated from German into English in 1995 as, The Experience Society – Cultural Sociology of the Present Day), Schulze shows in detail how different lifestyle segments can have highly various preferences as to experiences. It could be interesting therefore to investigate the relationship between Schulze’s sociological categories and, especially, the user metaphors presented in this book, to identify differences and similarities. In chapter 5 we looked at a selection of services to determine which target groups or segments they were directed towards. I will now try to categorize the services with an experience perspective in mind. To what extent do the services contain important elements of experience? Community information services, for example, do not seem to contain important experience oriented elements whereas cultural arrangements, literature circles, and the like represent more experience oriented services. In some cases, the experience element has influenced the form and content of traditional library courses; computer literacy courses of today are, for example, much more experience oriented than library introduction courses in 1970 or 1980. The fee-based services are still mostly informational although many fee-based library arrangements could also contain a strong element of entertainment. Finally, online messages services and staff-less libraries are mostly information oriented.

150 

 Library user metaphors and the experience society

Often libraries, however, try to transform traditional services by adding elements of experiences through the provision of small surprises and exciting arrangements. Indeed, blending information with entertainment is quite modern; the style has even got its own name, infotainment, which is, however, mainly used to characterize a specific journalist genre (Deuze 2005). Infotainment and the related concept of edutainment emerged around 2000. Infotainment can be considered as a competitor which forces libraries to find new ways to attract and retain their users (Heise & Kimmel 2003). To enable a comparison with library user segments and metaphors, we will take a closer look at some of Schulze’s key sociological concepts and his thoughts about the peculiarities of user segments within the experience economy. Compared with Pine and Gilmore (1999), Schulze is less concerned with the narrow economic aspects of marketing and sales. The strength of Pine and Gilmore is, however, that they clearly demonstrate how the adding of experience content to a product or service increases its value and price. Their classic example is how the price of 40 grams of coffee increases from a few cents to the Columbian coffee peasant to more than 10 Euros when served in Venice at the Piazza San Marco. In this example the distinction between the product (the coffee beans) and the experience ingredient is very clear. What interests Schulze is rather how experiences have changed modern society and how the daily life and happiness for many individuals have become an experience project. When his book on the experience society first appeared in 1992, it already attracted a lot of attention; later it became a sociology classic. The empirical basis of Schulze’s book is both quantitative and qualitative studies of 1,014 respondents in the German city of Nürnberg in 1985. Today, about 30 years later, many of his empirical results are certainly no longer directly valid. This circumstance could obviously compromise the current interest of his results now, and in different national and geographic environments. Nevertheless, although his observations on the preferences and dislikes of different social layers may have changed considerably since then, many of his concepts are nevertheless still relevant and able to inspire service development also in a present day contexts. In the following we will present some of these concepts and distinctions.

Segments and preferences in the experience society Basically, Schulze distinguishes between five different sociological segments (milieus) and between three different user preference styles:



The experience society 

 151

Table 6-1: Sociological segments and preference styles Different approaches to experiences (columns) Segments (rows) (Milieuspezifische Varianten der Erlebnisorientierung)

Highbrow scheme (Hochkultur)

Triviality scheme (Trivial)

Excitement scheme (Spannung)

Hierarchy segment (Niveaumilieu)

Close to

Far from

Far from

Conformity segment (Integrationsmilieu)

Close to

Close to

Far from

Harmony segment (Harmoniemilieu)

Far from

Close to

Far from

Self-realization segment (Selbstverwirklichungsmilieu)

Close to

Far from

Close to

Entertainment segment (Unterhaltungsmilieu)

Far from

Far from

Close to

Source: Schulze 2005, 165 (in parenthesis the name of the concepts in German)

The three vertical schemes represent different cultural and experience oriented preferences. People close to the first, the highbrow scheme, prefer, for example, classical music, and visiting museums; what they enjoy is to read an intellectually challenging book. Their cultural enjoyment is related to reflection, they emphasize being distinguished as anti-barbarian and concerning their basic life philosophy, they see perfection as a sought after goal. The triviality scheme is quite different: its adherents, in general, prefer pop music and hits, they enjoy watching television, especially quizzes and entertainment programs, and they like to read romantic novels. What they enjoy is not reflection, but rather a cozy atmosphere and having a nice time. They pay attention to being commonplace and non-eccentric, and their life philosophy values harmony above perfection. Finally, the excitement adherents are attracted by rock music, thrillers, and by nightlife and visiting bars, discos, and cinemas. They enjoy action and like to be described as unconventional. Opera visits, classical ballets and dramas are certainly not among their favorite choices. Their life philosophy is primarily narcissistic (Schulze 2005, 163). It is obvious that different preferences as to genres and styles of entertainment should be kept in mind too when planning or designing library services. The three styles, however, do not represent specific sociological user categories

152 

 Library user metaphors and the experience society

although they are related to user categories. The styles express different types of preferences as to experiences. Rather, the five horizontal segment categories: the hierarchy, conformity, harmony, self-realization and entertainment segments, reflect sociological categories. The five segments are based on several types of criteria. Objective socio-demographic criteria such as age and length of formal education play a significant role (Schulze 2005, 279). The members of the self-realization and the entertainment segments, for example, are aged less than 40 years, while the highbrow, integration and harmony segments are aged over 40 years. The least education is found among the harmony and entertainment segments whereas the self-realization and highbrow members have the most education. The integration segment comes in between the highbrow and the harmony as to education. In library contexts, user characteristics are often sought by asking users about their literature preferences and habits: “Which authors have you read recently?” and “Which of them did you especially like?”, seem to be the questions frequently asked by librarians. However, Schulze is not content with considering prefe­­rences; he also recommends attention to what a certain user or user segment turns away from as an important element of an individual’s identity making process. This point of Schulze is related to the distinction concept. Following the tradition of Bourdieu, who said that “Le bon gout c’est le degout du gout des autres” [The taste is the other’s disgusted taste], Schulze emphasizes that members of different social segments apparently pay more attention to who and what they are not than to who and what they are and what they stand for. Members of the ’68 generation, thus, in particular, wanted to distance themselves from the Establishment. Similarly, the present day creative class is eager to demonstrate their anti-conventional and anti-traditional cultural preferences. Many librarians have experienced that to create a clear picture of a certain user’s literary taste it can be quite useful also to find out which recent titles the user especially dislikes, which confirms the relevance of both user preferences and distances. However, when re-thinking and modifying services it is often not enough to know, for example, that a majority of users do not like the present version of the service; it would be even more useful to know why these users do not like it, to enable more precise and effective modifications. Sometimes reluctance and non-use behavior can be related to practical aspects like timing, and sometimes more complex personality and psychological issues are at stake. In such situations many professional librarians would rely on their intuition and instincts to figure out what is wrong. However, here also Schulze offers adequate sociological concepts which could lead to clarification and steps forward or lead to and facilitate necessary clarification processes. Also here, it is not so much Schulze’s 1985 empirical



The experience society 

 153

survey results that are interesting, but rather his concepts and findings that can inspire and raise awareness. The concepts presented in Table 6-2 below concern what Schulze calls “primary perspectives” and “normal existential definition of problems” (in German: Normale existentielle Problemdefinition) and Me–world relations (IchWelt-Bezug). Table 6-2: Existential points of view (Existentielle Anschauungsweisen) Key existential Problem

Primary Perspective

Me–World relation

Goal: Promotion Goal: Conformity Goal: Security (Geborgenheit) Goal: Self-realization Goal: Stimulation

Hierarchy Social expectations Threats Myself Desires

World-rooted World-rooted World-rooted Me-rooted Me-rooted

Source: Konkretisierungen existentieller Anschauungsweisen (Schulze 2005, 237)

Table 6-2 needs a little explanation. Its purpose is to provide an overview of different basic human points of view related to the five social segments. Such basic ideas and relationships have not been revealed through simple questions in a questionnaire; instead they are based on qualitative analyses of interviews, observations, and the like. Often individuals could be quite unaware of where they should position themselves facing such huge questions. In Table 6-2, the relationships between the existential positions and different social segments are shown based on evidence from the German survey of 1985. Table 6-2 distinguishes between five essential goals in life: 1. to obtain promotion (which can be economic, social, political, professional, scientific, artistic, etc.) (hierarchy segment), 2. to live up to social expectations (conformity segment), and 3. to live one’s life safe from threats and dangers (harmony segment). Common to the first three goals is that they are all oriented towards the external surroundings. It means that the outside world is the common yardstick to match whether the particular existential goal – promotion, integration or security – has been achieved. The success of a fiction writer, for example, is certainly not measured according to his or her own opinion, but according to what the outside world in terms of critics, reviewers, and readers think. The same worldly perspective is valid for the conformity and the security oriented goals. The diffe­rence

154 

 Library user metaphors and the experience society

between a conformity and a hierarchy orientation can be illustrated through the example of a piano player. According to a hierarchy goal, an exceptional and revolutionary performance would be optimal, whereas the conformity oriented standard only demands an average performance. The third, safety oriented, goal neither focuses on hierarchy or social acceptance but on security. Their points of view are dominated by fear and scaring dichotomies, such as good versus bad, harmless versus dangerous, and confidence inspiring versus suspicious. The positions are obviously also closely related to the five segments. The goal of promotion characterizes the hierarchy segment, conformity the conformity segment, and security the harmony-segment. The me-rooted orientations contain two positions: 4. self-realization (self-realization segment), and 5. stimulation (entertainment segment). Me-rooted orientations are common among younger people (below 40 years) who primarily focus on the subjective relevance of observations and experiences. The me-rooted, self-realization oriented point of view could appear less challenging than the worldly, hierarchy position, because when a feeling of superiority is the primary goal and objective rank is the secondary yardstick, it seems to be easier to gain appreciation from oneself than from others. However, we often learn from the biographies of writers and artists that inner-oriented artists are much more ambitious and demanding than their reviewers and the public and that efforts to cheer up a disappointed me-rooted fiction writer – or software developer – therefore can be quite in vain (Schulze 2005, 233–234). The me-rooted positions are also related to sociological segments: The self-realization goal to the self-realization segment and the stimulation to the entertainment. The next step in Schulze’s reasoning is that both existential points of view (Table 6-2) and socio-demographic positions (Table 6-1) influence people’s preferences and the ways people consume and enjoy experiences. Indeed, he talks about favorite experience paradigms (in German: Erlebnissparadigma) associated with the different segments. A few examples may illustrate the point. Well-educated people above 40 years old are influenced, especially, by highbrow prefe­ rences. According to their hierarchy oriented goals, they consider the Nobel Prize ceremonies as their favorite experience paradigm (Schulze 2005, 291). The conformity segment (Schulze 2005, 301–311) is also aged over 40, but with a medium–long education and socially belongs to the white-collar middle class. The segment’s cultural preferences contain elements from both the highbrow and the trivial style, but they turn away from the excitement style. Their life philosophy emphasizes both harmony and perfection. Their favorite experience is to be in pleasant company (in German: nette Runde).



The experience society 

 155

The harmony segment again differs from the two preceding segments. Socio-demographically its members are more than 40 years of age and typically belong to the traditional blue-collar working class. Their cultural preferences lie close to the trivial style and far from both the highbrow and the excitement styles. The basic life philosophy of its members is often fatalistic with strong elements of paranoia. Their favorite experience is a wedding (Schulze 2005, 300). Among the two me-oriented groups, the self-realization segment (Schulze 2005, 321) contains younger people – under 40 years – with middle or higher levels of education. They are in general healthy, value spontaneity, are involved in many social activities, like openness and avoid fatalism. The cultural style of the segment is close to both the excitement and highbrow taste and distant from the trivial. Their favorite experience paradigm is the artist. The entertainment segment also contains young people, however less educated than the self-realization segment. Members like football and bodybuilding and they consider being in environments like “Miami Beach” as their favorite experience. Like the self-realization segment members, they prefer the excitement style but in contrast they dislike both the highbrow and trivial styles. Narcissism and spontaneity are among this segment’s key values (Schulze 2005, 330). It is certainly possible to recognize members of the five segments among the users of a public library today; some comments are, nevertheless, necessary. The basic sociological survey was done in 1985 and the much has happened since then. The definitions and demarcations of the different cultural styles have changed: What was considered a highbrow activity in 1985 today could be a rather trivial event. Sociologists, for example, have pointed out that among American highbrows, a shift in taste from snobbishness to “omnivorousness” took place from the 1980s to the 1990s (Peterson & Kern 1996). Although the particular categories therefore cannot be used as safe road maps to successful library services, the elaborated nature and the numerous aspects and dimensions contained in Schulze’s conceptual framework can certainly be used as a kind of checklist when planning new or modifying existing services. It can also be used to reflect and figure out why a service or a feature has been successful in one context or towards one group of users and not in other similar contexts and towards apparently similar audiences. It can, for example, be useful in some contexts to distinguish between segments which at the surface appear to be more or less alike: like the conformity and the harmony, and the self-realization and the entertainment segments. It can also be useful to be aware of both the likes and dislikes of certain groups and segments.

156 

 Library user metaphors and the experience society

Experience society segments and library user metaphors One possible way to consider the relevance of the experience society to the five library user metaphors could be to compare them with Schulze’s five sociological segments: hierarchy, conformity, harmony, self-realization, and entertainment (see also Table 6-1). A comparison reveals some apparent similarities between, for example, the citizen’s preferences concerning discussions and stimulating public debates and the hierarchy segment’s world-rooted and reflection-oriented intellectual style. Also traits of typical client characteristics can be found in the conformity segment and, especially, in the fatalistic and paranoid fears of the harmony segment. Finally, the partner metaphor shares characteristics like spontaneity and action orientation with the self-realization segments. There are, however, also important differences, for example, between the citizen and the hierarchy segment, where citizens are, typically, defined in terms of the political and societal field whereas the hierarchy segment is defined primarily through esthetic priorities. The segments that are most experience society oriented are certainly the two me-oriented ones: self-realization and entertainment. These segments are partly reflected in the partner metaphor although their scope is broader. But the individualistic, me-oriented values are common to the two segments and the partner metaphor. Another significant difference is that neither the customer and nor the guest appears among Schulze’s key segments of the experience society. The reason lies probably in the different nature of the categories; Schulze’s segments are sociological whereas customer is a marketing term – defined as those “who use, consume, buy or recommend a product or service” (Adcock et al. 1995, 6). Although customers and guests are not defined as segments within the experience society, the customer is nevertheless probably a more central element in an experience society than in an information or a knowledge society. To determine whether a certain service is useful and adequate in a knowledge society involves a certain amount of objective criteria: correctness, accuracy, currency, and the like. An experience, on the other hand, is much more subjective and dependent on the mood and feelings of the experiencing individuals.

6.2 Summary The purpose of chapter 6 was to address the following research question: How do the identified five user metaphors fit into an experience society context?

Summary 

 157

The approach to answer the question was to compare central sociological concepts of the experience society with the five user metaphors. Initially, two impor­ tant experience society frameworks – by Pine and Gilmore and by Schulze – were presented and discussed. Although Pine’s and Gilmore’s framework possessed important advantages in terms of measurability, Schulze’s was chosen because it was less commercial and more sociologically oriented. Among the principal distinctions made, five sociological segments (the hie­ rarchy, the conformity, the harmony, the self-realization, and the entertainment) and three main preference styles (the highbrow, the triviality and the excitement) were identified and presented in Table 6-1. The relationships between the five segments and the three preference styles were examined. Moreover, characteristics of the preferences as to artistic genres and entertainment and the associated life-philosophies of the segments were identified and commented on. In Table 6-2, the life-philosophical characteristics and relationships of the five segments were further investigated through concepts like: (1) key existential problems (containing the categories: promotion, conformity, security, self-realization and entertainment), (2) the associated primary perspectives (hierarchy, social expectations, threats, my-self, and desires) and (3) me–world orientations (containing two categories: world- and me-orientation). The main conclusion is that in spite of differences, the five metaphors go well with the categories of the experience society although Schulze’s five segments represent a more nuanced picture. I will now summarize the final conclusions of this study.

7 Conclusions 7.1 Research question 1 As to the first research question concerning which concepts have been used by the library profession to identify and understand different user segments, the answer was not to enumerate the numerous different words and concepts but rather to present a systematic framework of the applied categories. Here, five category types were identified: 1. Library usage related 2. Socio-demographic 3. Lifestyle and psychographic 4. Combinations of 1–3, and 5. Metaphors and images. It was moreover emphasized how a variety of both formalized and informal and manual and computerized methods had been applied. It was also emphasized that the validity and relevance of the different approaches were not absolute but highly situational and context dependent.

7.2 Research question 2 The focus was then narrowed to the fifth category, metaphors and images, focusing on to which extent and why they are important. – This question included considerations contained in both chapters 2 and 3. In chapter 2 it was concluded that the profession’s user metaphors, compared with other approaches possessed a number of weaknesses like low reliability, measurability, and predictability. Their library relevance was nevertheless high. Besides the important strength that me­­ taphors and images were used by the profession, it was furthermore argued in chapter 3 that metaphors are important parts of how people perceive, conceptualize, and act in their daily lives; indeed, metaphorical ways of thinking are not restricted to narrow rhetorical and literary contexts. The importance of me­­ taphors is related both to practical problem-solving contexts where prejudiced perceptions could block development and progress and to strategic issues where changed attitudes could lead to broad and innovative developments. Also, as library marketing tools metaphorical expressions have proved to be effective.



Research question 4 

 159

7.3 Research question 3 Answering the question concerning the theoretical frameworks behind metaphors, images, and similar concepts and behind organizational idea transfer included scrutinizing a number of relevant language and organizational theore­ tical frameworks to identify important points and concepts. Besides arguing in favor of the importance of metaphors in libraries, a number of useful concepts were presented. Indeed, the distinction between the “source” and the “target” elements of metaphors should be noted both when considering a more systematical use of existing metaphors and when seeking inspiration for new ones. Another distinction with even more far-reaching perspectives is the discussion about the “fashion” versus the “virus-inspired” theory of organizational idea transfer. The fashion theory emphasizes that global management concepts like “lean” or the learning organization are short-lived phenomena with only superficial influences, whereas Røvik’s virus-inspired theory represents a more nuanced model leaving place for both short-lived and permanent effects and complex adaption and translation processes. Røvik’s model seems to fit the spread patterns of library user metaphors better than the fashion theory although a systematic survey has yet to be conducted.

7.4 Research question 4 The main research question concerns the characteristics of active user metaphors within the library sector since the 1970s. The question contains three sub-questions about (1) the characteristics, (2) the reception and the use, and (3) the extent to which the metaphorical use of the terms have influenced public and academic libraries differently. As to the characteristics, the different metaphors are characterized by a considerable variation and heterogeneity compared with the relatively stable and homogeneous character of the institutional frameworks of the public libraries. Although the legal framework and the official mission statements of the public libraries in many countries have been relatively constant, many quite different user images have circulated among library professionals during the same period. Furthermore, the review revealed a number of differences between the five metaphors: the citizen, the client, the customer, the guest, and the partner. Their nature varied from terms used by the profession explicitly (citizen, customer, guest, partner) to implicit terms mostly revealed indirectly through the professional discourses (client). Also, the occurrence varies a lot from frequently used terms like “customer” to seldom used terms like “guest.” The variety is also

160 

 Conclusions

reflected in how controversial the status in the profession is perceived. Among many professionals, for example, “customer” and “guest” are considered to be controversial terms, whereas “citizen” is seen as a more neutral designation. The historical appearance of the different metaphors also varies consi­ derably. The citizen has been present for the whole period from the 1970s until today. The guest, on the other hand, appeared recently, after 2010, although a very early occurrence from the 1890s (Henderson) can be found. The customer first appeared in library contexts in from the 1980s and onwards, and the client dominated the professional discourses in the 1970s and 1980s. The partner is a relatively recent phenomenon from after 2000. One pattern which is consistent with the virus-inspired idea-transfer theory is that some metaphors have reappeared in different shapes at different times. Clients, originally conceived as socially disadvantaged persons, have reappeared several times in the 1990s as immigrants and later as computer illiterates. The classic use of “client” was to describe persons who are basically lacking both the power and the will to improve their unfavorable situation or to make progress to leave their actual present position. Immigrants represent a highly diversified group. Although they sometimes have considerable social and economic problems, facing both cultural and language challenges, they are nevertheless approached differently compared with the socially disadvantages clients. In spite of the considerable challenges, immigrants are namely believed also to possess resources and potentialities enabling them to change their societal position. Finally, there are the digital immigrants or computer illiterates, typically, older people who have severe difficulties in getting assistance from public institutions through the Internet and digital media. They are often – and have been for many years, unlike immigrants – totally integrated in the society; they are sometimes also relatively socially and economic well-off – unlike the socially disadvantaged. Their weaknesses, computer illiteracy in varying degrees, are thus well defined. On different key social, economic and cultural parameters even subgroups belonging to the same category of clients reflect a high degree of diversity. Finally, the different theoretical frameworks behind some of the metaphors have varied widely from socialist inspired theories behind the client’s thinking to marketing and New Public Management frameworks supporting customers. Today, Richard Florida’s economic and innovation theories about the blessings of the creative class often play a significant role when plans are made about new suburban neighborhoods and iconic libraries. Concerning the sub-question about differences between public and academic libraries, the findings indicate that many well-known public library user metaphors like citizen, client, and guest are more or less unknown in the academic library context. Among the user



Research question 6 

 161

metaphors, only that of the customer is frequently found in both public and academic libraries.

7.5 Research question 5 Chapter 5 addresses the interrelations between different library services and different user metaphors. To this purpose eight different library services have been chosen. The goal has been qualitative, to represent a variety of different patterns, rather than quantitative to reveal common types and frequencies. A consistent trend, however, is that apart from certain public libraries offering business information services, none of the services are intentionally exclusively targeted towards one particular segment. The examples illustrate what elements make a library service targeted towards a certain segment or metaphorical user. Borrow-a-prejudice campaigns is a dedicated citizen service, because it concerns important citizen issues like dialogue and social integration and because use of the service requires that the user possess certain social skills and a certain level of knowledge. Community information, on the other hand, is designed, among other things, for users with more meagre resources. Guest-host services are intentionally designed to fit the needs of library guests. Sometimes service design can benefit more than one target group. Increased transparency online as to expected waiting times and queues for specific titles, for example, can be seen both as a customer oriented initiative and at the same time as a citizen friendly step to qualify local cultural policy discussions with evidence-based data.

7.6 Research question 6 The final research question deals with how the five user metaphors identified fit into an experience society context. The question is relevant and important because many library researchers and cultural politicians believe that we are about to pass or have already passed into a new era called the experience society or the experience economy which is believed to influence libraries – and especially public libraries – as important local cultural institutions. It is interesting here to consider whether the user categories of the library profession still represent a reliable analytical support for service developments in the experience society or whether quite new categories should be established.

162 

 Conclusions

The experience society framework of Schulze represents an adequate basis for this purpose. His sociological framework for the experience society consists of five main segments: 1. Hierarchy 2. Conformity 3. Harmony 4. Self-realization, and 5. Entertainment In many respects, Schulze’s experience society framework corresponds roughly with the categories of library user metaphor. That the sociological framework of Schulze does not represent categories like customer and guest is related to the circumstance that his framework is sociological whereas customer and guest are marketing related categories. The most novel and experience-society related of Schulze’s categories are the self-realization and the entertainment segments. These two segments are broader but also more nuanced than both the partner and the popular creative class concepts. It is highly probable that the distinction between the two segments could qualify the efforts of libraries towards those two, young (less than 40 years) user categories. The sixth chapter, however, also highlighted that sociological categories and segments are never stable and unchangeable. Schulze’s characteristics of the cultural preferences and life-philosophies of his five segments are therefore not to be used as factual social encyclopedias, but rather as sources of inspiration and hints concerning future problems to be solved. I hope that this book will serve the same purpose.

References Aabø, Svanhild; Audunson, Ragnar & Vårheim, Andreas. 2010. “How do public libraries function as meeting places?” Library and Information Science Research 32(1): 16–26. Aabø, Svanhild & Audunson, Ragnar. 2012. “Use of library space and the library as place.” Library and Information Science Research 34: 138–149. Abrahamson, E. 1996. “Management fashion.” Academy of Management Review 21(1): 254–285. Adcock, D., Bradfield, R., Halborg, A. & Ross, C. 1995. Marketing – Principles and practice. 2nd edition. London: Pitman Publishing. Allcock, S. 1995. “Maybe the customer is NOT the key!” Information Development 11 (1): 15–16. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57371866?accountid=13607 Andersson, Marianne & Skot-Hansen, Dorte. 1994. Det lokale bibliotek: afvikling eller udvikling (in Danish) [The local library:phase out or development]. Copenhagen: Danmarks Biblioteksskole. Arthur, G. 1994. “Customer-service training in academic libraries.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 20 (4): 219–222. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57324683?accountid=13607 Audunson, Ragnar. 2005. “The public library as a meeting-place in a multicultural and digital context: The necessity of low-intensive meeting-places.” Journal of Documentation 61 (3): 429–441. Audunson, Ragnar; Essmat, Sophie & Aabø, Svanhild. 2011. “Public libraries: A meeting place for immigrant women.” Library & Information Science Research 33 (3): 220–227. Bacher, J., Wenzig, K. & Vogler, M. 2004. “SPSS Twostep cluster – a first evaluation.” In: http:// www.statisticalinnovations.com/products/twostep.pdf Balling, Gitte; Henrichsen, Lise Alsted & Skouvig, Laura. 2008. “Digital reading groups: renewing the librarian image.” New Library World 109 (1/2): 56–64. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1108/03074800810846001 Benavides, Alfredo H. 1989. “Social responsibility: a bilingual/multicultural perspective.” In Social responsibility in librarianship – Essays on equality, edited by Donnarae MacCann, 43–52. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland. Berger, Aagot. 2001. Mangfoldighedens biblioteker – Flersproglig biblioteksbetjening i Danmark. [Diversity libraries – multi-lingual library services in Denmark]. Copenhagen: Bibliotekarforbundet. Berger, Aagot. 2004. “Udlanes: Dialog med en fordom. available for loan.” [On loan: Dialogue with a prejudice]. Bibliotekspressen (16): 474–475. Retrieved from http://search.proquest. com/docview/57615864?accountid=13607 Bies, W. 1996. “Thinking with the help of images: On the metaphors of knowledge organization.” Knowledge Organization 23(1): 3–8. Retrieved from http://search.proquest. com/docview/57403186?accountid=13607 Bilandzic, M., & Foth, M. 2013. “Libraries as co-working spaces. Understanding user motivations and perceived barriers to social learning.” Library Hi Tech 31(2): 254–273. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07378831311329040 Black, Alistair. 2005. “The library as clinic: A Foucauldian interpretation of British public library attitudes to social and physical disease, ca. 1850–1950.” Libraries & Culture 40(3): 416–434.

164 

 References

Black, Alistair. 2011. “‘We don’t do public libraries like we used to’: Attitudes to public library buildings in the UK at the start of the 21st century.” Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 43(1): 30–45. http://lis.sagepub.com/content/43/1/30 Boter, J. & Wedel, M. 2005. “User categorization of public library collections.” Library and Information Science Research 27(2): 190–202. Boxenbaum, E. & Rouleu, L. 2011. “New knowledge products as bricolage: Metaphors and scripts in organizational theory.” Academy of Management Review 36(2): 272–296. Brabazon, Tara. 2006. “The Google effect: Googling, blogging, wikis and the flattening of expertise.” Libri 56(3): 156–167. Brabazon, Tara. 2009. “Fundamentalism of the mind or wagging the long tail? Google and the future of thinking.” Libri 9(2): 69–77. Brabazon, Tara. 2013. Digital dieting – From information obesity to digital fitness. August 2013. Ashgate. e-book – Strategies to move students and citizens from searching to researching Bridges, Karl. (editor). 2014. Customer-based collection development: an overview. Chicago: American Library Association. Brigham, T. J. (2013). Personas: Stepping into the shoes of the library user. Medical Reference Services Quarterly 32(4), 443–450. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2013.837737 Brunsson, N. & Winberg, H. 1997. “Implementing reforms.” In The reforming organization, edited by N. Brunsson & J.P. Olsen, 109–126. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Budd, J. M. 1997. “A critique of customer and commodity.” College and Research Libraries 58(4): 310–321. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57405421?accountid=13607 Budd, J. M. 2009. “Academic library data from the United States: An examination of trends.” LIBRES: Library and Information Science Research Electronic Journal 19(2) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/818634433?accountid=13607 Bunch, Allan. 1982. Community information services – their origins, scope and development. London: Bingley. Buschman, John. 2007. “Democratic theory in library and information science: toward an emendation.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology 58(10):1483–1496. Buschman, John. 2014. “Seven reasons to be skeptical about patron-driven acquisitions.” In Customer-based collection development: an overview, edited by Karl Bridges, 159–176. Chicago: American Library Association. Buxton, B. 1994. “Metaphors that keep us on the periphery.” Human-Computer Interaction 9(1): 50–52. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/57319725?accountid=13607 Calvert, P. 2005. “It’s a mystery: mystery shopping in New Zealand’s public libraries.” Library Review 54(1): 24–35. Caminata, Christina. 2014. “E-books and patron-driven acquisitions in academic libraries.” In Customer-based collection development: an overview, edited by Karl Bridges, 1–12. Chicago: American Library Association. Charalabidis, Y. & Loukis, E. 2012. “Participative public policy making through multiple social media platforms utilization.” International Journal of Electronic Government Research 8(3): 78–97. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jegr.2012070105 Clarke, J. & Newman, J. 1997. The managerial state: Power, politics and ideology in the remaking of social welfare. London: Sage. Coleman, Jean Ellen. 1989. “The social responsibilities of librarians toward literacy education.” In Social responsibility in librarianship – Essays on equality, edited by Donnarae MacCann, 31–41. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland.

References 

 165

Cornelissen, J.P. 2005. “Beyond compare: Metaphor in organization theory.” Academy of Management Review 30(4): 751–764. Cornelissen, J.P. & Kafouros, M. 2008. “Metaphors and theory building in organization theory: What determines the impact of a metaphor on theory?” British Journal of Management 19(4): 365–379. Crawford, John & Irving, Christine. 2012. “Information literacy in employability training – The experience of Inverclyde libraries.” Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 44(2):79–89. Czopak, V. 1998. “Using mystery shoppers to evaluate customer service in the public library.” Public Libraries 37(6): 370–371. Dahlkild, Nan. 2011. Biblioteket i tid og rum – Arkitektur, indretning og formidling. [The library in time and space: Architecture, design and communication]. Copenhagen: Danmarks Biblioteksforening. Deuze, M. 2005. “Popular journalism and professional ideology: Tabloid reporters and editors speak out.” Media, Culture & Society 27(6): 861–882. Retrieved from http://search. proquest.com/docview/57655262?accountid=13607 Diers, B., & Simpson, S. 2012. “At your leisure: Establishing a popular reading collection at UBC library.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 7(2): 49–66. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1448990011?accountid=13607 Dunstone, M. 1993. “The customer is always the customer.” Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services 6(1): 22–24. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57304563?accountid=13607 Elbeshausen, Hans & Skov, P. 2004. “Public libraries in a multicultural space: A case study of integration processes in local communities.” New Library World 105 (3/4):131–141. Eriksson, Catarina A.M.; Michnik, Katarina E. & Nordeborg, Yoshiko. 2013. “The library user and the charter tourist: two travelers, one analogy.” Information Research 18, No.3 paper C04. Available at http://www.Informationr.neR/ir/18-3/colis/paperC04.html Esson, Rachel; Stevenson, Alison; Gildea, Maureen and Roberts, Sue. 2012. “Library services for the future: Engaging with our customers to determine wants and needs.” Library Management 33 (8–9): 469–478. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01435121211279830. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1283633997?accountid=13607 Estabrook, L. 1979. “Emerging trends in community library services.” Library Trends 28(2): 151–164. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/57208609?accountid=13610 Eve, J., de Groot, M., & Schmidt, A. 2007. ”Supporting lifelong learning in public libraries across Europe.” Library Review, 56(5), 393–406. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1108/00242530710750581 Evjen, Sunniva & Audunson, Ragnar 2009. “The complex library: does the public’s attitude represent a barrier to institutional change in public libraries?” New Library World 110 (3/4): 161–174. Ferlie, E.; Ashburner, L.; Fitzgerald, L. & Pettigrew, A. 1996. The new public management in action. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fisher, Karen E.; Durrance, Joan C. & Hinton, Marian Bouch. 2004. “Information grounds and the use of need-based services by immigrants in Queens, New York: a context-based outcome evaluation approach.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 55 (8): 754–766.

166 

 References

Florida, Richard. 2002. The rise of the creative class and how it’s transforming work, leisure and everyday life. New York: Basic Books. Florida, Richard. 2005. Cities and the creative class. New York: Routledge. Forrester, M. A.; Ramsden, C., & Reason, D. 1997. “Conversation and discourse analysis in library and information services.” Education for Information 15(4): 283–295. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/57428618?accountid=13607 Foucault, Michel. 2003. The birth of the clinic – An archaeology of medical perception. London: Routledge. Freeden, Michael. 2005. “Ideology.” In The shorter Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, edited by Edward Craig, 438. London: Routledge. Garcia-Guillen, Emilie & Tomic, Sylvie. 2011. “A public service for a diverse readership: Reaching out to immigrant readers at the Toronto Library and Queens Library.” Bulletin des Bibliotheques de France 56(5): 81–86. Gibbons, S. 2013. “Techniques to understand the changing needs of library users.” Inter­­national Federation of Library Associations (IFLA)Journal 39(2): 162–167. Gibbs, R.W. 2008. “Metaphor and thought – the state of the art.” In Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, edited by R.W. Raymond, Jr., 3–13. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gibson, Craig. 2010. “Assessing service quality: Satisfying the expectations of library customers.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 36 (5): 456. http://search.proquest. com/docview/818634826?accountid=13607 Giesecke, Joan. 2010. “Finding the right metaphor: Restructuring, realigning, and repacking today’s research libraries.” Journal of Library Administration 51(1): 54–65. Glynn, Lindsay. 2006. “A critical appraisal tool for library and information research.” Library Hi Tech 24(3): 387–399. Gross, J., & Leslie, L. 2010. “Learning 2.0: A catalyst for library organizational change.” The Electronic Library 28(5): 657–668. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/853213180?accountid=13607 Gutting, Gary. 2005. “Foucault.” In The shorter Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, edited by Edward Craig, 280–284. London: Routledge. Habermas, Jürgen. 1984. Theory of communicative action Vol. 1–2. Beacon Press. Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (original work published 1962). Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. “Three normative models of democracy.” In Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political, edited by S. Benhabib, 21–30. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Harrison, Ross. 2005. “Democracy.” In The shorter Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, edited by Edward Craig, 165–170. London: Routledge. Hart, Genevieve. 2006. “The information literacy education readinessof public libraries in Mourmalanga Province (South Africa).” Libri 56 (1): 48–62. Havens, Kayri & Henderson, Sandra. 2013. “Citizen science takes root.” American Scientist 101(5): 378–385. Hedemark, Åse; Hedman, Jenny & Sundin, Olof. 2005. “Speaking of users: on user discourses in the field of public libraries.” Information Research 10(2). http://www.informationr.net/ ir/10-2/paper218.html

References 

 167

Heery, M. 1996. “Academic library services to non-traditional students.” Library Management 17(5): 3–13. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/57403175?accountid=13607 Heise, J. & Kimmel, S. 2003. “Reading the river: The state of the art of real-time virtual reference.” Internet Reference Services Quarterly 8(1): 1–7. Retrieved from http://search. proquest.com/docview/57556424?accountid=13607 Henderson, M.R. 1896. “The librarian as a host.” Public Libraries 1(5): 187–189. Hernon, Peter. 1998. “Customer Loyalty.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 24 (6): 435–436. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57478752?accountid=13607 Hernon, Peter & Schwartz, C. 1995. “Concepts: For instance, value, customer, and client.” Library and Information Science Research 17 (4): 325–326. http://search.proquest.com/ docview/57401386?accountid=13607 Heskett, James L. et al. 1994. “Putting the service-profit chain to work.” Harvard Business Review 72 (2): 164–174. Hjørland, Birger. 2014. “Classical databases and knowledge organization: A case for Boolean retrieval and human decision-making during searches.” Journal of Association for Information Science and Technology. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23250 Holmes, Martha Stoddard. 2011. “After Sontag – Reclaiming metaphor,” Genre 44(3):263–276. http://www.academia.edu/1080396/After_Sontag_Reclaiming_Metaphor Hornby, A.S. 1989. Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary of current English. 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hussey, Sandra R. 2011. “Listening to the Customer.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 37 (6): 549–550. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.08.006. http://search.proquest. com/docview/925705488?accountid=13607 Jackson, R. 2002, “The customer is always right: what the business world can teach us about problem patrons.” Reference Librarian, no. 75: 205–216. Japsen, Anne Lise. 1992. Biblioteket og den gode bog – Hvad styrer folkebibliotekernes anskaffelsespolitik? [The library and the good book – What determines the collection building policies of the public libraries?]. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. Jochumsen, Henrik & Hvenegaard Rasmussen, Casper. 2000. Gør biblioteket en forskel? [Does the library make a difference?]. Copenhagen: Danmarks Biblioteksforening, Center for Kulturpolitiske Studier & Biblioteksstyrelsen. Jochumsen, Henrik & Hvenegaard Rasmussen, Casper. 2006. “Bibliotekets brugere: Fra klienter til forandringsagenter.” [The library users – From clients to change agents]. In Folkebiblioteket som forvandlingsrum – Perspektiver på folkebiblioteket i kultur – og medielandskabet, edited by Leif Emerek, Casper Hvenegaard Rasmussen and Dorte Skot-Hansen, 41–52. Copenhagen: Danmarks Biblioteksforening. Jochumsen, Henrik & Hvenegaard Rasmussen, Casper. 2008. All that … and books too! En rundrejse gennem amerikanske biblioteker. Copenhagen: Danmarks Biblioteksforening. Jochumsen, Henrik, Hvenegaard Rasmussen, Casper & Skot-Hansen, Dorte. 2012. “The four spaces – a new model for the public library.” New Library World 113(11/12): 586–597. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03074801211282948 Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 1998. Hvordan finder biblioteket svaret: Evaluering. [How does the library find the answer: Report].Tønsberg: Tønsberg Bibliotek. Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 2004a. “Managing fee-based public library services – values and practices.” Library Management 25 (6/7): 307–315.

168 

 References

Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 2004b. “Money makes the world go around – fee-based services in Danish public libraries 2000–2003.” New Library World 105 (1/2): 21–32. Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 2009a. “Folkebibliotekernes brugerbilleder – Fire forestillinger om brugeren.” [Public libraries’ images of their users – Four conceptions]. Dansk Biblioteksforskning – tidsskrift for informations – og kulturformidling. Nr. 1, 5 årg.: 5–16. Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 2012. “Staff-less libraries – recent Danish public library experiences.” New Library World 113 (7/8): 333–342. Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 2014a. “Understanding users: from man-made typologies to computer-generated clusters.” New Library World 115 (9/10): 412–425. Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 2014b. “Innovative public library services – staff-less or staff-intensive?” Library Management 35 (6/7): 469–480. Johannsen, Carl Gustav. 2015. “Teaching social media in public libraries – Danish experiences.” The Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances 28 (1/2), 19–25. Johansson, V. 2004. “Public libraries as democratic intermediaries: Some examples from Sweden.” New Library World 105(1): 47–59. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/57525037?accountid=13607 Johnson, D. T. 1995. “Focus on the library customer: Revelation, revolution, or redundancy?” Library Trends 43 (3): 318–325. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57347863?accountid=13607 Julien, Heidi & Hoffman, Cameron. 2008. “Information literacy training in Canada’s public libraries.” The Library Quarterly 78(1):19–41. Jung, K.; Keng, K.A. & Wirtz, J. 2003. “Segmentation of library visitors in Singapore: learning and reading related lifestyles.” Library Management 24(1): 20–33. Jönsson- Lanevska, Yelena. 2005. “The gate to understanding: Swedish libraries and immigrants.” New Library World 106 (3/4): 128–140. Jørgensen, J. 2013. “Selvbetjente biblioteker boomer.” Momentum. http://www.kl.dk/ Momentum/momentum2013-8-2-id129736/ Kappus, Hanna. 1987. “Library service for the unemployed, socially disadvantaged and minorities in Hamburg.” New Library World 88 (12): 224–225. Kelley, Tom. 2001. The art of innovation. Lessons in creativity from IDEO. New York: Currency Books. Kelley, Tom. 2006. The ten faces of innovation – IDEO’s strategies for beating the devil’s advocate and driving creativity throughout your organization. London: Profile Books. Kessler, S. 2000. “Measuring and managing customer satisfaction.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 26 (5): 369–370. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57561521?accountid=13607 Kocevar-Weidinger, Elizabeth; Benjes-Small, Candice; Ackermann, Eric et al. 2010. “Why and how to mystery shop your reference desk.” Reference Services Review 38(1): 28–43. Koltay, Z., & Tancheva, K. 2010. Personas and a user-centered visioning process. Performance Measurement and Metrics 11(2): 172–183. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1108/14678041011064089 Koning, A. 2001. “Information literacy in New Zealand public libraries.” Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services 14(4):159–163. Kulturministeriet. 2008. Reach out! – Inspiration til brugerinddragelse og innovation i kulturens verden – Rapport fra Kulturministeriets tværgående projektgruppe. [Reach out! –

References 



 169

Inspiration to user-involvement in the world of culture – Report from the Danish Ministry of Culture]. Copenhagen: Kulturministeriet. Kymlicka, Will. 2005. “Citizenship.” In The shorter Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, edited by Edward Craig, 125–126. London: Routledge. Laclau, E. & Mouffe, C. 1985. Hegemony & socialist strategy: towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso. Lage, K., Losoff, B., & Maness, J. 2011. “Receptivity to library involvement in scientific data curation: A case study at the university of Colorado Boulder.” Portal: Libraries and the Academy 11(4), 915–937. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/914764901?accountid=13607 Lai, Horng-Ji & Wang, Jing-Yi. 2012. “Examining public librarians’ information literacy, self-directed learning readiness, and e-learning attitudes: A study from Taiwan.” Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science 16(2):101–115. Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire, and dangerous things – What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chigago Press. Lane, J.-E. 2000. New public management. London: Routledge. Lankes, David R. 2012. The atlas of new librarianship. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lebaron, F. (2009), “How Bourdieu ‘quantified’ Bourdieu: The geometric modeling of data.” In Quantifying Theory: Pierre Bourdieu, edited by K. Robson & C. Sanders. 11–29. New York (N.Y.). Levy, R. 2010. “New public management: end of an era?” Public Policy and Administration 25(2): 334–340. Long, E. 2003. Book clubs. Women and the use of reading in everyday life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Lopez, Garcia Fatima; Caridad, Sebastian Mercedes & Morales Garcia, Ana Maria. 2012. “Comparative analysis of the development of multicultural library services in the Spanish public library network (2007–2010).” Information Research – An International Electronic Journal 17(4): Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1373422982?accountid=13607 n4 MacCann, Donnarae, editor.1989. Social responsibility in librarianship – Essays on equality. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland. MacCann, Donnarae. 1989a. “Libraries for immigrants and ‘minorities’: a study in contrasts.” In Social responsibility in librarianship – Essays on equality, edited by Donnarae MacCann, 97–116. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland. Martin, W. J. 1989. Community librarianship: Changing the face of public libraries. London: Clive Bingley. May, Francine & Black, Fiona. 2010. “The life of the space: evidence from Nova Scotia public libraries.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 5(2): 5–34. https://ejournals. library.ualberta.ca/index.php/EBLIP/article/view/6497 Mayne, J. & Zapico-Goni, E., editors. 1997. Monitoring performance in the public sector. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. McGarthy, C., Yzerbyt, V.Y. & Spears, R. 2002. Stereotypes as explanations: The formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

170 

 References

McKnight, S. 2008. “Are there common academic library customer values?” Library Management 29(6–7): 600–619. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/57550623?accountid=13607 McKnight, S. & Booth, A. 2010. “Identifying customer expectations is key to evidence based service delivery.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 5(1): 26–31. Mehtonen, Pentti. 2011. “Public library buildings in Finland: An analysis of the architectural and librarianship discourses from 1945 to the present.” Library Trends 60(1): 152–173. http:// muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/v060/60.1.mehtonen.html Miao, H. & Bassham, M.W. 2006. “Embracing customer service in libraries.” Library Management 28(1): 53–61. Millson-Martula, C. & Menon, V. 1995. “Customer expectations: Concepts and reality for academic library services.” College and Research Libraries 56 (1): 33–47. http://search. proquest.com/docview/57375084?accountid=13607 Moos-Bjerre, Michael & Moos-Bjerre, Tilde. 2014. Fremtidens Biblioteker – målgruppebaseret viden til biblioteksudvikling. Udført for Tænketanken Fremtidens Biblioteker (The libraries of the future – target group oriented knowledge for library development, Think Tank of the Libraries of the Future). Copenhagen: Moos-Bjerre Analyse. Morgan, Gareth. 1993. Imaginization – the art of creative management. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Morgan, Gareth. 2006. Images of organization. Updated edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Morrison, P.D., Roberts, J.H. and von Hippel, E. 2000. “Determinants of user innovation and innovation sharing in a local market.” Management Science 46 (12): 1513–1527. Muddiman, Dave. 2000. “Images of exclusion: User and community perceptions of the public library.” In Open to all?: The public library and social inclusion. 179–188. London: Resource: The Council for Museum, Archives and Libraries. Nagata, H., Sakai, K. & Kawai, T. 2007. “Public library and users’ lifestyle in a changing context.” Performance Measurement and Metrics 8(3):197–210. Nagata, H. & Klopfer, L. 2011. “Public library assessment in customer perspective. To which customer group should the library listen?” Library Management 32 (4–5): 336–345. Newton, R., Sutton, A. & McConnell, M. 1998. “Information skills for open learning: a public library initiative.” Library Review 47(1): 125–134. Ng, P. T. 2009. Examining the use of new science metaphors in learning organisation. The Learning Organization 16(2): 168–180. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/57732815?accountid=13607 Ondrusek, A. L. 2004. “The attributes of research on end-user online searching behavior: A retrospective review and analysis.” Library and Information Science Research 26(2): 221–265. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/57560947?accountid=13607 Oswick, C., Keenoy, T. & Grant, D. 2002. “Metaphor and analogical reasoning in organization theory: Beyond orthodoxy.” Academy of Management Review 27(2): 294–303. Palmer, J. 1991. “Using cluster analysis to identify information style.” Journal of Documentation 47(2):105–129. Pateman, John & Williment, Ken. 2013. Developing community-led public libraries – Evidence from the UK and Canada. Farnham: Ashgate. Peterson, R.A. & Kern, R.M. 1996. “Changing highbrow taste: From snob to omnivore.” American Sociological Review 61(5): 900–907.

References 

 171

Pine, B.J. & Gilmore, J.H. 1999. The experience economy: Work is theatre & every business a stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Pluse, John. 1991. “Customer focus: The salvation of service organisations.” Public Library Journal 6 (1). http://search.proquest.com/docview/57163387?accountid=13607 Pollitt, C. 1990. Managerialism and the public services. Oxford: Blackwell. Pollitt, C. 1998. “Managerialism revisited.” In Taking stock: Assessing public sector reforms. Edited by B. Peters & D. Savoie. 45–77. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press. Popielewska, K. 2012. “‘Human library’ i.e. do not judge people by their covers.” Bibliotekarz (1): 6–10. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1531921783?accountid=13607 Popp, M. P. 2013. “Technology, lifelong learning and I (or we).” Reference & User Services Quarterly 52(3): 179–181. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/1438547700?accountid=13607 Pors, Niels Ole. 2006. “The public library and students’ information needs.” New Library World 107 (7/8): 275–285. Preddie, Martha Ingrid. 2009. “Use and public libraries are challenged to address these needs.” Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 4(4): 58–62. Prensky, Marc. 2001. “Digital natives, digital immigrants.” On the Horizan. 9(5): 1–6. Pybus, Ron. 1992. “Improvement of services to our customers – the modern approach.” Public Library Journal 7 (2). http://search.proquest.com/docview/57114730?accountid=13607 Radford, G.P. & Radford, M.L. 2003. “Librarians and party girls: cultural studies and the meaning of the librarian.” Library Quarterly 73(1): 54–69. Reed, V. 2008. “Whom do we serve? A patron by any other name might get sweeter service.” Reference Librarian 49(2): 183–185. Roach, Patrick & Morrison, M. 1998. Public libraries, ethnic diversity, and citizenship (British Library Research and Innovation Report; 76). Coventy: Centre for Ethnic Relations/ CEDAR, University of Warwick. Rogers, C. 2009. “There is always tomorrow? Libraries on the edge.” Journal of Library Administration 49(5): 545–558. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/57733911?accountid=13607 Rosen, Michael. 2005. “Karl Marx.” In The shorter Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, edited by Edward Craig, 617–631. London: Routledge. Rowley, J. 1997. “Knowing your customers.” Aslib Proceedings 49(3): 64–66. http://search. proquest.com/docview/57419257?accountid=13607 Rowley, J. 1997a. “Focusing on customers.” Library Review 46 (1): 81–89. http://search. proquest.com/docview/57397854?accountid=13607 Rowley, J. 2000. “From users to customers?” OCLC Systems and Services 16: 157–167. http:// search.proquest.com/docview/57509999?accountid=13607 Rumsey, Deborah. 2010. Statistics essentials for dummies. Hoboken, NY: Wiley. Røvik, Kjell Arne. 1996. “Deinstitutionalization and the logic of fashion.” In Translating organizational change. Edited by B. Czarniawska & G. Sevon, 139–172. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Røvik, Kjell Arne.2002. “The secrets of the winners: Management ideas that flow.” In The expansion of the management knowledge – carriers, flows and sources. Edited by K. Sahlin-Andersson & L. Engwall, 113–144. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Røvik, Kjell Arne. 2011. “From fashion to virus: An alternative theory of organizations’ handling of management ideas.” Organization Studies 32(5): 631–653.

172 

 References

Salinero, D. M. & Grogg, J. E. 2005. “May the bun be with you: an annotated bibliography of librarians and their image.” The Southeastern Librarian 53(3). Article 8. Available at: http://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/seln/vol53/iss3/8 Sarkodie-Mensah, K. 1992. “Dealing with international students in a multicultural era.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 18(4): 214–216. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/ docview/57313738?accountid=13607 Schultz, I. 2007. “Fra partipresse over omnibuspresse til segmentpresse.” Journalistika 5: 5–26. Schulze, Gerhard. 2005. Die Erlebnisgesellschaft – Kultursoziologie der Gegenwart. [The Experience Society – Cultural Sociology of the Present Day.] Frankfurt: Campus Verlag. Seeholzer, J. 2013. “Making it their own: Creating meaningful opportunities for student employees in academic library services.” College & Undergraduate Libraries 20(2): 215–223. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2013.789690 Sennett, Richard. 2002. The fall of public man. London: Penguin Books. Shachaf, P., & Snyder, M. 2007. “The relationship between cultural diversity and user needs in virtual reference services.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 33(3): 361–367. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/57640099?accountid=13607 Shakespeare, William.1988. As you like it, Act 2, Scene 7. In The complete works, edited by Stanley Wells & Gary Taylor, 638. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Shaw, L. 2010. “Representations of librarianship in the UK press.” Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives 62 (6): 554–569. Shoham, Snunith & Rabinovich, Rachell. 2008. “Public library services to new immigrants in Israel: the case of immigrants from the Former Soviet Union and Ethiopia”. The International Information & Library Review 40(1): 21–42. Skot-Hansen, Dorte. 2002. “The public library between integration and cultural diversity.” Scandinavian Public Library Quarterly.” 35(1): 12–13. Retrieved from http://search. proquest.com/docview/57546195?accountid=13607 Skot-Hansen, Dorte. 2008. “The city as a stage – but for whom? The challenges of experience economy for cultural and urban planning.” Nordic Journal of Architectural Research 20 (1): 11–19. Skot-Hansen, Dorte; Hvenegaard Rasmussen, Casper & Jochumsen, Henrik. 2012. “The role of public libraries in culture-led urban regeneration.” New Library World 114 (1/2): 7–19. Sommerlad, Elizabeth. 2004. Books and bytes: New service paradigms for the 21st century library: An evaluation of the People’s Network and ICT training for public library staff programme. London: Big Lottery Fund. Sontag, Susan. 1990. Illness as metaphor. New York: Anchor. Stenmark, D. 2008, “Identifying clusters of user behavior in intranet search engine log files.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59(14): 2232–2243. Stephens, M. & Cheetham, W. 2011. “The impact and effect of learning 2.0 programs in Australian academic libraries.” New Review of Academic Librarianship 17(1): 31–63. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/870996206?accountid=13607 Taylor, L.R. 1971. Party politics in the age of Caesar. Berkeley: University of California Press. Teknologisk Institut. 2007. Borgernes IKT-færdigheder i Danmark.[The ICT skills of the citizens in Denmark]. Lyngby: Teknologisk Institut. Tesdell, K. 2000. “Evaluating public library service: the mystery shopper approach.” Public Libraries 39(3): 145.

References 

 173

Thorhauge, Jens. 2007. “Branding the library.” Scandinavian Public Library Quarterly 40 (4): 3. Tinker, T. 1986. “Metaphor or reification: Are radical humanists really libertarian anarchists?” Journal of Management Studies 23(4): 363–385. Torrance, John. 2005. “Western Marxism.” In The shorter Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy, edited by Edward Craig, 631–632. London: Routledge. Tourangeau, R. & Rips, L. 1991. “Interpreting and evaluating metaphors.” Journal of Memory and Language 30(4): 452–472. Tsoukas, H. 1991. “The missing link: A transformational view of metaphors in organizational science.” Academy of Management Review 16(3): 566–585. Urry, J. 2002. The Tourist Gaze. 2nd edition. London: Sage. Usherwood, Bob. 1989. The public library as public knowledge. London: The Library Association. Usherwood, R.; Wilson, K. & Bryson, J. 2005. “Perceptions of archives, libraries, and museums in Modern Britain.” Library and Information Research 29 (93): 50–57. Van Acker, W., & Uyttenhove, P. 2012. “Analogous spaces: An introduction to spatial metaphors for the organization of knowledge.” Library Trends 61(2): 259–270. Retrieved from http:// search.proquest.com/docview/1364693690?accountid=13607 Van Riel, R. & Thomas, H. (2007), “Opening the book project”, available at: www. openingthebook.com Vanden Abeele, M., Antheunis, M. L., & Schouten, A. P. 2014. “Me, myself and my mobile: A segmentation of youths based on their attitudes towards the mobile phone as a status instrument.” Telematics and Informatics 31(2), 194–208. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. tele.2013.04.004 Vassilakaki, Evgenia & Moniarou-Papaconstantinou, Valentini. 2014. “Identifying the prevailing images in the library and information science profession: is the landscape changing?” New Library World 115 (7/8): 355–375. Veale, T. 2006. “An analogy-oriented type hierarchy for linguistic creativity.” Knowledge-Based Systems 19(7), 471–479. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2006.04.007 Von Hippel, Eric. 1986. “Lead users: a source of novel product concepts.” Management Science: 791–805 (pdf) Von Hippel, Eric. 2005. Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Vårheim, Andreas. 2011. “Gracious space: Library programming strategies towards immigrants as tools in the creation of social capital.” Library & Information Science Research 33: 12–18. Wang, Hong. 2006. “From ‘user’ to ‘customer’: TQM in academic libraries?” Library Management 27 (9): 606–620. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01435120610715518. http:// search.proquest.com/docview/57673729?accountid=13607 Weick, K. 1989. “Theory construction as ‘disciplined imagination’.” Academy of Management Review 14(4): 516–531. Wilson, T.D. (1994), “Information needs and uses: Fifty years of progress?” In Fifty years of information progress, edited by B.C. Vickery, 15–51. London: Aslib. Winkler, J. A. 1994. “Customer service and libraries.” Nebraska Library Association Quarterly 25 (3): 33–36. http://search.proquest.com/docview/57365446?accountid=13607 Winther Jørgensen, M. & Phillips, L. 2002. Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage.

174 

 References

Xie, Bo & Bugg, Julie M. 2009. “Public library computer training for older adults to access high-quality internet health information.” Library & Information Science Research 31(3):155–162. Yu, C. 2011. “Construction and validation of an e-lifestyle instrument.” Internet Research 21(3): 214–235. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10662241111139282