Pursue the Authentic
April 1st, 2008 by Michael MayFriday was my last full day in Minneapolis. In the morning I attended Great Libraries for Dummies presented by Greg Buss of Richmond Library in Canada. The main auditorium was filled for this session; I’m guessing about a thousand people were there.
Buss admitted that he was upset when he first heard the session title, which he did not choose, citing John Berry’s recent editorial in Library Journal which warned against the “dumbing down” of public libraries. But Buss went on to defend his belief that public librarians’ first and highest priority should be “customer convenience,” an approach which Buss said sets standards which most librarians hope to achieve — to provide full access to quality collections, services, and programs in order to empower individuals.
Despite 20% to 30% increases in what was already high circulation statistics at Buss’s own library, I personally remain very skeptical that “merchandising products to customers” necessarily results in quality library service, and I am not convinced that public libraries can “achieve greatness” by looking like big-box or chain bookstores.
Next I attended a talk table called Patrons or Customers? Held in the bowels of the conference center, about twenty people attended this refreshing session. Here are examples of some of the questions discussed:
- When you go to a library, do you want to “buy” or do you want to “know”?
- Is the term “customer” more appropriate than “patron” in some libraries, such as large urban libraries vs. small rural libraries?
- Does “patron” represent the “proud and venerable history” of public libraries? Or is it condescending?
- Should we refer to children as “customers”? Should we call them “patrons”?
- Is the use of “customer” an attempt by administrators to validate or enforce management techniques?
- Do libraries that use the term “customer” provide better service than those that use “patron”?
- Can we offer “good customer service” to our “patrons”?
- Do the people we serve care what we call them?
- Is there a better word than “patron” or “customer”?
While few of these questions were fully answered, the consensus of the group seemed to be that open discussion about whether to use customer, patron, or other terms is worthwhile and deserves further consideration.
After lunch, award-winning author Louise Erdrich read from her novels, letters, and poetry. A phrase from Erdrich’s poem “Advice to Myself” caught my attention: “Pursue the authentic.”
This simple philosophy is reflected in the website for BirchBark Books, Erdrich’s independent bookstore located in Minneapolis. The site says BirchBark staff “believe in the power of good writing,” “answer to no corporate sponsor,” and “value relationships and stories and ideas . . . value what you have to say.”
I very much regret not visiting Erdrich’s bookstore while in Minneapolis. If public libraries have anything to learn from bookstores, an independent bookstore based on a philosophy to “pursue the authentic” would be a great place to start.
|
Print this post
April 1st, 2008 at 9:17 pm
I’m interested in your comment: “I personally remain very skeptical that “merchandising products to customers” necessarily results in quality library service”
Was that really the link being made? Everything I’ve read about merchandising in public libraries seems to confirm the notion that it will increase circulation, but I haven’t really seen an attempt to link it to non-circulation related service. How was that point being made in the presentation?
April 1st, 2008 at 10:04 pm
Hi Tony,
I’m using the phrase “library services” in a very general way, i.e. everything the library has to offer, including collections.
I think the implied point or link was that customers are the ones who ultimately determine the value or quality of library services and collections, and one way to measure how much customers value library collections is through circulation statistics.
About this, John Berry’s editorial cited in the post above says the following:
“The resulting ‘destination’ libraries resemble the cookie-cutter design of the grocery store, aimed at making sure everyone who comes in goes out with ‘product’ (books, CDs, DVDs, or downloads). What the patron takes is of as little concern to the storekeeper librarian as it is to the supermarket manager. The success of the enterprise is measured in the number of products collected by patrons, now called ‘customers.’ It is no longer measured in the usefulness or impact of the service on the quality of life in the community served.”
To put it another way, just because McDonald’s has served one billion people and counting does not necessarily mean McDonald’s offers quality products or services.
Mike
April 4th, 2008 at 6:25 am
McDonald’s may or may not offer quality products or service, but what they do offer is obviously what people want. I have long been puzzled by the idea of what I call the “spinach philosophy” of libraries - don’t give ‘em what they want, give ‘em what we think is good for them. No ice cream, just spinach.
Customers, or patrons, or whatever you want to call library users, do determine how good our service is. Since we don’t have sales goals or a bottom line, the only statistic we can go on is circulation - and what’s wrong with everyone leaving with something in their hand?
One billion served? I’d rather work for the McDonald’s of libraries any day.
April 4th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
I find the idea of a “McDonald’s of libraries” one of the saddest goals for a library I have ever heard. McDonald’s ONLY goal is to make as much money as possible, and they have accomplished this partly by making every restaurant exactly the same, so that customers don’t have to waste time on things like reading a menu. Libraries clearly should not be the same; and while high circulation is great - it is ONE measure of how well a library is serving its community - many people come to libraries and get exactly what they needed without checking anything out, so it can’t be the ONLY measure.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Michael, I went to Birchbark Books and fell in love with the store. Small, but beautiful, appears to have a birch tree growing in the middle. Titles were the best of everything, Native American and best seller. Music was aboriginal. I bought cone flower salve and warrior tea. I’ll send you pictures if you want.
Katharine
April 9th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
There are more choices than customers and patrons. I prefer clients because it really denotes a professional relationship. I know I am in a minority, as it has never caught on.