« Good news from Upper Norwood | Main | To borrow, return or renew books »
May 17, 2007
Computers in libraries
The entries and comments below about computers in libraries indicate that
- one of the intentions, among many good ones, for installing computers in libraries is to convey to the generation that have grown up with them, that libraries are in touch with their world.
- to do this effectively means doing it properly otherwise the effect is the exact opposite of what was intended: if I were to open a rock music shop and put photos of Andy Williams in the window, I would be being daft.
-it's no good libraries saying "we have put computers in our libraries- aren't we public spirited?" - that is plain bad management. The managers have to be aware of how their service matches up with the public expectation for excellence- that is part of what management means.
- if councils are placing restrictions on internet access in libraries, or on hardware and downloads then it's no good blaming the council IT department: it is part of the responsibility of the library managers to sort that out- no one else can. The council IT department may not be aware of the problem it is causing and it won't be aware until the library service makes a fuss. Then it's fairly easy for them to understand.
-If a service is to be offered it must be offered properly and in the best way one can (Ockham)
Posted by Tim Coates at May 17, 2007 4:42 PM
Comments
In answer to your points.
-Yes.
- That is true, but within reason. Technology moves at such a pace that new hardware quickly becomes obsolete and replacements are costly. It is better to provide a good basic service which can be sustained (and gradually updated) over time than have something with all the whistles and bells which cannot be repaired or replaced once it (inevitably) breaks down.
- You are right. Having computers in libraries is not enough, consistency and sustainability are also important. This may mean, in practice, that certain expectations cannot be met (uploading documents from a memory stick, for example). The important thing is to ensure that basic needs are met well. If people can successfully access websites for research, check email and print things from the internet then the needs and wants of the majority of users are being served.
- This suggests that you have had very little contact with council IT departments. It's not a matter of making them understand. Their priority is to fix reported faults rather than problem solve. If managers can think of a solution and suggest that it is installed then they will do that (for a price) but this relies upon having experienced and knowledgeable library staff who are concerned and interested enough to find a solution for themselves and their customers (trained professionals perhaps?). Having someone from the library service make a fuss will ensure that the problem is passed from team to team like a hot potato because it will effect the IT service stats.
- Quite. Making it as simple as possible works.
Posted by: Miriam Palfrey at May 18, 2007 9:04 AM
Miriam
Thanks. I have now found "Supermarket Rasputin" which only sells Russian produce, has a television broadcasting (very loud) from Moscow- and ten internet terminals which work fine. My memory stick causes no virus problems and the return key on the keyboards isn't stuck with gum.
You and Peter have both said "how expensive IT is". I bet the keyboard upon which I am typing this didn't cost £20 (or the equivalent in roubles); the screen is clean and might have cost £40 and the computer itself probably cost £250. So why can't libraries, for example, buy a few new keyboards?
Posted by: Tim at May 18, 2007 2:05 PM
Tim,
Glad to hear that not all of the internet cafes in your area have been driven out of business!
I agree. I would consider a working keyboard to be part of the basic service and replacing or repairing broken keyboards would be covered by sustainability of service.
Did you report the fault to a member of staff? If so the keyboard may have replaced by now.
Posted by: Miriam Palfrey at May 18, 2007 3:02 PM
What I was saying was that there is an opportunity cost to IT. If an IT service is provided yes it should do its job, but that will involve spending from a currently fixed size cake.
Which is somewhat different from saying "how expensive IT is" :)
Posted by: Pete Smith at May 18, 2007 3:27 PM