Exceeding Expectations: E-Reference Excellence in Collaborative VR

1
Exceeding Expectations E-Reference Excellence
in Collaborative VR

• Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.
• Marie L. Radford, Ph.D.
• Panel
• Best Practices in Cooperative Virtual Reference

2
Seeking Synchronicity Evaluating Virtual
Reference Services from User, Non-User, and
Librarian Perspectives

• Project duration
• 10/1/2005-3/30/2008
• Four phases
• Focus group interviews
• Analysis of 850 QuestionPoint transcripts
• 496 online surveys
• 283 telephone interviews
• Interviews Surveys with VRS Users, Non-users,
  Librarians

3
Librarian VRS Providers Demographics

• 175 Online Surveys
• Majority female Caucasian
• Academic librarians outnumber public librarians
• More urban than suburban or rural
• Most 41-50 years old

• 100 Telephone Interviews
• Majority female Caucasian
• Public librarians outnumber academic librarians
• More urban than suburban or rural
• Most 31-50 years old

4

• Recommendations for
• Cooperative
• Virtual Reference
• Services

5
Research Findings Cooperative VRS

• Survey respondents (N175) Eliminates
  geographic boundaries (96)
• Focus group interview participants
• Virtual umbrella
• Provides dissolution of the boundary.

6
Recommendations Cooperative VRS

• DAZZLE EM (FROM A DISTANCE)
• ADVERTIZE COOPERATION
• PROMOTE GLOBAL/LOCAL PRESENCE
• SEIZE OPPORTUNITIES TO BUILD RAPPORT

7
Research Findings Cooperative VRS

• What is Reported to be Difficult?
• More public librarians than academic librarians
  experience difficulty answering questions from
  different geographic areas
• Working in a consortium (38)
• Different libraries and policies
• Working with database access rights (18)

8
Recommendations Cooperative VRS

• OVERCOME BOUNDARIES HEIGHTEN AWARENESS OF
  REMOTE ACCESS ISSUES
• DONT TEASE OR BAIT AND SWITCH
• GUIDE USERS BEYOND CONSORTIAL
• LIMITS

9
Research Findings Cooperative VRS

• Survey Respondents (N175)
• Consistently rated chat second only to FtF
• Satisfaction in a successful encounter very high
  (71)
• Users satisfaction in a successful encounter
  very high (65)
• Ability to provide reference excellent or very
  good (gt50)

10
Recommendations Cooperative VRS

• DEVELOP SHARE EXPECTATIONS
• EXCEED EXPECTATIONS
• AIM FOR EXCELLENT SERVICE CULTIVATE REPEAT
  USERS

11

• Recommendations for
• Individual VRS Providers
• Librarians
• Staff

12
Research Findings VRS Librarians

• Challenges Reported in Online Survey (N175)
• User impatience (79)
• Negative encounters in critical incidents (N173)
• Unrealistically high user expectations (47)
• Homework help (17)
• Rarely or never experience
• Prank questions (46)
• Inappropriate language (60)
• Inappropriate questions (50)
• Rude users (50)

13
Research Findings VRS Librarians

• BUT Survey Respondents
• rated VRS second to FtF for users
• saying thanks

14
Recommendations VRS Librarians

• START OFF ON THE RIGHT FOOT!
• ACCENTUATE THE POSITIVE
• MAINTAIN A PROFESSIONAL TONE
• BE YOURSELF

15
Research Findings VRS Librarians

• Positive Online Survey Critical Incidents (N173)
• Query clarification reference interview (19)
• Challenge - Nonverbal cues missing (83)
• Information Literacy instruction (15)

16
Recommendations VRS Librarians

• DO NOT DISMISS QUESTIONS OUT
• OF HAND
• CLARIFY THE QUESTION

17
Research Findings VRS Librarians

• Positive Online Survey Critical Incidents (N175)
• VRS is especially good in providing
• Specific resources (62)
• Database searches for articles (26)
• Specific websites (86)
• VRS is less effective in providing
• Technical support (11)
• Library policy info. (11)

18
Recommendations VRS Librarians

• INCREASE ACCURACY
• ANSWER THE SPECIFIC QUESTION
• PROVIDE A VARIETY OF RESOURCES

19
Research Findings VRS Librarians

• Online Survey (N175)
• VRS is good in ability to refer users to
  subject specialists
• Challenge Disappearing users (88 reported)
• Public librarians report even higher incidence of
  disappearing users
• But all able to handle such challenges (ability
  excellent or very good).

20
Recommendations VRS Librarians

• MANAGE COMPLEX OR MULTIPLE QUERIES
• REFER COMPLEX QUESTIONS
• THEY DISAPPEARED?
• COMPLETE INQUIRY
• ANYWAY

21
End Notes

• This is one outcome from the project, Seeking
  Synchronicity Evaluating Virtual Reference
  Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian
  Perspectives, Marie L. Radford Lynn Silipigni
  Connaway, Co-Principal Investigators.
• Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University and OCLC,
  Online Computer Library Center, Inc.
• Special thanks to Patrick Confer, Timothy J.
  Dickey, Jocelyn DeAngelis Williams, Janet
  Torsney.
• These slides available at project website
  http//www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicit
  y/

22
Questions Comments

• Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.
• Email connawal_at_oclc.org
• www.oclc.org/research/staff/connaway.htm
• Marie L. Radford, Ph.D.
• Email mradford_at_scils.rutgers.edu
• www.scils.rutgers.edu/mradford