LIBR 246-04/13 Web 2.0 (Spring 2010)

The Lawrence Public Library (LPL) serves the community of Lawrence, Kansas. Lawrence, a city of approximately 80,000 is the home to the University of Kansas (KU). KU has over 30,000 students and 2,000 faculty members, accounting for a tremendous portion of the Lawrence community.  Over 80% of Lawrence residents are white, over 90% are high school graduates, and nearly 50% are college graduates. The specific demographics of the LPL patron community is a bit difficult to discern from the Library’s website, but seniors, teens, and children have dedicated areas on the library website and are likely some of the core populations served by the library. Interestingly, I was not able to find anything on the website that acknowledges the close proximity to KU, suggesting that the university students and faculty are not a significant patron group for the LPL.

LPL has a number of elements to their online presence. They have a busy, but not overwhelming website that is organized and attractive. The website features a banner that includes artwork on the front of their building. Immediately beneath the banner, they have icons linking to facebook, twitter, Blogger, flickr, YouTube, contact information, and a suggestion box. The homepage also includes a calendar, announcements, links to services, news, and easy-to-find access to the library catalog. Overall, the library has an impressive web presence that provides service and information to its patron community. The web presence is well-maintained and could be expanded to provide better connection to patron groups and potential patrons. Specific components of the LPL web presence are analyzed below:

facebook: The LPL facebook page has 657 fans. The page includes basic information such a hours and location, as well as an event schedule in the left hand column. A steady flow of updates, around 4 per month, promote library events, services, and news. There is a smattering of responses to the posts – thumbs up or comments. Several discussions were initiated on the “Discussion” tab, but it does not appear that this forum has caught on among users. A close look at the discussion topics reveals that two of the three topics are, in fact, announcements that might have been more appropriately posted as updates rather than discussion topics. The facebook page is current, regularly updated, and does not reflect negatively on the Library in any way. The facebook page is a good starting point that might be exploited in other ways and promoted more extensively.

twitter: The LPL twitter feed has 1234 followers, almost twice the number of facebook fans. The feed is updated frequently with announcements, questions, contests, recommendations. For example, a February 2, 2010 post was, “1st person to come to the upstairs Ref Desk and say the word "Kenya" wins a free copy of this book: http://www.lawrence.lib.ks.us/dfmf.html”  Without knowing the demographic and interests of the followers, it is difficult to determine how well the feed matches the desires and needs of the community. However, the number of followers is substantial, more than 1% of the population of Lawrence. The feed is updated roughly 30 times per month. The content of the feed has a positive tone, seems relevant to library visitors, including parents, teens, and seniors. This is one of the most impressive elements of LPL’s web presence.

Blogger: LPL has one blog called, “Lawrence Public Library Book Blog.” As its name suggests, the blog provides book recommendations and reviews, along with links to book lists, websites, and tools to help patrons find books of interest. My assumption is that readers’ advisory is one of the primary roles of LPL librarians. The blog serves that function, although it is consists primarily of lists with limited commentary from librarians and patrons. The book blog is available by RSS feed or email subscription. It is on the blog’s main page that patrons will find a link to a list of BookLetters, lists and newsletters built around a variety of topics, genres, and media. These are available by RSS feed or email subscription. Patrons would not know about these services if they did not visit the blog page. The book blog could be better maintained, including more comment and evaluation by librarians and patrons. Additional blogs might be created to address other topics of interest to Lawrence community members.

flickr: While there are only five sets of photos on LPL’s flicker page, the oldest of which date back to June, 2009, the photos give a little insight into the LPL community showing both children, seniors in computer class, Fabio, and children’s book character Arthur. The use of flickr could be more extensive and organized, but it is current and would be of interest to someone in the community. LPL is off to a good start, but could take better advantage of flickr by promoting specific photos or events on their homepage, rather than simply presenting a flickr icon.

YouTube: The LPL YouTube presence is a little anemic. A small number of clips, many of which appear to have been created by teen patrons are on the site. While this may represent an important connection to the teen patron group, it seems to be simply a repository for miscellaneous video clips related to the library. Videos that are better organized and presented would be preferable. Videos that provide information or service to patron groups or videos created by patron groups would both promote the library and connect the library with its patrons. As it is, YouTube is underutilized and not clearly positioned as a tool for the library.

Contact Us and Suggestions: These icons are prominently placed on the home page and appear to represent a strong interest in patron input. It would be interesting to see the suggestions made by patrons and the response of the Library. This transparency might build the reputation of the library as an organization that cares about patrons and appreciates ideas. Without seeing this, it is hard to know how the library feels about or responds to feedback. In addition to Contact Us and Suggestions, there is link to a "Two minute survey" to "help us serve you better" that is prominently placed on the library home page.

Although LPL has a good website and many well-constructed components, it does not have a strong brand. The identity – purpose, personality, community – of the Library is not clearly communicated by the web presence. Their use of technology suggests something about the Library’s attitude toward technology and possibly their organizational identity, but exactly what is not well-communicated. Formulating a strong brand for the library should make it easier to determine how to use technology to promote the library. For example, if the Library is a place that connects patrons to community services this would be a key feature on its website. If seniors are the primary patron group, the web presence would reflect this which would, in turn, draw more seniors to the library. It is possible the library has a sense of identity that is not clearly communicate through the organization's web presence.

My recommendation to LPL is to build on what is already in place. First, the library should develop a clear identity and communicate it using its web presence. The LPL website fits very much into the “destination web” model and could do much more to serve and engage the community, as well as promote the library. Once the Library has a clear sense of identity, its use of technology could be expanded based on that. LPL should tailor the use of facebook, twitter, YouTube, and blogs to speak directly to the Library’s primary patron communities and potential patron communities.  Consider using these tools to interact with patrons – get feedback, have conversations, share information.  For example, if patrons could share book recommendations with each other patrons might build stronger ties to each other and the library. In short, work to better connect the Library’s web presence to its patron communities.