Subject: The Greenboro District Library: An Evaluation
of Ottawa Public Library’s ‘Library of the Future’
Prepared by: Dave Thomas, Manager, Greenboro
District Library
Prepared
for: Ottawa Public Library
Board
Meeting
of: October
27, 2008
Date of
preparation: September 3, 2008
BACKGROUND
In
recognition of the trends in public libraries, Greenboro was designed as a
‘library of the future’, a concept pioneered in Canada by Richmond (B.C.)
Public Library. Their Deputy Chief Librarian, Cate McNeely, served as a
consultant in the planning of Greenboro.
The
essence of the ‘library of the future’ concept is one of efficiency in terms of
high outputs (use, customer satisfaction) and low inputs (low costs, value for
taxpayers’ money). In more concrete terms, this means providing library service
that meets users’ needs (popular collections, convenience, and an attractive
and welcoming environment) and taking advantage of technology to enhance
service and focus staff efforts on value added service.
The
accompanying report evaluates the success of the Greenboro District Library to
the end of 2007. Both quantitative and qualitative criteria are used. Each
criterion is explained and an evaluation made of each.
EVALUATION SUMMARY: GOOD
§
A splendid building, which works
well, despite some failings (for example, the need for a staff presence for
customer service nearer the entrance)
§
A well-used facility with a number
of key features of convenience for users ( for
example, the ‘powerwall’ merchandising displays)
§
A popular collection with a high
turnover rate
§
Staff who are highly rated by the
public
§
Good ratings from users, both
formal and informal
RECOMMENDATIONS IN BRIEF
Greenboro’s
experience suggests that we would do well as a system to pursue the following
to at least the same extent as has been done at Greenboro:
Areas of focus for new and/or
existing facilities on based on Greenboro’s experience:
WHAT GREENBORO IS DOING
§
Working on plans to add a staff
presence in the entrance area for improved customer service in 2009
§
Installing a ceiling-mounted
wide-screen display to welcome people and provide directional and program
information in 2008
§
Trying to maximize the draw of
face-out displays and the ‘powerwall’ by frequent changes of thematic displays
to highlight under-circulating material
§
Increasing the amount of sloping
shelving for ‘face-out’ display throughout the collection in 2008
§
Working on plans to move the
‘powerwall’ to a more prominent location in 2009
§
Adding lighting to areas where
lighting is lacking
§
Formalizing the ‘roving’ reference
concept to ensure that staff ‘rove’ for improved customer service
9
THE GREENBORO DISTRICT LIBRARY
AN EVALUATION OF OTTAWA PUBLIC LIBRARY’S ‘LIBRARY OF THE
FUTURE’
Greenboro
District Library
INDEX Page
Executive
Summary ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. |
3 |
Background ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… |
9 |
Evaluation
Criteria Defined ………………………………………………………………………………………… |
12 |
Evaluation …………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………. |
15 |
Summary of Conclusions
and Ratings …………………………………………………………………………. Further conclusions and recommendations …………………………………………………………………. |
51 53 |
District Libraries: Greenboro and Nepean
Centrepointe ………………………………………………… Appendix:
Greenboro District Library: Model for Operations ………….…………………………….. |
54 59 |
|
|
Second
floor, Greenboro District Library
Greenboro
District Library opened in June 2006. It is a 2-story, 29,000 square foot
library attached to the Greenboro Community Centre in south suburban Ottawa. It
is intended to serve as a community library for approximately 50,000 people and
as a district library for a further 100,000 people.
The
designing architect was Gerry Shoalts of Shoalts Zaback Architects Ltd. and the
whole project was a huge collaborative effort with the City of Ottawa, whose
participation was led by Philip Piazza of the Design & Construction
Division of the Real Property & Asset Management branch.
This
report details its progress to the end of 2007.
The
library was designed as a ‘library of the future’. The essence of this concept
is one of efficiency in terms of high outputs (use, customer satisfaction) and
low inputs (low costs, value for taxpayers’ money). In more concrete terms,
this means providing library service that meets users’ needs (popular
collections, convenience and an attractive and welcoming environment) and
taking advantage of technology to enhance service and focus staff efforts on
value added service.
The
report outlines the ways in which Greenboro has tried to meet these goals and
attempts to evaluate its success in doing so. The evaluation is important not
only for Greenboro, but for Ottawa Public Library as a whole, as Greenboro has
been viewed as a pilot project for the evolution of public library service in
Ottawa.
The
evaluation criteria used in the report have been divided into qualitative and
quantitative measures.
Quantitative measures:
1. Circulation of materials, including turnover rates
2. Number of people entering the library
3. Self-checkout
4. Programs and Program Attendance
5. Number of library cards issued
6. Seating and computer workstations
7. Wireless Internet use
8. Use of the Drive-Thru book return
Qualitative measures:
A. Written and verbal feedback from the public
B. Functionality of the building
C. Popular materials, powerwalls, and merchandising
displays
D. Information service and roving reference
E. Teen services
F. Meeting rooms
G. Co-location with the Greenboro Community Centre
H. ‘By The Book’ – the Greenboro Friends’ used bookstore
and café
1. Circulation
As the number one measure of a library’s success,
Greenboro’s circulation got off to a good start, but went into decline when the
exemptions from requests and shared collections were removed in April 2007.
This poses a number of challenges: maintaining attractive browsing collections
on the shelves, examining the effects of requestability and shared collections,
as well as the type of material in the collection and the effects on the
collection as a whole of buying more highly popular material.
On the other hand, Greenboro’s turnover rates, even after
the decline in circulation in the spring of 2007, are very encouraging. These
rates are generally well above OPL averages, which indicate that Greenboro is
successful in a way that is not evident from the circulation numbers.
Greenboro’s circulation as a share of total OPL circulation
also suggests that it is pulling its weight within OPL.
Grade Circulation
statistics: B (Fair)
Circulation
turnover: A+ (Excellent)
Circulation
in relation
Total
OPL circulation: A (Very good)
2. Number of people visiting the library
With a typical daily headcount of between 950 and
1,000, Greenboro continues to attract a respectable number of users. There was
a decline of approximately 5% from fall 2006 to fall 2007, but this was less
than the decline in circulation.
Grade B+ (Good, with qualifications)
3. Self-Checkout
Self-checkout is definitely a success story with a
rate of approximately 85% -- the highest rate within OPL.
Grade A+ (Excellent)
4. Programs & Program Attendance
Comparisons are made with Nepean Centrepointe, the
district library most comparable to Greenboro, although Centrepointe is a much
more established library and does not have a community centre next door
offering a wide range of programs.
Preschool program attendance at Greenboro is quite
good and Greenboro is surely one of the most successful libraries within OPL
for teen programs.
Grade A (Very good)
5. Number of Library Cards Issued
After very high numbers in 2006, by the beginning of 2007,
the number of cards issued monthly at Greenboro had declined to an average of
224 per month – approximately 7% fewer than issued at Centrepointe. This
suggests sustained interest in Greenboro despite the decline in circulation.
Grade B+ (Good, with qualifications)
6. Seating and Computer Workstations
With non-computer seating for 111 people, Greenboro is well provided with seating overall, but its distribution could be improved, particularly more study seating in the Kids Zone. The 51 public Internet computers are sufficient for all but the busiest times, when they are sometimes all in use. The growing use of the wireless Internet service may be resulting in fewer sessions on the library’s own computers.
Grade B+ (Good, with qualifications)
7. Wireless Internet
With an average of 360 successful wireless sessions a
month in 2007, the service must be considered a success. Most of the more
frequent problems were overcome in the fall of 2007 and it would appear that
its use is increasing – there were 603 successful sessions in October.
Grade A (Very good)
8. Use of Drive-Thru book return
Use was relatively low until the final installation of
external signage in October 2007. By late November, daily average use was 115
items, or approximately 7.5% of total returns. As it is most convenient in
inclement weather, the winter of 2008 should show how useful the public finds
it.
Grade B (Fair)
Feedback has been
overwhelming favorable. People love the building – the space, the light, and
the colorful décor, but some people find it too noisy. We get complaints when
checkin backlogs occur, although by late 2007 these were less serious and much
less frequent than in the first year. Initially, a few people expressed their
dislike of self-checkout and missed the lack of contact with borrower services
staff for routine transactions. Some people also feel a bit lost as they enter
the library – clearly more staff presence or directional aids would help here.
Grade A- (Very
good)
The
building generally works as it is supposed to. The planned adjacencies of the
design work well, as do the environmentally friendly features, such as the
widespread use of wheatboard and the waterless urinals. The raised floors and
underfloor heating and cooling have worked well, though there have been serious
problems with the mechanics of the heating and cooling system. And while the
lighting has been generally good, some areas need more lighting.
Grade B+ (Good
with qualifications)
A fundamental principle of a ‘library of the future’
is an emphasis on popular material. This is certainly true at Greenboro, and
has necessitated a change in approach by Collection Development. Not only is
there an emphasis on popular material, but on its presentation and promotion.
To this end, Greenboro has one main powerwall with 26
bays of mostly face-out display of books, as well as six smaller display units.
These displays attempt to bring to people’s attention a selection of attractive
books on popular themes, thus providing enhanced customer service and
generating high circulation.
The main powerwall and smaller displays have worked
quite well, but it has been an increasing challenge to find enough suitable
material to keep the main powerwall stocked, especially since the exemptions
from requests and shared collections ended in April 2007. Unfortunately, there
is no way of knowing exactly how much circulation the powerwall generates.
Efforts to maximize its potential are ongoing and we hope to be able to extend
face-out display to wider areas of the library – particularly to the adult
fiction and nonfiction collections.
Grade B+ (Good
with qualifications)
Reference questions in the traditional sense may be
declining for obvious reasons, though we cannot confirm any such trend at
Greenboro in its first 18 months. However, the need for help using the library
is ever-present and ongoing.
Greenboro information service staff were to spend a
considerable amount of time roving – seeking customers who need help, while
maintaining an awareness of what is happening in the library.
There is less roving than had been envisaged, but
roving is not always necessary or appropriate. The principle remains a good one
and worth pursuing in the interest of customer service and staff control of the
library, and we have done well to largely remove desk work from information
staff while on duty to leave them free to focus on the public.
The issue of portable phones or headsets – much discussed
before opening – has proved to be moot, as few people call the library with
information questions. The second floor information service point typically
takes only one or two phone calls an hour. On the ground floor, it is generally
similar, though with concentrations of calls at times relating to children’s
programs.
Grade B+ (Good with qualifications)
Greenboro is the first OPL library to have a separate Teen Zone. Planning of the space was done with the assistance of a group of 9 local teens, which formed the nucleus of what has become the Greenboro Teen Advisory Group (TAG).
The teen room itself is a qualified success. It tends
to be heavily used by pre-teens and it would function better if it were an
enclosed room with a glass wall.
The TAG has to be considered a success by OPL
standards. It is composed of boys and girls from a mix of ethnic backgrounds
aged from 12 to 17. They meet once a month for 2 hours on a drop-in basis. In
2007, they have volunteered over 350 hours in constructive activities,
including collection development and assistance with children’s programs.
Grade A (Very good)
Greenboro District Library and the Greenboro Community
Centre jointly own two 750-square foot meeting rooms, which constitute an
important element of the facility. Despite occasional logistical issues over
bookings with the community centre, and problems with heating and cooling, they
have proved very successful as a venue for all kinds of activities, including
library meetings and training sessions.
Grade A (Very good)
The relationship between the library and the community centre has been cooperative and harmonious despite minor issues of miscommunication. Certainly, both institutions have benefited from the proximity of the other and the public enjoys the convenience of the joint facility.
Grade A (Very
good)
The Friends of the Ottawa Public Library at Greenboro
did a wonderful job of setting up their bookstore and, with the café, of
creating that essential element of a library of the future – a place for
customers to obtain coffee and refreshments.
Grade A+ (Excellent)
OVERALL EVALUATION
§
A splendid building, which works
well, despite some failings
§
A well-used facility with a number
of key features of convenience for users
§
A popular collection with a high
turnover rate, but with some challenges maintaining effective merchandising
displays
§
Staff highly rated by the public
§
Good ratings from users, both
formal and informal
§
Need for customer service nearer
the entrance
Overall Grade A-
(Good)
RECOMMENDATIONS IN BRIEF
Greenboro’s
experience suggests that we would do well as a system to pursue the following
to at least the same extent as has been done at Greenboro:
Areas of
focus for new and/or existing facilities on based on Greenboro’s experience:
DISTRICT LIBRARIES: GREENBORO AND NEPEAN CENTREPOINTE
(SUMMARY)
Greenboro
meets most of the criteria of a district library within OPL and functions to a
degree as a resource for OPL itself. However, it does not function as a
district library with respect to the size or depth of its collection. Greenboro’s
closest comparator within OPL, Nepean Centrepointe, has a collection that is
approximately 80% bigger and is not as focused on popular material as
Greenboro’s. It also has a lower turnover rate. However, comparisons may be
misleading; Centrepointe is a large, established library that was built as
Nepean’s central library. Greenboro is smaller and has been designed
differently in many respects, including the collection.
The
demographics are quite different between the two libraries too, though further
study will be needed to show what each branch’s true catchment area is. Based
on the present assumed catchment areas:
§
Greenboro’s population
is 44% larger
§
Greenboro’s population
is significantly younger
§
Greenboro has
approximately 30% more speakers of languages other than English and French, in
proportionally terms
§
Greenboro has over twice
the proportion of French speakers
§
Greenboro has a much
higher proportion of Arabic speakers
§
Centrepointe has a
higher proportion of Chinese speakers
§
After Chinese and
Arabic, the next most significant language groups are Spanish speakers
(Greenboro) and Russian speakers (Centrepointe)
End
of Executive Summary
BACKGROUND
The
Greenboro District Library opened on June 7, 2006, following years of community
pressure for a library to serve the South Keys-Greenboro-Hunt Club area. The
library is a 2-story, 29,000 square foot library attached to the busy Greenboro
Community Centre.
The
designing architect was Gerry Shoalts of Shoalts Zaback Architects Ltd. and the
whole project was a huge collaborative effort with the City of Ottawa, whose
participation was led by Philip Piazza of the Design & Construction
Division of the Real Property & Asset Management branch.
This
report outlines its progress to the end of 2007.
The
library sits in the heart of a residential suburban community that is
economically and ethnically diverse. It was planned as a community library for
the approximately 50,000 people living in an area bounded by the green belt to
the south, the CP tracks to the north, Hawthorn Road to the east, and the
Rideau River to the west. As a district library, it serves approximately
150,000 people over a wider area, which includes the catchment areas of Alta
Vista and Elmvale branches to the north, and Osgoode ward to the south.
The
Greenboro District Library was planned as more than just a district branch to
serve south suburban Ottawa. It was designed to be a ‘library of the future’,
which would lead the way for, and demonstrate, the evolution of library service
at the Ottawa Public Library (OPL).
The
Greenboro District Library shares the facility with the Greenboro Community
Centre. This joint facility is an important feature, offering convenience for
residents and mutual benefits for both operations.
In this
report the Greenboro District Library is often compared to OPL’s Nepean
Centrepointe branch, because this is the most similar library to Greenboro
within OPL. Like Greenboro, it is, by size and definition, a ‘district’ library,
though it has three floors compared to Greenboro’s two, and it is a
long-established library. There are other significant differences, such as the
demographics of the respective catchment areas and the fact that the Greenboro
District Library shares a roof with the Greenboro Community Centre.
Comparisons
between the two libraries also raise the issue of the role of a ‘district
library’ within OPL. A section at the end of this report addresses these issues
in more detail.
Although
a ‘library of the future’ might seem by definition to be somewhat elusive, it
is, at a business case level, one which achieves a high output with relatively
low input (i.e. high efficiency) and takes advantage of available technology.
The high output reflects a desire to be more successful in meeting public
demand for library services than libraries have traditionally been. The low
input recognizes the reality of limited budgets and increasing pressure to give
taxpayers value for money. To an increasing degree, technology provides the
tools to do this by automating traditional processes (e.g. self-checkout) or
offering levels of service not previously available (e.g. wireless Internet).
In more
concrete terms, this translates into a focus on customer service: giving people
what they want rather than what they are believed to need, thus further
democratizing an already fundamentally democratic institution. The public
library shifts its emphasis from being a quasi-academic institution to behaving
more like a retail institution focusing on customer service in terms of popular
materials, convenience, and an attractive and welcoming environment. Staff
efforts are concentrated on helping people do what they cannot do themselves,
so that staff, the most costly element of library service, is focused on adding
value to the public’s use of the library.
Greenboro District Library was planned at Ottawa’s
first ‘library of the future’. In this respect it is a pilot project for new
branches yet to be built, as well as a model for change for OPL’s existing
branches.
Principal
features of the ‘library of the future’ are:
Collections
in a ‘library of the future’ consist primarily of highly popular materials.
During the two-year period before Greenboro opened, $812,000 was spent on new,
popular material, including many multiple copies, to add to Blossom Park’s
approximately 55,000 items. Approximately 45,000 items were acquired and stored
over a period of approximately 18 months to bring Greenboro’s opening day
collection to approximately 100,000 items. This was expected to grow to
approximately 150,000 over the next few years.
Furniture
designed to display popular material face-out in a thematic arrangement
effectively merchandises the collection and generates a higher than normal
level of borrowing. This is done principally through the library’s ‘powerwall’,
which has a total of 26 bays of face-out display by subject or theme. Books are
displayed spine-out on the lower shelf to constantly replenish the face-out
displays as the books on face-out display are borrowed. There are also a number
of other smaller areas with furniture designed for face-out display.
The
emphasis is on customer service, so information service staff ‘roam’ or ‘rove’,
looking for people who need help, rather than waiting for people to come to
them. To this end, we try not to assign tasks, which will distract staff from
public service when they are on duty. Instead, they are expected to roam the
library looking for people to help, watching the powerwalls and the general
collection so that the displays can be constantly refreshed, and also
maintaining an awareness of what is happening on the floor. Cordless phones or
headsets had been discussed as a tool to facilitate customer service while
roaming, but this was not implemented (see page 46-47).
Another
aspect of value-added customer service involves staff being ready and available
to greet people in the entrance area by responding to general and directional
questions. We knew that the design of the entrance area left something be
desired in this respect, and experience has shown this to be an issue that still
needs to be addressed.
The library was designed to
provide an attractive environment that would encourage people to treat it as a
gathering place within the community: high ceilings, big windows and skylights
letting in lots of light, brightly-colored carpeting, the use of light-colored
wood furniture, an absence of clutter, and lots of space. Further to this are
the different parts of the library designed for different uses, such as:
§
The Kids Zone with its
semi-circular program area, multicolored LED lights playing on a stylized roof,
the Flintstone-inspired car, and the puzzles on the wall
§
The Teen Zone, designed with input
from a fledgling teen advisory group
§
The Quiet Room for those who want a
quiet space
§
The Living Room, with its comfortable
seating and fireplace
§
The dividable meeting room that the
library shares with the community centre
The
library was designed as an adaptable space to meet changing needs. Although the
Quiet Room and the computer training room are self-contained rooms, and the
Teen Zone is somewhat separate, most of the public space is open and the floors
are raised by approximately 20”. The openness of the design will make it easier
to add, remove, or reconfigure shelving and furniture, and the raised floors
will greatly facilitate future cabling.
The
library aims to provide value for taxpayers’ money through efficient and
cost-effective operations.
§
Self-checkout was the most
important tool for efficient and cost-effective operations, with three
self-checkout units at the exit and another in the Kids Zone. Based on the
expectation that a large proportion of checkouts would be done by
self-checkout, we planned not to increase the 4.6 FTE complement of Circulation
Assistants that came from Blossom Park, even though we anticipated a much
higher level of circulation, though there was a considerable increase in the
number of Pages and a Senior Circulation Supervisor was added.
§
Another important feature of
planned efficiency were the internal and external pedestrian bookdrops, which
were designed for customers to sort returned material into three broad
categories, thus saving staff time.
§
Greenboro was equipped with 4
self-checkout units and the hope was that a higher percentage of circulation
would be handled this way than at other branches that have self-checkout.
§
Greenboro was the first OPL branch
to offer wireless Internet.
§
There are more computers than can
typically be found in an OPL branch of comparable size.
§
Users use Vendcard to pay for
printing and copying (as at other large branches).
The
library building was designed to meet LEED certification standards (Leadership
in Energy & Environmental Design), though no application for certification
was made for budgetary reasons. As a result, the library incorporates a number
of energy-efficient features, such as:
§
The raised floors in the public
areas, which constitute giant plenums for the heating and cooling system,
moving air gently and quietly with more even distribution than a conventional
system and without the expense and visual clutter of ductwork.
§
The widespread use of wheatboard
for walls, baseboards, cupboards, and doors means no off-gassing of
formaldehyde and, when discarded, wheatboard will safely decompose in a
landfill.
§
Motion sensors control the lighting
in the washrooms.
§
The urinals in the men’s public
washrooms are waterless.
§
Certain windows throughout the
library can be opened, allowing fresh air to compensate for any difficulty the
ventilation system might have in maintaining stable temperatures when there are
large fluctuations in the outside temperature.
This
report will attempt to measure the success of the Greenboro District Library to
the end of 2007. It is not possible to measure exactly the success of each of
the aspects of the ‘library of the future’, but certain obvious statistical
measures are available. Those elements for which quantifiable measures are
available will be considered first, followed by analysis based on observation
and experience for those elements less easily quantified.
1A Circulation Statistics
This is probably the most used measure of the success
of a library. It is a general measure of the popularity of the material offered
to the public, but it is difficult to estimate to what degree high circulation
reflects the success of merchandising or the degree to which staff effectively
connect people with books and other material. The circulation level may also be
affected by other variables, such as the size of the collection, policies
relating to reserving material, and the distribution of collections between
branches.
In this respect, it is important to understand that,
during its first year, there was a planned exemption for Greenboro from
requests placed by borrowers on its material in order to try to ensure that
Greenboro’s shelves contained a rich selection of material for browsers. This
followed the example of many other public libraries in North America with
respect to new branches.
For the same reason, Greenboro was to be exempt from
‘shared collections’ for its first year. A ‘shared collection’ (also known as
‘floating collection’ in some library systems) is a category of material (e.g.
mysteries) where material returned to a branch is shelved at that branch as
opposed to its being returned to an ‘owning’ branch.
Greenboro’s exemption from requests and ‘shared
collections’ ended in April 2007 and appear to have had a significant effect on
Greenboro’s circulation.
1B Turnover Rates
Circulation can be measured by more than absolute
numbers. The turnover rate of the collection, and particular collections within
the total collection, is probably a better measure of the collection’s appeal.
Turnover is usually expressed as an annual rate, which is calculated by
dividing annual circulation by a library’s holdings. A turnover rate of 4 is
considered good.
1C Greenboro Circulation as Ratio of OPL Circulation
Circulation can also be measured in terms of
Greenboro’s circulation in relation to total OPL circulation and the proportion
of the total population served by Greenboro.
The number of people entering the library can, over time, be considered a measure of its success.
3. Self-Checkout
Greenboro was to rely heavily on self-checkout to support a high volume of business without adding to the complement of circulation staff. The proportion of total circulation handled through self-checkout will be the measure.
4. Programs Offered and Program Attendance
The number and type of library programs offered is subject to many variables, and Greenboro in its first year was still experimenting with programs to some degree, but a brief comparative review and analysis of programs and attendance will indicate the degree of success of programs and provide some context for the numbers.
Not everyone who has a library card uses it, but over time the number of cards issued can be considered a measure of its success.
Provision of sufficient and appropriate seating is a critical element of library service. Much of this seating today relates to computer use. Greenboro has more computers for its size than any other OPL library. The amount of use made of them will indicate whether there are enough.
7. Wireless
Internet Use
Greenboro was the first OPL library to offer wireless service. The amount of use of the service indicates its usefulness to customers.
8. Use of the
Drive-Thru Book Return
The inclusion of a drive-thru book return at Greenboro was considered an important element of convenience for customers. Its use will indicate how important a feature it is.
For some
of the above measures, comparisons will be made between Greenboro and Nepean
Centrepointe, as it was effectively planned as a district library, being
Nepean’s central library. It must be recognized, however, that, as Nepean’s
central library, its role was greater than a suburban district library in the
new OPL, and insofar as it is approximately 25% bigger than Greenboro and an
established library that has built its services over many years, comparisons
should be made carefully.
Qualitative Measures
A. Written
and verbal feedback from the public
A library, which claims to respond
to what people want, must pay attention to what its users say.
The degree to which the building does what it was intended to do is an important measure of the success of the operations, which it houses.
The principle of merchandising – long used by the retail sector – has now become important in public libraries in order to provide convenience for people looking for material that will interest them, and consequently generating high circulation of the material. Ultimately, high circulation indicates that the library is giving people good value for their money.
D. Information
service and roving reference
The traditional model of library
service had information staff sitting at a desk, waiting to help customers find
material and information. However, the staff was often given other work to do
in case they were not busy answering questions, so that customers, seeing that
staff was busy, sometimes hesitated to ask questions. In a ‘library of the
future’ staff are supposed to be proactive in seeking to meet customers’ needs
– and therefore on their feet greeting people and making their services
available to all who might need them rather than focused on other work at their
desk. We have attempted to do this at Greenboro.
E. Teen
Services
Teens are often considered hard
to reach in public libraries. Greenboro was the first OPL library to have its
own Teen Zone and a teen services librarian in an attempt to overcome this
difficulty.
F. Meeting
rooms
The facility was planned with
two 750 square foot meeting rooms for use by the library, the community centre,
and the general public. The rooms can be used separately or as one and can even
be opened up to the central corridor or ‘link’.
In selecting the site for the
new library, co-location with the Greenboro Community Centre was considered a
major asset, so the success of the library should be judged, in some measure,
on how well this has worked.
H.
‘By The Book’ – the Greenboro Friends’ used book store
and café
A modern library of any size is expected to
have a place where users can obtain refreshments in the form of coffee, soft
drinks, and snacks. The Friends of the Library have done an excellent job of
providing this service.
EVALUATION: QUANTITATIVE MEASURES
Blossom
Park branch had been closed for 7 weeks when Greenboro opened on June 6, 2006,
so there was considerable pent up demand for material. Considering also that
the opening day collection included approximately 45,000 brand new items housed
in an exciting new library and it is not surprising that circulation took off
very well, reaching almost 64,000 in July (15% more than Nepean Centrepointe)
and remained higher than Nepean Centrepointe’s through January 2007, though by
then the difference was just under 3%. In February 2007, Centrepointe’s
circulation was almost 4% higher than Greenboro’s and this marked the beginning
of a trend that would grow. By July, Centrepointe’s circulation was 35% higher
than Greenboro’s.
As
mentioned above, the decline in circulation coincided with the end of the
exemptions from requests and shared collections that Greenboro enjoyed during
its first 10 months. More will be said about this in the analysis and conclusions
below.
Circulation:
Charts & Analysis
This
chart shows impressive circulation at Greenboro when the library first opened.
It is probably not surprising that it leveled off after four months and was
running at about the same level as Centrepointe’s, showing the same monthly
trends as circulation at both Centrepointe and Main. This continued until April
2007, but as of May Greenboro’s circulation declined compared to
Centrepointe’s.
By
the end of April, Greenboro’s exemptions from requests and shared collections
had ended. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the decline in Greenboro’s
circulation was very much linked to the end of the exemptions. (Centrepointe’s
circulation in July, August, and September was atypically high due to the
closure of Carlingwood.)
The
chart above shows that, while Greenboro’s circulation was in decline as of May
2007, the same cannot be said of total circulation at OPL, except for a slight
initial decline, suggesting that the circulation that was lost at Greenboro was
picked up at other locations. This tends to confirm the link between
Greenboro’s decline and the end of the exemptions from requests and shared
collections.
The
chart above shows more clearly how Greenboro’s circulation, as a percentage of
total OPL circulation, declined after April 2007, when the exemptions from
requests and shared collections ended, dropping from about 9% in 2006 to about
7% by the fall of 2007.
Circulation
of the various components of Greenboro’s collection will be examined below. In
each case, the numbers used include
renewals.
The sharp
decline of DVD circulation at Greenboro in May and June of 2007 can clearly be
seen in the above chart. Most affected are adult English DVDs, which account
for a large proportion of total DVD circulation.
Although
English juvenile DVDs experienced a decline similar to adult English DVDs,
circulation of French juvenile DVDs picked up slightly (lower line), though
again the numbers are much lower.
This chart shows the
steep decline in the circulation of adult music CDs in April, May, and June
2007. In fact, the decline continued until September, though there has been no
comparable decline in the circulation of juvenile music CDs.
At Greenboro, romance,
mystery, and general fiction have the highest circulation among mass market
paperbacks, as reflected by the three upper lines in the chart above. Fantasy,
science fiction, westerns, and horror all have relatively low circulation. The
chart above shows that, despite a slight decline in circulation of romance and
mystery following the end of the exemptions, there was no decline in other
genres and circulation of the more popular genres rose in the summer of 2007.
September saw the usual end-of-summer decline, followed by a modest recovery in
October.
This chart shows mysteries as accounting for about half of
hardcover fiction circulation at Greenboro. It is interesting that mysteries
showed two months of decline in circulation following the end of the exemptions
in April, whereas general circulation of hardcover fiction shows four months of
increasing circulation. Circulation of science fiction is negligible.
As
hardcover editions are rare in French fiction, all formats of French fiction
are shelved together. Despite a slight dip in circulation in May, the trend
from February through July 2007 was one of increasing circulation, though there
was a decline in the August – October period.
There has
been a sharp downward trend in the circulation of adult non-fiction since March
2007, probably as a result of the end of Greenboro’s exemption from requests.
While
there was a general decline in circulation of juvenile print material in the
spring of 2007, there was a general increase in the early summer, so it is
difficult to draw firm conclusions. There is generally not a high level of
requests placed on this material and none of these categories are shared
material, so the end of the exemptions probably had little effect on
circulation. Still, for the highest circulating categories (picture books,
paperbacks, and non-fiction), there seems to be a downward trend.
No clear
downward trend is evident for juvenile French print material. Circulation seems
to be holding its own and even increasing, though the numbers are much lower
than for juvenile English print material.
Juvenile
English non-fiction circulation is clearly more volatile than juvenile French
non-fiction and seems to be in a downward trend since April, whereas juvenile
French non-fiction is holding steady. Juvenile non-fiction is not heavily
requested and neither is it a shared collection, so it seems unlikely that any
decline is related to the end of the exemptions.
Chinese
books are a shared collection, though Arabic books are not. The end of the
exemptions would not appear to have caused a significant decline in the circulation
of books in either language. In late summer of 2007 there seems to have been a
general decline in circulation, most notably of adult books in both Chinese and
Arabic. Circulation of Chinese books has been generally steady in 2007, whereas
there has been a clear downward trend in the circulation of Arabic books.
Greenboro Circulation July-Oct 2006
compared to July-October 2007
The table
below shows those material types that have shown the most significant changes
in circulation between July-October 2006 and July-October 2007.
Collection |
Shared |
% Increase (rounded) |
Approx. size of increase |
% Decline (rounded) |
Approx. size of decline |
Adult English DVDs |
Y |
|
|
62% |
7,700 |
Adult music CDs |
Y |
|
|
51% |
3,500 |
Juv Eng DVDs |
Y |
|
|
50% |
1,750 |
YA Eng Graphic novels |
N |
|
|
43% |
1,000 |
Eng. Paperbacks |
Y |
|
|
23% |
700 |
Adult Eng Non-fiction |
N |
|
|
8% |
500 |
Juv Eng paperbacks |
Y |
|
|
18% |
500 |
Juv Eng picture books |
N |
|
|
18% |
500 |
Adult Eng Mysteries |
Y |
|
|
20% |
300 |
Juv Eng Non-fic |
N |
|
|
10% |
250 |
Adult Arabic |
N |
|
|
25% |
175 |
Adult Eng CDs |
Y |
|
|
10% |
100 |
Adult Eng fiction |
N |
|
|
3% |
100 |
Juv Fr picture books |
N |
32% |
250 |
|
|
Adult Eng fiction (excl.
Mysteries) |
N |
6% |
200 |
|
|
Adult Chinese |
Y |
23% |
200 |
|
|
Adult Fr DVDs |
Y |
54% |
175 |
|
|
Juv Fr DVDs |
Y |
92% |
100 |
|
|
Juv Eng Fic |
N |
10% |
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total approx. increase/decline
for material types shown above |
|
|
1,000 |
|
17,075 |
Actual average monthly decline
(all material types, incl. those not shown above) |
16,077 |
As
can be seen in the table above, total circulation of 13 categories of material
declined by an average of approximately 17,000 items per month from 2006 to
2007 in the three-month period July-October. 85% of these this was in shared
collections, though, as previously mentioned, the opening of Greenboro’s collection
to requests in April 2007 was probably the main cause of the decline. The
decline was offset by an increase of approximately 1,000 items per month spread
over 6 categories of material in the same period.
Total Greenboro Circulation
August—October 2006 and 2007 compared |
|||
|
2006 |
2007 |
Change |
September |
58,484 |
42,504 |
-27.3% |
October |
56,487 |
45,075 |
-20.2% |
November |
56,100 |
41,500 |
-26.0% |
Total |
171,071 |
129,079 |
-24.6% |
§
Pent-up Demand
An atypical initial surge in circulation on the opening of Greenboro was to be expected with Blossom Park having been closed for 7 weeks.
§
Collection Building for
Opening Day
The opening day collection was considerably enriched with the expenditure of $812,000 on materials during the two years before Greenboro opened. This created a highly attractive collection with a large amount of new and recent material and many multiple copies. However, there were no special funds in 2007, so the collection gradually lost some of its luster.
§
Exemptions from Requests and
Shared Collections
Greenboro’s collection was to be exempt from requests and from sharing ‘shared’ material for one year from the date of opening in order to try to ensure a supply of attractive material on Greenboro’s shelves.
However, the rationale for the exemptions proved
difficult to communicate and did not receive widespread support. The exemptions
caused extra work for Virtual Library Services; customers were sometimes
misinformed; and it became obvious that some people saw Greenboro as unfairly
privileged. Largely because of these difficulties, the exemptions ended earlier
than planned.
§
End of Exemption from
Requests and Shared Collections
Exemptions for certain materials were ended in mid-April
2007 and by early May all exemptions from requests and shared collections had
been removed. From February through April, Greenboro’s circulation had been
just 3-4% below that of Centrepointe, but in May it was 21% lower, in June 25%
lower, and in July 35% lower. (Comparisons for August and September are less
valid, as Centrepointe picked up a great deal of business from Carlingwood’s
temporary closure).
Approximately 85% of this decline occurred in shared
collections, but it is not clear that shared collections were primarily
responsible for the decline. It more likely resulted from the items simply
becoming requestable, as the exemptions from shared collections and from
requests ended simultaneously. Given the high popularity of DVDs and music CDs,
it is probably likely that Greenboro’s shelves now hold fewer of these simply
because they are meeting requests across OPL, rather than because Greenboro
borrowers are returning material elsewhere.
While the change in circulation levels for non-shared collections
has been much less dramatic than for shared collections, there have been
significant declines in the circulation of some non-shared collections, such as
teen English graphic novels, adult nonfiction, and juvenile English picture
books. It therefore seems logical to attribute the decline in Greenboro’s
circulation to the opening of its collection to requests in April 2007
Although
the pent-up demand explains part of the initial surge, and the large investment
in Greenboro’s opening day collection inevitably generated a demand that would
probably not be sustained by the operating budget, it seems clearly to have
been the end of the exemptions from requests and, probably to a lesser degree,
from shared collections, that caused a decline in circulation which began in
May 2007.
Although
the material types that account for most of the decline in circulation belong
to shared collections, the end of the exemption from requests probably played a
larger role in the decline than the end of the exemption from shared
collections. For DVDs, the underlying factor is probably the limited amount of
material available in relation to demand, the result being that items are tied
up in request lists and are rarely on display in any of our libraries for
on-the-spot browsers.
There are
some material types where circulation has increased from July-October 2006 to
July-October 2007, and almost half of this increase is accounted for by
circulation of shared collections (Chinese material and French DVDs), but the
increases are modest compared to the declines referred to above.
Circulation
of adult nonfiction, which is the mainstay of the powerwall, declined by 8%
between July-October 2006 and July-October 2007. As this is not a shared
collection, it seems likely that this decline was the result of the whole
collection’s becoming requestable in April 2007 and the fact that the 2007
materials budget didn’t provide new material on scale of the expenditure that
created the opening day collection.
1.
Non-Requestability
In order to create
attractive collections for on-the-spot browsers, perhaps we should consider a
modest degree of non-requestability for critical browsing collections,
including powerwall material – and not just at Greenboro. This has been
attempted with the recent expansion of the Express collections, but remains
limited. I would not advocate special item types, which would impose an
unwieldy burden and severely compromise the flexibility needed to add to and
subtract from powerwalls, but surely there is scope for exploration of this
issue.
2.
Shared Collections
It is unclear to what extent shared collections
contributed to the decline in circulation experienced when the Greenboro
exemptions ended (as opposed to the end of the exemption from requests), but
this may have contributed to the decline. I propose conducting a pilot project
to remove one of the existing shared collections from shared collections in
order to evaluate the effect of this on on-the-shelf collections and
circulation at individual branches.
One of the reasons for the adoption of shared
collections was the ever-increasing burden of returns on materials delivery of
material returned to owning branches, but there has been a steady year-by-year
increase in the volume of inter-branch shipments since amalgamation and our
counting week statistics do not differentiate between one gray box and another,
so that no conclusive data exists on the effect of shared collections on
shipping volume. More study would therefore be needed to determine the net
effects of shared collections on shipping volumes.
Redistribution mechanisms have been put in place to
try to overcome unbalanced collections resulting from shared collections.
However, redistribution itself can be time-consuming and requires inter-branch
shipments. It would be interesting and useful to see a detailed evaluation and
analysis of shared collections at OPL. Certainly, it is a growing trend among
public libraries and has many strong proponents, but Richmond (B.C.) Public
Library, whose example we have been trying to follow in many respects, prefers
to return material to the owning branch.
3.
Acquisition of Powerwall
Material
One of the most innovative features at Greenboro is
the powerwall. In the months after Greenboro’s opening, there was a good
selection of material on the powerwall and we know that this helped generate
circulation, though we don’t know exactly how much. With the passing of time
and the end of the exemptions from requests and shared collections, staff have
found it difficult to maintain attractive powerwall collections, though an
increasing amount of creative effort has gone into this and displays are
changed frequently.
I am satisfied that Collection Development buys
generally popular material for Greenboro, but perhaps we should increase the
acquisitions of popular material in the broad powerwall categories in order to
increase the effectiveness of the powerwall and to generate more circulation.
A bolder step would be to significantly increase the
proportion of popular material in acquisitions for all branches, which appears
to have been the key to success for Richmond (B.C.) Public Library. Whether for
Greenboro alone or for OPL as a system, this would require consideration of a
number of questions, such as:
a) At what
point would we be failing to provide a collection of sufficient depth for a
district library?
b) How
effective would this be if the material was requestable and therefore never
appeared on the powerwall?
c) Could
Collection Development tailor purchases so that the material was popular enough
to generate large circulation but not end up on request lists?
Despite the decline in the
volume of Greenboro’s circulation, an examination of turnover rates puts the
matter in a different light. Collection turnover rates are a revealing
indicator of a library’s success in terms of the degree to which it meets its
most essential mandate – that of providing the a collection that people want to
borrow. Turnover rates take into account not only the level of circulation, but
the size of the collection that generates that circulation. The collection
turnover rate is the average number of times the stock of material is borrowed
in a year.
When one
examines Greenboro’s turnover rates, an encouraging picture emerges. To start
with, Centrepointe has been used as a comparator in this report because
Greenboro was purpose-built to play a similar role – that of a district
library. However, not only is Centrepointe bigger and more established, but it
has a collection that is almost 80% larger than Greenboro’s, and Greenboro’s
collection actually shrank by 3% from the end of 2006 to the end of 2007 (from
107,958 to 104,757).
According
to Collection Development data, Greenboro’s overall turnover rate was 8.0 in
2006, based on prorated circulation for the year as a whole, compared to 4.0
for OPL as a whole. In 2007, the OPL rate increased to 4.4, while Greenboro’s
rate fell to 7.0. While this decline in turnover reflects the decline in
circulation that has been described above, 7.0 still represents a respectable
rate that is significantly higher than the rate for OPL as a whole.
Looking
at this in a little more detail, the table below shows Greenboro holdings at
the end of 2006 and 2007, the respective turnover rates for the two years, and
the corresponding 2007 turnover rates for OPL as a whole. It covers material
types that have high turnover rates or which are important in themselves.
SELECTED GREENBORO TURNOVER RATES
Ranked from highest to lowest for major material types
Material Type |
Holdings 12/31/06 |
Holdings 12/31/07 |
2006 GB turnover |
2007 GB turnover |
2007 OPL turnover |
Adult Eng DVDs |
4,805 |
2,572 |
32.1 |
36.5 |
25.5 |
Express collection |
199 |
252 |
32.4 |
30.7 |
25.7 |
Juv Eng DVDs |
1,678 |
844 |
26.7 |
33.8 |
20.1 |
Teen Eng graphic novels |
1,017 |
1,004 |
25.8 |
15.8 |
11.6 |
Adult French DVDs |
206 |
349 |
21.9 |
17.7 |
21.3 |
Juv French DVDs |
86 |
142 |
18.5 |
19.3 |
18.4 |
Adult Eng books on CD |
1,848 |
756 |
7.0 |
16.7 |
10.5 |
Juv Eng graphic novels |
233 |
348 |
15.4 |
13.5 |
9.8 |
Juv French board books |
310 |
431 |
15.2 |
11.8 |
8.1 |
Adult music CDs |
6,598 |
4,490 |
12.9 |
12.3 |
12.8 |
Juv Eng easy readers |
1,590 |
1,745 |
13.0 |
11.5 |
7.3 |
Juv Eng picture books |
3,818 |
4,053 |
13.1 |
11.4 |
6.3 |
Juv Eng board books |
835 |
830 |
13.3 |
11.0 |
9.3 |
Juv French easy readers |
677 |
919 |
13.0 |
11.1 |
7.5 |
Juv music CDs |
833 |
859 |
9.2 |
8.1 |
7.3 |
Teen Eng
magazines |
57 |
81 |
10.1 |
7.0 |
4.2 |
Juv French bandes dessinées |
278 |
271 |
9.7 |
7.6 |
4.8 |
Teen Eng fiction |
724 |
842 |
8.4 |
7.3 |
5.4 |
Juv Eng paperbacks |
4,694 |
4,705 |
8.4 |
7.2 |
5.2 |
Juv French picture books |
1,611 |
1,798 |
6.8 |
7.7 |
4.2 |
Adult Chinese print |
1,395 |
2,110 |
7.8 |
6.1 |
6.6 |
Teen French magazines |
12 |
11 |
8.7 |
3.9 |
1.4 |
Teen Eng paperbacks |
1,506 |
1,233 |
6.4 |
5.8 |
4.1 |
Adult Arabic print |
1,234 |
1,408 |
6.9 |
5.0 |
2.1 |
Juv French CDs |
35 |
42 |
5.3 |
5.9 |
3.2 |
Juv Eng fiction |
2,124 |
2,251 |
5.6 |
5.4 |
3.6 |
Juv Eng CDs |
540 |
427 |
5.3 |
4.9 |
6 |
Adult Eng nonfiction |
18,931 |
20,037 |
5.0 |
4.8 |
3.2 |
Adult Eng fiction |
6,901 |
7,188 |
4.7 |
4.8 |
3.8 |
Adult Eng paperbacks |
9,969 |
8,159 |
4.5 |
4.8 |
5.3 |
Juv French fiction |
449 |
427 |
4.2 |
3.8 |
2.2 |
Juv French paperbacks |
1,695 |
2,107 |
4.2 |
3.8 |
2.8 |
Adult Eng large print |
1,637 |
1,487 |
3.6 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
Juv Arabic print |
520 |
534 |
4.0 |
2.8 |
2.5 |
Juv Chinese print |
577 |
926 |
3.2 |
2.3 |
4.4 |
Juv French nonfiction |
2,630 |
2,663 |
2.3 |
2.3 |
1.5 |
Adult French fiction |
1,584 |
1,484 |
1.5 |
1.6 |
1.9 |
Greenboro total |
107,958 |
104,757 |
8.0 |
7.0 |
4.4 |
Greenboro had turnover
rates of over 10 for the following types of material in 2007:
Material Type |
Greenboro turnover 2007 |
OPL turnover 2007 |
Greenboro turnover compared to total OPL |
Adult English DVDs |
36.5 |
25.5 |
+43% |
Express collection |
30.7 |
25.7 |
+19% |
Juv English DVDs |
33.8 |
20.1 |
+68% |
Juv French DVDs |
19.3 |
18.4 |
+5% |
Adult French DVDs |
17.7 |
21.3 |
-17% |
Adult English books on CD |
16.7 |
10.5 |
+59% |
Teen English graphic novels |
15.8 |
11.6 |
+36% |
Juv English graphic novels |
13.5 |
9.8 |
+38% |
Adult music CDs |
12.3 |
12.8 |
-4% |
Juv French board books |
11.8 |
8.1 |
+46% |
Juv English easy readers |
11.5 |
7.3 |
+57% |
Juv English picture books |
11.4 |
6.3 |
+81% |
Juv French easy readers |
11.1 |
7.5 |
+48% |
Juv English board books |
11 |
9.3 |
+18% |
Not all
of these material types are very large in terms of numbers, so let’s look at
the larger collections – all those over 2,000:
Material type |
Collection at 12/31/07 |
Greenboro turnover 2007 |
OPL turnover 2007 |
Greenboro turnover compared to total OPL |
Adult English nonfiction |
20,037 |
4.8 |
3.2 |
+50% |
Juv English nonfiction |
9,112 |
3.9 |
2.6 |
+50% |
Adult English paperbacks |
8,159 |
4.8 |
5.3 |
-10% |
Adult English fiction |
7,188 |
4.8 |
3.8 |
+26% |
Juv English paperbacks |
4,705 |
7.2 |
5.2 |
+38% |
Adult music CDs |
4,590 |
12.2 |
12.7 |
-4% |
Juv English picture books |
4,035 |
11.4 |
6.3 |
+81% |
Adult English mysteries |
3,436 |
4.7 |
5.3 |
-11% |
Juv French nonfiction |
2,663 |
2.3 |
1.5 |
+53% |
Adult English DVDs |
2,572 |
36.5 |
25.5 |
+43% |
Juv English fiction |
2,251 |
5.4 |
3.6 |
+50% |
Adult Chinese print |
2,110 |
6.1 |
6.6 |
-8% |
Juv French paperbacks |
2,107 |
3.8 |
2.8 |
+36% |
From this
table, it can be seen that of the 13 material types with collections of over
2,000 at the end of 2007, nine have significantly higher turnover rates than
the OPL total. These nine range from 26% to 50% higher than the OPL total
turnover rate for the respective material types. The four material types with
turnover rates below the total OPL rate for the respective material type range
between 4% and 11% below the OPL totals.
Conclusions
The
decline in Greenboro’s circulation in 2007 was neither surprising nor
unexpected, but it should not obscure the clear success of Greenboro’s
collection as evidenced by its turnover rates. The overall turnover rate of
Greenboro’s collection is significantly higher than the rate for OPL as a
whole, and 9 of the 13 most important material types accounting for
approximately two thirds of Greenboro’s collection have turnover rates that are
between 26% and 50% above the respective rates for OPL as a whole.
Greenboro 2007 circulation
|
572,131
|
Total OPL 2007 circulation
|
7,643,420
|
Greenboro’s share of 2007 circulation
|
7.5%
|
Total Ottawa population at end 2007
|
888,882
|
Greenboro District Library’s community population
|
50,000 = 5.6% of total
|
Greenboro District Library’s district population
|
150,000 = 16.9% of total
|
Based on
the above numbers, one could conclude that Greenboro District Library is
fulfilling its role as a community library for a population of 50,000, based on
current OPL standards, as it exceeds the circulation one would expect for such
a community by approximately one third.
Numbers
are counted by the security gates and divided by two, as each person is counted
as they go in and out. Almost one thousand people a day enter the library on
average. Unfortunately, there have been some problems recovering and
interpreting the data, especially in 2006, but these have been overcome and
numbers are now recorded on a daily basis.
Not
surprisingly, the numbers were very high in the early months the library was
open, averaging 1,169 per day. By November 2006, the number dropped slightly
below 1,000 per day and since then it has generally been between 950 and 1,000,
rising somewhat over 1,000 in June and July of 2007.
It should
be noted that when the library is not open Sundays in the summer, the daily
average tends to be slightly higher because the Sunday opening is only for 4
hours, giving a somewhat lower daily number than usual, though high on an
hour-for-hour basis. The average Sunday count for September-November 2007 was
638, though on Sunday, October 7, 2007 the count hit 850.
If
one assumes that things had settled down since opening by September 2006, it is
interesting to compare the busy September – November period for the two years,
which is shown in the chart below. Though there is a decline of 6 to 8% in
September and October, that decline had shrunk to 1.7% by November.
Greenboro daily average headcount by month Sep-Nov 2006 vs. Sep-Nov 2007 |
|||
|
2006 |
2007 |
Change |
September |
1,058 |
976 |
-7.8% |
October |
1,014 |
951 |
-6.2% |
November |
957 |
941 |
-1.7% |
Total |
3,029 |
2,868 |
-5.3% |
Conclusions
The
headcount has declined from 2006 to 2007, but by less than the decline in
circulation. With a daily headcount of almost 1,000 people per day, Greenboro
can certainly be considered successful.
Although
Nepean Centrepointe and Main have had self-checkout for some time, in both
cases it was added to a library where customers were used to having staff check
out their material, which has militated against its use. At Greenboro, however,
the hope was that, as a brand new library where there had been no library, the
rate of use of self-checkout would be significantly higher.
Happily,
we can certainly say that this has proven to be the case. In the very first
month Greenboro was open, 72.2% of first-time checkouts were done through
self-checkout, a level not achieved by any other branch except Greenboro before
or since. As can be seen in the table below, Greenboro averaged 78.92% for the
balance of 2006 and 84.82% for the first ten months of 2007, both averages
significantly in excess of those achieved in other branches.
Percentage of first time
self-checkouts as percentage of total circulation
|
||
Branch |
2006 |
2007 |
Greenboro |
78.92% |
84.82% |
Centrepointe |
56.05% |
62.78% |
Dickinson |
56.46% |
61.87% |
Main |
57.52% |
59.63% (some data missing) |
Conclusions
While
approximately 85% is probably not the best that we can do, it is certainly the
best OPL has done and it has been done with little resistance. A few customers
complained about this “cold and impersonal” service (or lack of service), but
most took to it happily. It is important to note that the success of
self-checkout at Greenboro has allowed us retain the same 4.6 FTE complement of
Circulation Assistants as there was at Blossom Park, where the average monthly
circulation was approximately 16,000, compared to approximately 50,000 per
month at Greenboro.
A
‘library of the future’ should be very much a ‘people place’, so we would
expect to see a great deal of program activity. However, in the early months,
Greenboro did not attempt to offer many programs, as there was too much else to
do, though of course there were children’s programs in the
Fall of
2006. In looking at program attendance, Nepean Centrepointe is used here as a
comparator, as it is the only other OPL library truly functioning as a district
library.
Adult Programs
After
some trial and error, we have decided to focus on certain kinds of program that
we have seen to be successful. Programs that typically work well for seniors at
some branches have not done well at Greenboro. Many that do work are
computer-related, as befits a ‘library of the future’, such as Internet
Basics, Beyond Basic Searching, Introduction to Web-Based Email, Top Ten Things
on OPL’s Website, and Using the OPL Catalogue. The Adult Book Club
meets monthly, and craft workshops have worked quite well. An English as a
Second Language (ESL) chat group meets monthly, organized by our settlement
worker, and we have partnered with Toastmasters to do an introductory program.
Although
the attendance numbers don’t compare to those of Centrepointe, we feel that we
are using our resources efficiently in terms of adult programming. It should
also be pointed out that we share the facility with the Greenboro Community
Centre, where many well-established programs are offered, though these are
mostly fitness-related based on their experience of what works.
Teen Programs
The
activities of the Greenboro Teen Advisory Group (TAG) are listed in the section
on teen services (see section E below). Although attendance is low compared to
younger children’s programs, a comparison with Centrepointe suggests that
Greenboro is doing relatively well with this underserved group. While there is
surely room for improvement, teen programs at Greenboro are an example of a
little going a long way, as the teen services librarian works only half-time
specifically for Greenboro, and spends a significant amount of that time
providing information service.
Children’s Programs
One only
has to be in the library at Greenboro when one of the many children’s programs
is taking place to be impressed with the enthusiasm and energy that staff put
into the programs! Although Greenboro’s attendance numbers are lower than
Centrepointe’s, it takes some time to build up community participation in
programs, both from parents and schools, and Greenboro’s children’s programming
is still very much a work in progress. Children’s staff are still finding out
what works and what does not work in terms of programs and their timing, and
are looking for opportunities to consolidate programs where attendance declines
after the first sessions, as happens in many libraries.
Greenboro
preschool programs have been quite successful. To better serve school-age
children, Greenboro staff have been trying hard to attract school visits, but
with the exception of one local school, this has proved difficult. In some
cases there has been lack of interest on the part of schools, in others limited
budgets for bussing have been cited.
There are
some important differences between Centrepointe and Greenboro. Whereas
Centrepointe has a self-contained children’s library, Greenboro’s children’s
library shares the first floor with adult AV and the main powerwall, and the
first floor information service point serves both as a children’s service point
and a general adult service point, often directing people to the second floor
information service point. And although children’s staff usually staff the
first floor service point, they also sometimes staff the second floor service
point, and vice-versa. This makes for flexibility in staffing and provides
variety for staff and may be considered appropriate for a suburban district
library where most customers are not looking for highly specialized services.
However, covering both service points means that two of the children’s staff
often work two evenings a week, which precludes their availability for daytime
work and programming.
Yet
another factor that affects children’s programming at Greenboro is the presence
of the Community Centre and the wide range of programs they offer for all ages.
There is some crossover here and it works both ways, but the community centre’s
programs are highly successful.
All
things considered, the Greenboro’s children’s program attendance numbers are
encouraging and can be expected to increase as children’s staff fine-tunes the
programming to try to provide the greatest benefit for the greatest numbers.
In the
first three weeks Greenboro was open, 1006 new library cards were issued, and
an average of 476 per month for all of 2006. Not surprisingly, this average has
fallen to 224 per month for the first eleven months of 2007. For comparison,
the average number of cards issued per month during this period at Centrepointe
was 285. As of the end of November 2007, there were 15,205 valid library cards issued
from Greenboro and 16,925 issued from Centrepointe.
Interestingly,
the month-to-month trend, since early 2007, is very much the same for Greenboro
as for Centrepointe.
Greenboro’s
most appropriate comparator as a district library is Nepean Centrepointe,
though Centrepointe is about 20% larger than Greenboro. Seen in this light,
Greenboro’s non-computer public seating is generally reasonable in comparison
with Centrepointe’s.
NON-COMPUTER SEATING |
Greenboro |
Centrepointe |
Children’s
area
|
16 |
27 |
Teen area |
13 |
2 |
Adult |
82 |
108 |
Total |
111 |
137 |
Greenboro’s
teen area is much better appointed than Centrepointe’s but this is not
surprising, as it has a specially designed teen room. In the children’s area,
however, Greenboro falls short of what is required. It has become clear that
some children wish to use the children’s library to work, and not always with
computers. Other than the lounge chairs and computer seating, there are only
two small tables, each with three chairs. These are often occupied by parents
accompanying children, leaving children looking for a place to work with few
choices on this floor. This may also be one of the reasons why there are
generally more children using the second floor than had been expected. To
address this issue, two catalog computers in the children’s area were converted
to Internet computers in mid-2007. Further reconfiguration of computers may be
necessary as well as the addition of several small tables.
The adult
area is generally well provided with seating. There are usually (though not
always) empty carrels in the quiet room, but the room is consistently used and
provides an important refuge for those that need it. The ‘Living Room’ could
probably use more comfortable seating and fewer tables, but we are monitoring
the situation and may try to relocate a table at some point. The study tables
by the windows on the east and north sides of the building are heavily used and
provide a pleasant environment for groups to study.
With a
total of 51 Internet computers, Greenboro is extremely well provided with
public computers by OPL standards. Centrepointe has a total of only 23 and even
Main only has a total of 52.
Even with
so many computers and wireless service, on weekends and busy evenings people
wait to use library computers, though on weekdays people can walk in and find
computers free until mid-afternoon.
Approximately 55% of available bookings are used.
The chart indicates that this is fairly consistent.
Since the
fall of 2006, approximately 34.5% of total available time is used. The average
length of use per session is approximately 30 minutes for sit-down computers
and approximately 8.5 minutes for express computers.
Clearly,
Greenboro has enough computers, as customers can generally walk in and use a
computer without having booked one most weekdays until about 4:00 P.M. However,
at busier times, such as evenings and weekends, all computers are often busy,
suggesting that the total number is probably appropriate. Wireless Internet
eases the pressure of demand when all wired computers are busy.
Wireless
Internet was available from opening day at Greenboro. It was considered an
important element of convenience for the public and also reflects the Library’s
desire to use technology to enhance public service. It also provides the
benefit, when all the wired computers are in use, of allowing others to use
online services in the library.
For
perhaps the first year, many users had technical problems availing themselves
of the service, but with the help of Virtual Library Services and City IT, most
of these issues seem to have been overcome and by the fall of 2007 it was
working well for most people.
In 2007,
there were on average 360 successful wireless sessions per month, though in
October there were 603 sessions, which reflects encouraging use of the service
and growth.
The chart
below shows the number of sessions per month for the period November 2006 –
October 2007:
As can be
seen, despite a few months where usage dropped, the trend shows increasing use,
especially in the fall of 2007, by which time many of the problems we had had
with the service seemed to have been ironed out.
In
addition to the external and internal pedestrian return slots near the entrance
to the library, there is a single drive-thru return slot under a large canopy
at the north end. This was designed as a convenience for people who simply want
to return material without finding a parking space and exposing themselves to
the elements. We therefore expected that the drive-thru return would be most
used in inclement weather. Because of unforeseen complications with the
difference between the grade level outside and the height of the floor inside
the building, this proved to be an extremely complicated and expensive
undertaking.
The
drive-thru return saw only very low use in the early days of the library,
perhaps because it was summer, no external signage had been planned, and many
people assumed the “drive-thru” referred to the three main external return
slots near the entrance, as many people park by the curb momentarily and cross
the sidewalk to return their material.
Prominent signage was
finally installed in October 2007, since when there has been a modest but
noticeable increase in the use drive-thru return. By late November, the number
of items returned there daily varied between approximately 50 and 200, with a
daily average of 115 or approximately 7.5% of total daily returns. With good
signage in place, usage should provide a more reliable indicator of the need
for this service.
Drive-thru return, Greenboro District Library
EVALUATION: QUALITATIVE MEASURES
Feedback
from the public has been overwhelmingly favorable. Much of this has been
expressed verbally, but some people have filled out comments cards and we now
have the feedback from Counting Opinions
for the second and third quarters of 2007.
I love this library – wonderful architecture. The
children love it.
This is a beautiful library, stocked with so much wonderful
material. Thank you for your efforts for making this library the excellent
place it is.
What
people most like about the library is its colorful and attractive décor, its size,
its relaxed atmosphere, its special areas (such as the Kids Zone, the Teen
Zone, the Quiet Room, and the Living room), its proximity to the community
centre, the number of computers, wireless Internet, and the car in the
children’s area.
Kids Zone, Greenboro District
Library
Comments
relating to staff are generally favorable. In Counting Opinions, most people report being very satisfied with both
information service and borrower services staff; though it is not always
possible to know exactly which staff are referred to. Many people compliment staff on being helpful, polite
knowledgeable, pleasant, and having pride in the building.
During
the first few months the library was open, we heard from many customers who
greatly appreciated being able to find an attractive selection of interesting
material on the shelves – especially on the powerwall and the DVD display
units. Some of these customers even came from outside Greenboro’s catchment
area to take advantage of the selection available at Greenboro for browsers.
Staff explained the exemptions from requests and shared collections, including
the fact that these exemptions would end. As the end of the exemptions drew
closer, some customers expressed great concern that they would no longer have
as good a selection for browsing – and some put this in writing.
It seems
clear that the public generally appreciates the relatively relaxed approach we
have taken at Greenboro with regard to food and drink. The whole library, with
the exception of computer workstations, is considered a designated area for
food and drink. We also recognize that trying to prevent cell phone use is
almost futile, so staff reserve their efforts for the most disruptive
offenders. A ‘library of the future’ can hardly hound people for doing
something that most people consider normal and acceptable. When it comes to
general noise levels, however, it is a different story and there are a
significant number of complaints. The comments received suggest that most
people are especially bothered by undisciplined children and teens, and
particularly by physically disruptive behavior and bad language, about which
more below.
The
number one complaint is noise! It comes up frequently among the things that
people are least satisfied with in Counting Opinions feedback, and of 34
handwritten comments submitted from opening day to the end of October 2007, 10
pertain to noise – especially noise created by children and teens – especially
noise on the second floor, and most especially noise in the computer training
room, which is seen as an adult room by many adults. However, with pre-teens
gravitating to the Teen Room, some teens gravitate to the computer training
room for noisy, and sometimes offensive, socializing. To try to control this,
the room was designated a ‘Quiet Computer Room’ in the fall of 2006 and staff
have tried to keep a lid on disruptive behavior – with some success.
Certainly,
the situation was far worse in the months following the library’s opening than
it was one year later. By mid-2007 there were far fewer complaints, though some
members of the public have great difficulty accepting that there can be much
more than a whisper in a library, and Greenboro has certainly lost some disappointed
users because of the noise levels and undisciplined children. However, in
relation to the number of people visiting the library, the number of complaints
is not great. At the same time, staff have become more comfortable and
consistent in dealing with disruptive behavior and some of the worst offenders
have been banned.
Probably
the second most common complaint is the time we take to check materials in.
During 2006, borrower services had trouble maintaining a full complement of
staff and staff were sometimes overwhelmed with the volume of returns,
especially as there were so many cards to be issued and membership issues to be
resolved in the early months, which took much staff time. The problem became
most acute after long weekends, when the checkin backlog was occasionally as
much as a week. However, it was more typically a few days, and by 2007
generally 1-2 days. Still, some customers compare Greenboro to community
branches, such as Alta Vista, where material is checked in as customers return
it. They want to check their records later that day and see that returned
material is off their record, which is not always possible at Greenboro. This
leads us to the third most common complaint…
While many people praise staff, as has been
mentioned above, it is clear that a certain number of people feel that staff
are too absent, not available to help, and even rude. I believe that most of
these complaints relate to borrower services staff – not because they are
unhelpful or rude, but because they have the sometimes difficult job of
encouraging borrowers to check out their own material and discouraging the
expectation that material will be checked in on demand, as to do so exacerbates
any backlog that exists. When customers insist that staff do either of these
tasks and staff try to encourage customers to follow the (by us) preferred
procedure, friction can result. However, there were considerably fewer problems
in this regard by the end of 2007 than there were in 2006.
Another
problem is the lack of staff presence near the library entrance. The Cards
& Accounts counter is a little way into the library and has a specific
function; the first floor information service point is too far in and does not
have adequate signage (though there is already enough other hanging signage);
and there is a lack of vertical surfaces on which to put signage indicating the
different parts of the library. Many people do not need staff assistance, but
some do. A staff presence would be highly desirable near the entrance in order
to:
§
Greet people entering the library,
answer questions, and point the way
§
Help with self-checkout problems
§
Take care of cases where the
material security alarm sounds as someone leaves the library
One
solution would be to build out ‘Cards & Accounts’ to create a single
customer service point for the first floor, using the staffing model of small
branches, where a Public Service Assistant does everything, though this would
require significant physical renovation as well as a shift in the approach to
staffing in a larger branch and could not readily be undertaken as a branch
initiative. Although this would be an innovation for such a large branch at
OPL, it is a model being adopted by a number of progressive library systems and
is emerging as a trend.
Another
possibility, which offers greater scope for experiment in the near future,
would be to move the stand-up podium of the first floor information service
point closer to the entrance. This would require some re-cabling and considerable
careful planning, especially in terms of obtaining staff support to make it
work. I will be exploring the possibility of implementing such a change by
2009.
Conclusions
Most people
like the design – the bright colors, the light, space, and openness, and most
people seem to be happy with a relatively relaxed approach to what is permitted
in the library. However, noise levels are certainly too much for some people,
especially the few who still think that libraries should be very quiet. Some
such people have expressed their dissatisfaction with Greenboro and have
probably chosen not to return, despite the fact that the library is not always
noisy and the Quiet Room is appreciated by some.
The
design of the library has generally worked well. Staff and public like the
large windows, the bright colors, and the open, airy feeling of the library.
The
spaces work well in terms of people’s movement and there are no bottlenecks in
the public spaces. My fear that lineups for checkout would block the way of
people making their way to elevator or stairs simply hasn’t happened, as
lineups are not serious, even when they do occur – unless the system goes down,
of course!
What has worked well?
§
The planned adjacencies of the
design
§
The environmentally-friendly
aspects of the design, such as the widespread use of wheatboard, and waterless
urinals
§
The raised floor for flexibility in
cabling, though not much new cabling has been run yet
§
The raised floor for even
temperature distribution and a quiet ventilation system, despite other problems
with heating and cooling
§
The operable windows, despite minor
problems in public areas, have been useful at times
§
The children’s programming area,
with its low wall and lightweight partition, works well as a distinct area for
programs. It affords a degree of privacy, while allowing others to see in
§
The light wells in the second floor
bring daylight down to the first floor during the day, enhance awareness of the
whole library from either floor, and contribute greatly to the overall ambience
of the library
§
The computer training room for both
staff and public training – though it is generally open for regular public use
§
The Quiet Room is greatly
appreciated by some, especially as parts of the library can be noisy
§
The gas fireplace in the Living
Room is appreciated by many
§
The acoustic attenuation provided
by wall panels at the north end of the second floor is very effective in that
area
§
The small meeting room in the first
floor staff area is invaluable
§
Traffic flow in relation to the
checkin/checkout area has worked well and there have not been lineups for
checkout which interfere with people entering and making their way to the stairs
or elevator
§
Having the main washrooms in the
link has worked well, though there is a steady demand for the individual
washrooms in the library
What has not worked well?
§
As customers enter the library, it
is not obvious where they get help. The Cards & Accounts counter was
designed not to loom large and divert people from self-checkout, while
affording Borrower Services staff an awareness of what’s happening at
self-checkout. As a result, the information service point was located
relatively far back into the library. The result is that customers have no
obvious person to go to for general and directional information.
§
Inadequate lighting in some areas,
especially on the first floor under the light wells when there is no daylight
§
The heating and cooling system is
unreliable and uneven, either due to design flaws or to other factors, most
noticeably in enclosed areas such as the Quiet Room, the staff lounge, and the
meeting rooms
§
There was an increasingly
persistent whistle from the ventilation system in the Quiet Room, but this was
finally fixed in November 2007
§
Noise from the ventilation system
above the Quiet Room and the manager’s office
§
The elevator seems to become out of
order easily and is a source of fairly frequent problems, though these have diminished
greatly
§
The distance from receiving to the
main circulation area, though this was foreseen as a weakness in the design
§
The lack of an overhead LCD
projector in the computer training room, though this is still in the works
§
The external book drop chutes are
badly positioned in relation to the bins and sometimes jam
§
Inadequate storage space in most
areas, especially for children’s programming
§
The teen room’s not being an
enclosed room
§
The computer tables in the teen
room are poorly designed and do not support the weight properly
§
The space the Friends of the
Library have for sorting is inadequate – this was a casualty of the need to cut
almost half a million dollars from the construction costs
§
The acoustics are not particularly
good; with the exception of the north end of the second floor; much sound from
the first floor carries up to the second floor.
§
The glass walls around the light
wells on the second floor do not go right to the floor; on one occasion a
removed privacy screen fell through the gap
§
With no lines of sight into the
link from the library or the community centre, there are sometimes problems
with lack of security in the link, particularly in the evening. As the link is
neither part of the community centre nor the library, it is unclear who is
responsible for it.
Fundamental
to ‘powerwalls’ and merchandising display is the emphasis on popular material.
Traditionally, the collection of a district library would include more material
catering to interests of limited appeal than would be found in a smaller
branch, which inevitably means that this material would see little use and
would drive down the overall turnover rate. Greenboro’s collection is designed
to be of high appeal to many people, with the result that the material is
borrowed often. While this doesn’t exclude material of limited appeal from the
collection, it represents a significant change in the approach to collection
development.
Greenboro’s
powerwall is a double-faced 13-bay section of face-out display. In addition,
there are several other smaller areas of thematic face-out display, but the
same principle applies to all. The face-out display of popular material
attracts customers and provides them with an interesting selection of material
on a variety of subjects, including some fiction. This constitutes a
‘value-added’ level of customer service compared to traditional ‘spine-out’
shelving. While this concept is evolving in public libraries and the trend is
to increasing merchandising displays, the degree of merchandising display at
Greenboro is relatively modest and the location of the main powerwall is not
ideal, but the principle has been applied to a greater degree than at other OPL
branches.
As we
planned Greenboro, Cate McNeilly,
Deputy Director of Richmond (B.C.) Public Library was our consultant. At the
time, Richmond was learning from its own experience and was relying
increasingly on powerwalls and face-out display. If the final planning for
Greenboro had taken place even six months later, there would probably have been
considerably more face-out display than we actually have.
The main
area for face-out display are the 13 bays of double-sided ‘powerwall’ on the
main floor –
strategically
located under the light wells, which bring light down from the second floor
skylights. As the powerwall is in the middle of the ground floor between the
adult audiovisual section and the children’s library, one side of it is for
adult books, and the other children’s books. The location is not ideal, as
customers have to make a point of going to the power wall, whereas ideally they
would have to pass right by it on entering. It could also use a little more
floor space for browsers than it has, especially on the children’s side.
Each bay
on the powerwall has a theme, which is designated by relatively expensive
all-too-permanent signage. The bottom shelf was designed for spine-out
shelving, from which staff replenish the upper four shelves where books are
displayed face-out. Initially, with the $950,000 that had been spent on
collection building, we had large amounts of new popular material, and multiple
copies of many titles.
As there
is no collection code for powerwall material, it is not possible to track the
circulation of powerwall material as such. However, as staff continually
replenish the powerwall and monitor the success of the material on it, it is
possible to report in general terms how well it has worked, though unfortunately
without circulation statistics.
As
well as the main powerwall, there are four other significant areas of face-out
display on the first floor near the entrance:
§
A double-sided unit of paperbacks
(6 shelves)
§
A double-sided unit for the express
collection (6 shelves)
§
A large four-tiered display unit
with varying thematic displays
§
A free-standing unit housing two
catalog computers is used for the display of oversize and coffee-table books
that might otherwise not receive much attention
On the
second floor there are two small powerwall-type units:
§
A unit with 6 bays of teen
material, most of it face-out
§
A unit with 6 bays of fiction,
including paperbacks, according to a theme
Powerwall, Greenboro District
Library
We
originally thought that, with the right choice of themes for the main
powerwall, we would not need to change them very often, but we have discovered
that a much more flexible and creative approach is needed. Although we
unfortunately used relatively expensive signage to designate the theme for each
bay, we did at least have the benefit of several months of experience before we
actually committed to the themes that would appear on the signage, which
allowed us to choose themes that were broader than some of the original themes,
thus allowing more flexibility in adapting them to currently popular topics or
topics that could be matched to material we wished to highlight.
The themes chosen were:
ADULT |
CHILDREN’S |
Spotlight on … / En vedette
|
Spotlight on… / En vedette |
Books on CD / Livres sur CD |
Eyewitness |
Mind, Body, Spirit / Corps
et esprit |
Have You Read? / Avez-vous
lu? |
New / Nouveautés
|
New / Nouveautés |
New / Nouveautés
|
New / Nouveautés |
Oh Canada! / Ô Canada!
|
Dr Seuss on the Loose |
Award Winners / Grands prix |
Books to read together / Livres
pour lire ensemble |
Homes & Gardens /
Chez-moi |
Things That Go! / Ça bouge! |
Cooking / Cuisine |
Beginning to read |
Crafts / Bricolage |
Favourite Friends / Livres
préférés |
Your Health / Votre santé |
Pour les tout petits |
Money Matters / C’est
l’argent qui compte |
J’aime lire |
Have You Read? / Avez-vous
lu? |
Early Learning / L’Apprentissage |
Anecdotally,
we know from what many people have told us, that they like the powerwall, and
certain customers can be seen routinely checking it out. However, replenishment
is sometimes a challenge for some of the ongoing popular themes, as there is
insufficient suitable material on the regular shelves on which to draw. Our
powerwall shelves are designed for only the bottom shelf to hold material
spine-out, but in most cases, we do not have enough material available from the
collection to come close to filling that shelf. Typically, there are no more
than half a dozen books on the bottom shelf waiting to replace the face-out
displays.
The end of
the exemptions from requests and shared collections, which had such a
significant effect on the circulation of DVDs and music CDs, has probably had
less of an effect on the powerwall, as it is mostly non-fiction, which is not a
shared collection. However, the end of the exemption from requests has
inevitably meant that less material is available for in-library browsing. Also,
people who keep checking a bay for a particular theme, such as ‘Your Money’,
inevitably find the same material reappearing, as we do not have enough
suitable new material to constantly replenish the powerwall.
The
location of the powerwall could also be considered a challenge, as it is
supposed to be in a location that customers gravitate to, and this is not
exactly the case. Their present location is not bad – it’s simply less than
ideal and I think that could be addressed by moving the three sections out of
their present location and placing them diagonally in the path of incoming
customers in an attempt to gain them more attention. This is another project
for 2009!
Without
special collection codes for powerwall material, we are unable to statistically
measure the success of the powerwall, though to do so would involve a
prohibitive amount of time making changes to the database. However, based on
observed customer behavior and the time spent on replenishment and changing of
themes, we believe that the powerwall has been moderately successful,
particularly the children’s side, where there are still multiple copies and categories
like Eyewitness and Dr. Seuss are borrowed constantly. We have been working
with Collection Development to try to maximize the amount of new material we
get for the powerwall without too great a detriment to the depth of the
collection, and believe that it is a work in progress.
In fact,
I believe that we would do well to convert a significant portion (perhaps one
third) of the general adult fiction and non-fiction shelving to face-out
display. This would require a considerable degree of planning in order to make
the displays meaningful within the framework of conventional library shelf
order, as well as investment in sloped shelves for face-out display. An even
bolder approach in non-fiction would be to combine the increased face-out
display with a significant departure from the traditional Dewey-bound order and
reflect more of a retail approach. Considerable planning would be necessary,
but we could draw on the experience of other libraries that have taken steps in
this direction.
Finally,
I believe that the main powerwall could be used to better advantage by moving
it from its present location to one of greater prominence and I hope to
accomplish this by 2009.
The Concept
One of
the major ways in which Greenboro was going to break ground for OPL was in
‘roving’ or ‘roaming’ reference, an approach to providing excellent public
service that is being adopted in many libraries. The idea is that staff not sit
behind an information desk doing assigned tasks that they interrupt if a
customer asks for help, but rather that staff spend a significant amount of
time on their feet looking for people who need help. This is not really a new
idea, even for some of the libraries within OPL, but it is a major departure
from established practice.
The
concept of roving reference is also an appropriate response to the decline in
traditional ‘reference’ questions that has occurred with the rise of the
Internet as everyone’s reference tool, though Greenboro has not been open long
enough to confirm any such decline. The online catalog has greatly simplified
searching for library materials, and the proliferation of websites, coupled
with search engines such as Google, has revolutionized access to many kinds of
information. This doesn’t mean that people no longer need help using the
library, but the nature of the help they need is often different, and roving
reference brings a customer-focused approach to this ever-present and ongoing
need.
Recognizing
that there would still be times when an information service point staffer would
need to sit, especially when serving children, our service points on both
floors were designed with one sit-down desk and one stand-up desk, which would
at least encourage the second staff person to remain on their feet to be better
ready to help the public.
The
ground floor information service point is located on one side of the ‘Kids
Zone’, where it was intended that it do triple duty as a general point of
triage for questions of all kinds, an information service point for the
children’s library, and for the adult AV collection, which is located on the
ground floor. To some extent this was imposed on us by the design of the
library, but we took this as a positive factor, which would militate against an
unnecessary division between adult and children’s services. The library, after
all, is not huge, and serves a population with many children. While not denying
a degree of specialization for adult or children’s services, we envisioned a
healthy integration between the two. We also hoped it would foster maximum
flexibility in staffing for public service.
One thing
we have done at Greenboro is to eliminate most of the tasks traditionally
performed by information service staff at the service point, so that staff’s
attention is focused on the public. When available information service staff
are not needed for public service, someone is directed to do off-desk work in a
staff area. For the most part, the remaining staff do not have to concentrate
on work other than serving the public.
We have
achieved a modest degree of ‘roving’ at Greenboro. Staff certainly makes a
point of walking around to maintain their awareness of what’s happening on the
floor and seeing if their assistance is needed, but we have probably not
developed this as far as we might. Unfortunately, too, the move to mandatory
personal logins for IT security dealt a serious blow to our attempts to free
staff from feeling attached to a particular computer.
On the
other hand, at quieter times (weekday mornings on the second floor, for
example), there may not really be enough customers to warrant more than the
occasional walk around. Conversely, at busier times, staff often have a
succession of people asking questions at the service point, and some of the
more active areas, such as the computer training room and the teen room, which
are not far from the second floor service point, require fairly consistent
monitoring to try to prevent disruptive behavior. In other words, at busier times,
staff have their hands full enough so that they do not have time to ‘rove’ the
floor in case someone needs them.
As a
final note, because we have often not had a full staffing complement, we have
had to make extensive use of casuals. Greenboro operates somewhat differently
from most OPL branches in terms of roving, flexibility in staffing ground floor
and second floor service points, and giving priority to public service by not
assigning deskwork to staff who are on public service duty. It has proven difficult
to communicate some elements of our model to casuals, which highlights the need
for more training and overall direction in this area.
Portable Telephones, Headsets, etc.
In the
planning stages, there was much discussion of the need for ‘roving’ staff to
carry portable phones or wireless headsets in order not to miss phone calls
while they were roving. It was thought that such devices would also better
equip staff to handle telephone information with the caller while the staff
member was in the stacks. In the end we decided to wait and see what the needs
would be in this regard.
This
proves to have been a wise decision, as staff report little need because there
are few phone calls. While the complexity of the telephone tree may discourage
some callers, (though there have been no complaints), it is more likely a
reflection of the fact that people do not often call the information service
these days. In the past, most of these calls were to see if the library had a
certain item, but now most people can easily check this online without staff
help. Similarly, reference-type information is now readily available online,
and the kind of person who previously called the library to ask such questions
is precisely the kind of person who now uses a home computer to find the
information online. Although there can be clusters of calls relating to
children’s programs, information staff generally receive between one and
several phone calls an hour. As the floors at Greenboro are not that large in
area, the need for staff to carry portable phones or headsets does not seem
great.
(Borrower
Services staff also receive relatively few phone calls – typically
approximately 5 per day.)
Greenboro
information staff do a modest amount of roving to provide better public service
and are little encumbered when on duty at the service point with tasks that
divert their attention from the public. Unfortunately, mandatory personal
logons have removed an important element of flexibility that encouraged roving.
Furthermore, at busier times staff do not have the time to rove and there is
still some merit in having a reasonable degree of staff presence at the service
point. Despite this, the roving principle is one to be pursued and formalized,
perhaps in conjunction with a more concerted attempt to replenish the
powerwall, although this would amount to work that could divert staff attention
from customers seeking help.
Richmond
(B.C.) Public Library now favors removing desks from information service points
completely and having staff rely on public computers to assist customers. I am
not sure I would want to go that far, as all our public computers can be busy,
which would be inconvenient if assistance involved more than searching the
catalog.
We do not
feel that there is a need for staff to carry portable telephones while
performing public service. In a very large library there might be such a need,
but not at Greenboro.
The Teen Zone
Greenboro
is the first OPL library to have a dedicated teen area (The Teen Zone). Details
of the design were based on feedback from teens at a meeting held with nine
members of the fledgling teen advisory group (TAG) who were recruited in the
summer of 2005. At that meeting, they were asked what kind of teen room they
wanted at the new library.
The
response of these impressive, serious young people was:
§
Computers for group and individual
use
§
A bar-like counter with stools to
work at or just hang out with friends
§
Display space on the walls
§
A wide-screen monitor to watch DVDs
or play games (this did not come from the teens themselves, though they were
enthusiastic when it was suggested)
The first
three elements have been incorporated into the teen room, though not the
wide-screen monitor because it was low among priorities and it was not very
practical in the available space. A wide-screen monitor is no longer part of
the plans for the teen room, as the current TAG is not very interested in it.
If it was used for gaming, it would attract mainly preteens and the teens would
prefer to watch movies on a larger screen.
The
computers in the Teen Zone are used heavily by pre-teens, which tends to make
it less attractive to teens, though teens can be seen browsing the collection,
and the display on the posting boards reflects the work and activities of the
TAG. Perhaps one of the reasons that pre-teens gravitate to the room is that
there were only four Internet computers in the children’s area, and even now
there are only six, but clearly the pre-teens aspire to be teens and enjoy the
space.
The Teen
Zone has walls on three sides, but is open to the rest of the second floor,
which houses the adult collection. This is unfortunate, as it is not
acoustically self-contained. A fourth wall made of glass, with a glass door,
allowing clear line of sight, but making the teen room more self-contained,
would enhance the space and reduce the spillover of noise.
The
bright colors of the teen room and the interesting furniture certainly make the
space attractive though the sign, which has a large picture of “teens” actually
depicts rather old teens who are dressed in a style which is recognizably very
out-of-date to today’s teens! This picture will be replaced.
The teen
collection receives considerable attention, but the electrical and data outlets
in the floor are unfortunately placed in such a way that the computer table
restricts access to the collection somewhat. As the floor is concrete, this
would be difficult and expensive to change.
Teen Zone, Greenboro District
Library
TAG Activities
Once
we were open, the teen services librarian used the original list of about 16
names from the original recruitment to bring the TAG to life. The TAG is now
composed of:
§
Boys and girls aged 12 to 17
§
Teens who live mostly in the
Greenboro area, though two are from Greely, but they go to school all across
Ottawa
§
Teens with a mix of ethnic
backgrounds, including Chinese, Somali, Italian, and Francophone
§
Meetings are drop-in with as many
as 21 teens at a session, though the entire group is larger
§
Meetings are held monthly and last
2 hours
TAG
members volunteered over 350 hours in 2007. Their activities have included:
§
Reading and writing reviews for
over 70 advance reading copies of teen fiction books
§
Discussing teen fiction, how the
publishing industry works, how books get on the shelf at the library, and
providing feedback for the Collection Development Teen In-Service
§
Acting as one of three focus groups
providing feedback for the Homework Help website for teens, which was then
revamped into Study Zone
§
Advising Collection Development
about a new video game collection
§
Planning the monthly Teen Book Club
§
Painting windows in the children’s
library for the Summer Reading Club and providing program prep for children’s
programs
§
Conceiving and executing the Harry
Potter launch program for children, which was attended by six teens playing
leading roles in costume
§
Providing input for the youth
component of the Library’s Strategic Plan
§
Choosing 5 favorite books for
display in Teen Zone
§
Working on a book review in media
format
§
Joining BOPL’s book club on the
children’s website and creating quizzes, word mazes and publishing online
reviews of teen and children’s books
§
Judging the ‘Golden Compass’
contest
Conclusions
The Teen
Zone itself has been moderately successful. It would have greater potential if
it were more acoustically self-contained and physical access to the collection
could be better. It would also work better if we had planned a place for the
pre-teens, who come to the library in such large numbers. Thanks to the efforts
of the teen services librarian, the TAG is a great success, as evidenced by
their numbers and the scope of their activities.
However,
a lot more could be done for teens and preteens. The members of the TAG are
impressive young people who are interested in the library and in contributing
to it. What is missing, however, are activities for the far less motivated
teens that use library computers or just hang out at the library and sometimes
cause problems through inappropriate behavior. Staff do engage these young
people and are sympathetic to them, but we do not have the resources to do much
for them. The teen services librarian has had considerable success with
Runescape Club and Pillow Fight programs, which attract some of the more
disadvantaged teens and preteens, but with half of her time devoted to
collection development, only half her time is devoted to public service at the
information service point and working with teens. If we had a full-time teen
librarian/youth worker who could work more with some of these young people, it
might help keep some of them out of trouble. And if such a person had the time
to coordinate teen programming with the community centre, this would be a very
good thing.
The
Greenboro District Library and the Greenboro Community Centre have two
750-square foot meeting rooms, which can be used as one. The rooms have proved
very successful as a venue for many kinds of meetings and events, from larger
library programs, meetings, and training sessions to community activities such
as table tennis, blood donor clinics, and advance polls. On a typical day the
rooms are used from one to four times. There have occasionally been logistical
issues over bookings, which are done through the community centre, and over the
dividing or opening up of the rooms, but on the whole the joint ownership of
the rooms has worked well.
Co-location
with the Greenboro Community Centre was a big plus in determining the location
of the Greenboro District Library. The library’s relationship with the
community centre has, for the most part, been successfully cooperative. There
have been minor issues over the logistics of meeting room bookings and use, and
we both need to talk to each other more about our programs and how we could
work together in that regard, but day-to-day communications on operational
issues are generally good and friendly cooperation is the rule.
An
important component of the success of the Greenboro District Library has been By
The Book, the used bookstore of the Friends of the Library at Greenboro,
located in the link between the library and the community centre. Although the
bookstore had difficult beginnings in the planning stages, the group of
volunteers who took on the challenge of setting up the bookstore in its space
at the west end of the link did an excellent job – not only of setting up the
bookstore, but also creating a small café, where they serve excellent coffee
and snacks. The availability of coffee and snacks has enhanced the experience
of visiting the library for many and provides great convenience for many
visiting the facility as a whole.
‘By The Book’ – the Friends of the
Ottawa Public Library’s Used Bookstore and Café at Greenboro
SUMMARY
OF CONCLUSIONS
Guide to Ratings
I have
graded each of the criteria according to the following scale of grades.
Although the grades are subjective, I am confident that they accurately reflect
the relative success of the various criteria.
A+ |
Excellent |
A |
Very good |
A- |
Good |
B+ |
Good, with qualifications |
B |
Fair |
A table of ratings appears on the
next page.
|
MEASURE |
EVALUATION |
GRADE |
1A |
Circulation statistics |
A promising beginning followed by
the expected decline, but how to sustain a popular browsing collection that
will not be swallowed up by requests? |
B |
1B |
Collection turnover |
Turnover rates compared very well
with OPL rates |
A+ |
1C |
Greenboro circulation as ratio of
OPL circulation |
Greenboro is pulling its weight
in terms of circulation for its catchment area |
A |
2 |
Daily headcount |
A slight decline in 2007, but
still respectable use of library |
B+ |
3 |
Self-checkout |
Best level of use at OPL |
A+ |
4 |
Program attendance |
Not at the level of an
established district library, but promising for a new library attached to a
community centre |
A |
5 |
Number of library cards issued |
The ongoing level of new cards
issued suggests sustained interest in the library |
B+ |
6 |
Seating and computer workstations |
Adequate and well planned with
some exceptions, such as seating in the Kids Zone |
B+ |
7 |
Wireless Internet |
A valuable service seeing growing
use |
A |
8 |
Use of drive-thru book return |
Not heavily used, but late
arriving signage may improve use |
B |
A |
Written and verbal feedback from the public |
Generally very positive, but many
complaints about noise |
A- |
B |
Functionality of the
building |
Mixed reviews: Generally good,
but some serious problems, regarding adjacencies in the entrance and with
heating & cooling |
B+ |
C |
Popular materials,
powerwalls, and merchandising displays |
Successful so far; probably has
more potential, but how to realize that potential when online requests siphon
material off the shelves? |
B+ |
D |
Information service and roving
reference |
Not as much roving as we
expected, but sometimes for good reasons. A good principle worth pursuing. |
B+ |
E |
Teen Services |
Some problems with the teen room,
but the focus on teens and the activities of the TAG are outstanding |
A |
F |
Meeting rooms |
Well used by library and many
other groups. |
A |
G |
Co-location with the Greenboro
Community Centre |
Convenience for the public. Good
relations between library and community centre. |
A |
H |
‘By The Book’ – the Greenboro
Friends’ used book store and café |
An important asset to the
library, particularly the café. |
A+ |
Overall
evaluation
|
§
A splendid building,
which works well, despite some failings §
A well-used facility with
a number of key features of convenience for users §
A popular collection with
a high turnover rate, but with some challenges maintaining effective
merchandising displays §
Staff highly rated by the
public, but lacking a presence in the entrance §
Good ratings from users,
though noisy at times |
A-
|
FURTHER CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Collections
and Merchandising
Greenboro’s
experience suggests that popular collections and merchandising should be
pursued as a matter of policy across OPL while maintaining sufficient depth in
the collection system-wide to satisfy most customers. Merchandising could be
taken much farther than has been done at Greenboro, and the placement of
merchandising displays for optimum advantage should receive high priority in
the planning of new libraries and the retrofitting of existing ones.
Generalized merchandising displays should be encouraged throughout the
collections to make it easier for customers to find popular material without
having to navigate the Dewey call numbers.
Use of
Technology
Greenboro
relies successfully on self-checkout technology. Hopefully, self-checkin will
be the next step. Although Greenboro’s computers are often not all in use,
there are times when they are, and this would suggest that a similar number of
computers should be planned for the next district library, though a greater
number should be placed in the children’s area if the demographics support
this. Wireless Internet service is very popular and should become a regular
feature in our libraries.
Teen
Services
Teen
services are very important for a library like Greenboro. The Greenboro TAG
(Teen Advisory Group) has been very successful and offers a model for other
branches. The Greenboro Teen Zone has been successful except insofar as it
attracts mainly preteens. However, it would work better if it were bigger,
totally enclosed but with a glass wall for visibility (rather than being open
to the rest of the library), and acoustically engineered to isolate the room
from the rest of the library.
Noise and
Acoustics
One of the
biggest public complaints about Greenboro has been that it is noisy. The open
design of Greenboro contributes to this, so I would recommend strongly that
more attention be paid to acoustic attenuation of ambient sound in future
libraries. The Quiet Room has been very successful and should be a feature of
future libraries.
Design
& Functionality
Greenboro’s
design has worked very well in general terms, but in future libraries, special
attention should be paid to the physical layout of the entrance in terms not
just of self-checkout and checkin, but also of the adjacency requirements of
merchandising displays and the presence of staff to provide basic information
to customers as they enter. In this respect, a single ground floor service
point for all library services might be considered.
Special
attention needs to be paid to lighting and areas that might not be sufficiently
well lighted, as well as to the placement of rooftop heating and cooling units
so that their sound is not intrusive.
Roving
Reference
Greenboro’s
experience with roving reference has been a modest success that can be taken
further. This should be reflected in the design of future libraries, though I
would not necessarily recommend the complete elimination of service points.
Drive-Thru
Drop-Off
The
drive-thru drop-off is certainly an added convenience for some people, especially
under adverse weather conditions, but probably doesn’t warrant the space and
resources devoted to it, particularly if the regular external drop-off were
well designed.
DISTRICT LIBRARIES: GREENBORO AND NEPEAN
CENTREPOINTE
Regardless
of Greenboro’s successes and failings as described above, it is worth
considering the role of a ‘district library’ within OPL’s service delivery
framework. Criteria for district libraries are as follows:
District Library Criteria |
Greenboro |
Applicability of Criterion |
District
branches are built in densely populated areas, are central to their district,
and are a minimum number of kilometers from other district branches and the
Central Library |
Greenboro
is relatively densely populated; the location is fairly central to its
district; it is 6 km from the two nearest branches and 14 km from downtown. |
Yes |
Service
hub for community branches in catchment area |
Greenboro
is not a materials delivery “ service hub” for its community branches, nor
does it have the level of resources that would allow it to provide service to
‘community’ branches. |
No |
Minimum
30,000 square feet in floor area |
At 29,000
square feet, Greenboro is close. |
Almost |
Fully
equipped computer training rooms |
Greenboro
has a computer training room with 10 computers and an instructor’s
workstation. It is used for staff and public training sessions. |
Yes |
Meeting
and program rooms |
Greenboro
has a large, dividable meeting room, which is co-owned and managed with the
community center. It also has a children’s program room and a small staff
meeting room. |
Yes |
Food
facilities |
Greenboro
has a used bookstore and café run by the Friends of the Library. The café
sells hot and cold beverages and snacks in the link between the library and
the community center. With the exception of computer workstations, the
library is a designated area for the consumption of food and drink. |
Yes |
Separate
areas for children, teen, and adult collections |
Greenboro
has separate areas for children’s, teen, and adult collections |
Yes |
Separate
service points for children, teen, and adult areas |
Greenboro
has a service point for adult and teen services and another for children’s
and general information services |
No |
Comfortable
reading and study space |
Greenboro
has comfortable reading and study space |
Yes |
Resource
for the cluster of community branches that they serve |
Greenboro
acts as a resource for its cluster only in limited ways. E.g. Training room,
meeting rooms, occasional advice on operational issues. |
Limited |
Serve as
the community branch for their immediate neighbourhood |
Greenboro
is primarily a community branch for the immediate neighborhood. |
Yes |
Hold a
minimum of 150,000 items in their collections |
Greenboro’s
collection is still approximately 100,000 items. Regular ongoing weeding may
be limiting its growth. |
No |
Offer
specialized training and a range of programming for adults and children |
Greenboro
offers a range of programming for children, some for teens, and limited
programs for adults. Specialized training takes the form of staff giving adult
computer-related programs. |
Limited |
District Library Criteria |
Greenboro |
Applicability of Criterion |
Has
separate information and circulation service points |
Greenboro
has separate information and circulation service points. |
Yes |
Takes
advantage of technology as appropriate in the delivery of library services
(e.g. self-checkout) |
85% of
Greenboro circulation is handled by self-checkout; Greenboro was the first
OPL branch to offer wireless Internet; with 51 computers, Greenboro has more
than any other branch except Main. |
Yes |
A range
of specialized technologies is available for people with disabilities |
Greenboro
is one of several branches with a computer workstation that has assistive
technology |
Yes |
Service
as a primary resource for reference materials for their community branches.
These in-depth collections include core adult and children’s reference and
reader’s advisory collections, specialized municipal information, and
electronic resources |
Greenboro
has a relatively small print reference collection (approx. 1,300 compared
with over 11,000 at Nepean Centrepointe). With the preeminence of electronic
information sources, we have not built up specialized print reference
collections at Greenboro. |
No |
Provide
in-depth print and audiovisual works on a wide variety of subjects, including
parenting collections. |
Greenboro’s
collection is more of a popular collection, which calls into question its
role as a district library in this respect. |
No |
Specified
district branches will act as a primary resource for in-depth French language
materials for their district. |
Greenboro’s
francophone population represents approximately 7% of its total user
population. It is not a primary resource for in-depth French language
materials for its district, though it certainly has more than the rural
branches to the south. |
No |
District
branches offer a broad spectrum of children, teen, and adult programming,
such as: §
Full programming for children §
Regular computer based training on Internet skills §
Training on how to use library resources for
specialized subjects §
Sponsorship of system-wide activities such as
Heritage Day §
Regular library tours |
Greenboro
offers full programming for children; regular computer-based training on
Internet skills; very limited training on using library resources for
specialized subjects; and many library tours. Greenboro
has not ‘sponsored’ system-wide activities such as Heritage Day. |
Yes, with
one exception |
District
branches are expected to be open no less than 60 hours per week |
Greenboro
is open 63 hours per week most of the year (59 hours in summer). |
Yes |
Targeted
circulation is greater then 500,000 items annually |
Greenboro’s
circulation in 2007 was 571,131. |
Yes |
Greenboro
District Library as an OPL Resource
Greenboro certainly plays a significant role as a district library
within OPL, by hosting teleconference training sessions and staff
computer-based training sessions and by staff’s playing an active role in
OPL-wide committees and working groups, such as adult programming, Web 2.0,
teen advisory groups, the technical services ops group, the GASP group, and
powerwall promotion.
Greenboro
as District Library: Collections
Greenboro
meets most of the criteria for a district library according to OPL’s service
delivery framework. However, in a number of key ways, Greenboro is not
fulfilling the role of a district library and this relates mostly to
collections.
Greenboro
has a relatively small print reference collection because most reference
material is now available online, either from websites of from the electronic
databases to which the library subscribes. Greenboro also has no particular
reference specialty, partly because we are new, but also because we have seen
little demand for in-depth reference service. This contrasts greatly with
Nepean Centrepointe, which, as Nepean’s central library, set out to specialize
in serving local businesses and built up the service over many years.
Greenboro’s
collection is also not yet at the 150,000 mark that is expected of a district
library. In fact, it did not grow greatly during the first 18 months we were
open. The end of the exemptions from requests and shared collections saw an
outflow of material from Greenboro, but we also do a great deal of ad hoc
weeding as well as the scheduled weeding of specific areas of the collection
from time to time.
The table
below shows Greenboro’s and Nepean Centrepointe’s total collection sizes at the
end of 2006 and 2007 respectively:
|
Collection at Dec. 31, 2006 |
Collection at Dec. 31, 2007 |
Greenboro |
107,958 |
104,757 |
Nepean Centrepointe |
198,482 |
186,831 |
Despite a
few minor areas where Greenboro has slightly more material than Nepean
Centrepointe, the difference in the collection sizes is reflected in just about
all the major collection codes and the considerably greater collection of
Nepean Centrepointe must surely generate a higher level of circulation, even if
their turnover rate is lower.
In terms of
being a district library, it is not just the size of the collection that
matters, but also the depth of the collection. Greenboro has tried to focus on
popular materials and this can only be done at the expense of less popular
material, which means that the collection does not have much more depth than
many community branches. In this respect, Greenboro is not acting as a resource
provider for residents of its district, but rather functions as a large
community library.
Greenboro
is also not functioning as a district library in terms of adult programming
generally. Adult programs have been offered, but most have been poorly attended.
This may have to do with the demographic of the area and the fact that there is
a community centre next door, though the community centre itself has found that
the only successful adult programs are fitness-related, so they offer little
else.
Greenboro
and Centrepointe: Demographics
Based on
the 2006 Statistics Canada census, the table below shows the populations of the
assumed community catchment areas of Greenboro and Nepean Centrepointe by home
language and age groupings. (Further study is needed to determine the actual
catchment areas).
Language |
Greenboro |
% of
single responses |
Nepean
Centrepointe |
% of
single responses |
English |
40,340 |
74.8% |
28,055 |
83.3% |
French |
4,140 |
7.7% |
1,070 |
3.2% |
Other
languages |
9,435 |
17.5% |
4,565 |
13.5% |
Total
census single responses * |
53,915 |
|
33,670 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Languages
representing 1% or more in either area |
|
|
|
|
Arabic |
3,020 |
5.6% |
380 |
1.1% |
Chinese |
1,350 |
2.5% |
1,345 |
4.0% |
Spanish |
755 |
1.4% |
245 |
0.7% |
Russian |
|
|
335 |
1.0% |
(* It
should be noted that the census numbers used here are based on single
responses. The totals are different in the age statistics reported below.)
As can be
seen in this table, Greenboro’s population is linguistically more diverse, with
over twice the percentage of francophones and 30% more people with a home
language other than English or French. Whereas Centrepointe’s main other
language is Chinese (4%), Greenboro’s is Arabic (5.6%), and Greenboro has twice
Centrepointe’s percentage of Spanish speakers. However, Centrepointe
distinguishes itself by having a small Russian speaking population, whereas
Russian speakers are rare in Greenboro catchment area.
Age Group |
Greenboro |
% of
total |
Nepean
Centrepointe |
% of
total |
Preschool
(0-4) |
3,360 |
5.96% |
1,670 |
4.41% |
Primary
(5-9) |
3,750 |
6.65% |
2,025 |
5.35% |
Young teen
(10-14) |
4,320 |
7.66% |
2,385 |
6.30% |
Older
teen (15-19) |
4,385 |
7.77% |
2,735 |
7.23% |
Twenties
(20-29) |
7,700 |
13.65% |
5,730 |
15.14% |
Adult
(30-54) |
21,960 |
38.93% |
13,115 |
34.66% |
Young
senior (55-74) |
8,750 |
15.51% |
6,935 |
18.33% |
Older
senior (75+) |
2,150 |
3.86% |
3,240 |
8.56% |
TOTAL |
56,405 |
|
37,835 |
|
It can be
seen from the table above that Greenboro’s catchment area has a significantly
higher younger population that that of Nepean Centrepointe, though Centrepointe
has somewhat more people in their twenties. Greenboro has a higher proportion
of people in the 30-54 age group, but Centrepointe has an even higher
proportion of people over 55.
Greenboro
and Centrepointe: Staffing and Circulation
Borrower
services staffing levels and 2007 circulation for Greenboro and Centrepointe
are shown in the table below:
|
2007
Circulation |
Circ Asst
scheduled annual hours |
Circs per
Circ Asst hour |
Page
scheduled annual hours |
Total
Circ Asst & Page annual hours |
Circ per
total Circ Asst & Page hours |
Greenboro |
572,131 |
8,050 |
71 |
8,900 |
16,950 |
33.75 |
Centrepointe |
749,508 |
9,900 |
75.7 |
9,450 |
19,350 |
38.73 |
The above
numbers would suggest that Centrepointe Circulation Assistants handle
approximately 6.6% more circulation that their Greenboro colleagues and that,
when Page time is factored in this difference increases to 14.7%. This is
particularly interesting given Greenboro’s high reliance on self-checkout.
However, it
should be borne in mind that this includes only regularly scheduled hours,
which do not include Sundays, extra hours, or casual hours. Further study
should also look at anomalies in the circulation levels, such as the large
increases in circulation experienced by Centrepointe when Carlingwood was
closed for renovations, as fluctuations will often be handled without
corresponding adjustments to staffing levels, staffing levels being generally
determined based on typical work levels. It is not necessarily practical to
change the core hours when temporary fluctuations in workload occur.
Greenboro District Library –
first floor
Appendix
GREENBORO DISTRICT LIBRARY: MODEL
FOR OPERATIONS
This
document (which is subject to ongoing revision) attempts to define the model
for operations at Greenboro. While we do not always live up to it, it provides
a point of reference to review our operations on an ongoing basis.
Collections
§
The Greenboro District Library
seeks to provide its customers with popular material that will appeal to a wide
range of people.
§
Collection Development selects a
high proportion of very popular material for the Greenboro District Library,
particularly in subject areas regularly featured on the powerwall.
§
Powerwall displays are designed to
provide convenience to customers by offering a selection of attractive,
interesting material of various types, organized according to themes or genres.
§
Powerwall displays will consist of
items in good condition based on a subject or theme that is expected to have
popular appeal and to generate circulation.
§
Themes may be chosen to bring
attention to not-so-recent items that are not getting the attention they
deserve on regular shelves.
Information Services (Adult and Children’s Services)
§
Information services staff strive
to be welcoming and helpful to customers.
§
Information staff rove the public
area in order to help members of the public and to maintain their awareness of
what is happening on the floor.
§
As much as possible, information
service staff do not have assigned tasks other than serving the public when on
public service duty, except for powerwall-related duties.
§
Information service staff
constantly monitor powerwalls to keep successful displays stocked and to change
displays to move material.
§
The bottom shelf of powerwalls is
used to shelve material spine-out; this material is then used to replenish the
face-out displays above.
§
Information staff intervene to stop
and prevent disruptive behavior by customers.
§
Adult services and children’s
services staff work together cooperatively to provide as seamless public
service as possible.
§
Adult services and children’s
services staff work cooperatively with borrower services staff to ensure the
smooth functioning of the library and as seamless public service as possible.
Borrower Services
§
Borrower services staff strive to
be welcoming and helpful to customers.
§
Borrower services staff issue cards
and help customers with issues relating to their accounts.
§
Borrower services staff strive
constantly to check in returned material without delay.
§
Borrower services staff respond to
problems at self-check out and the security gates as quickly as possible.
§
Borrower services staff set aside
new and popular material, which may be used on powerwall.
§
Borrower services staff work
cooperatively with information services staff to ensure the smooth functioning
of the library and as seamless public service as possible.