ON MAKING THE CUSTOMER DO THE WORK

James Sweetland, Library Link Regional Convenor - USA

One could argue that the modern tendency to put some of the burden on the user began with the automobile age, probably, at least in the United States, sometime in the 1930s; certainly it was common by the 1950s.

One example is the development of the "fast-food" industry. Of course, we have had takeaway food for a long time. But, with the development of the automobile, some restaurants began offering "curb service", in which the customer sat in the car, while a waiter took the order, and then delivered the food. The customers had to worry about how to balance dishes on their lap, what to do about the garbage and the like. By the late 1960s, one was expected to park the car, then walk into the "restaurant", order and pick up the food, and then take it to a table. The only role of the staff was to cook the food, hand it to the customer, and, supposedly, keep the tables clean. Since the production system was also based on a very limited menu (e.g. hamburgers + fried potatoes + drinks in one popular configuration), the net result was the growth of places like McDonald's; the customer got a fast, simple meal at a relatively low price in return for doing much of the work and accepting a very limited menu. By the late 1990s, the American truck stop "diner", as well as the local small restaurant were nearly extinct, and many fast food chains had also come and gone, essentially leaving the market to purveyors of hamburgers, tacos (and other pseudo-Mexican food), and pizza, with many outlets also selling a deep fried fish sandwich.

The point here, however, is that we seem to see the same pattern developing in libraries and similar information agencies. One could start about the turn of the century, with libraries opening the stacks to the users, but again the real change seems more recent�in fact, it seems related to computer technology.

There are a number of examples of this phenomenon, but computerized information retrieval may serve for all.

In the early days (before the mid 1960s), a few libraries, mostly smaller specialized ones, would provide literature searching for their clients. With the development of online services in the 1970s, this service became common in a large number of general libraries, especially academic ones of all kinds: the user met with a search analyst, who worked with the user to refine the initial question, and then did the search. The user then went away with a list of (usually) bibliographic citations.

Then, as the 1980s progressed, a number of changes made it possible for the user to do the search. Some online services came up with menu and other easy systems, complete with different pricing structures; but one of the biggest changes came with the rapid spread of CD-ROM databases, and (at about the same time), the loading of database tapes into libraries' online catalog systems. Now, the user could do the search. And, from the evidence, in a relatively short time, many libraries eliminated the search analyst, because most searching was in fact being done by the user. As with the early fast food outlets, users apparently preferred the self-serve systems.

By the early 1990s, the retrieval systems commonly added at least some full text, or even full image, permitting the user to the search, and print out at least some of the material on the spot. Not surprisingly, this development was also welcomed by many (if not all) users.

However, consider the details of what was going on. Users had several choices:

• Do the work yourself, in printed sources:
  Searching is difficult, and usually limited to controlled vocabulary. A large number of physical volumes must be handled. Relevant citations must then be copied by hand, or the volume taken to a photocopier, which may not be working, or may work poorly, and in any event costs money to use. Then, with citations in hand, the user must navigate the library's journal and book collection. Having found the material, it's another trip to the copier.
• Have the search done for you:
  Searching is probably better, but requires (often) making an appointment and then waiting hours or days for the output. The search costs considerable money. The user still must navigate the library collection.
• Do the search online:
  The search is apparently free. The searcher has all the options that the professional searcher has (although usually not quite as many in detail) The citations found, much of the text is available on the spot. All of this is, in most US libraries, completely free�including the paper text of the journals.

However, as we move into the next decade, several things are happening, which I believe will change the information retrieval environment:

• Libraries, in part due to increased costs of printed material, and in part to the need to fund access to online databases, continue to cut their collecting, especially in the area of journals.
• As a result of increased access to material, and the cuts in collections, interlibrary loan departments will see huge increases in demand.
• Partly as a result of this demand, ILL services that were formerly free now have charges attached to them.
• As a result of the above, libraries will have smaller collections of newer, relevant materials, and will have to charge users for delivery of such material, using a very inefficient system (most US interlibrary requests take several weeks to fill).

If at home, the user must select the "library collection" and even the search engine. Then, s/he must determine the search strategy, execute it, and evaluate the results�which usually are thousands of possibly relevant items. Then, in a growing number of cases, the user is expected to download and later print out the results. The same is true at the library, except that some other agency pays for the equipment (but already many libraries are beginning to charge for the printing).

Think about this for a minute: the user has become the selector, the evaluator, the circulation clerk, and even the printer. The cost of access to the Web, the cost of the equipment, and even the cost of ink and paper are all borne by the user.

At the same time, the libraries not only see their budgets not growing as fast as the cost of traditional library materials (let alone the new formats), but they also must fund access to the same Web out of their small budgets. In too many places, there appears to be a pattern of funding such access by reducing or eliminating staff.

Thus, on the one hand, the user becomes accustomed to doing much of the work, and to paying for the privilege. On the other, when the user does go to a library, s/he finds fewer people and less material, while the response to a question is often, "have you tried the World Wide Web?"

At what point are we either going to find some new type of library invented? Or, will users merely revolt, refuse to fund libraries, and plan on using the money for their own needs?

What effect will this have on publishing? On those who can't afford, or lack access to, the needed equipment and connections? On the presumed social fabric of which the general library is a part?

Consider these questions and related ones. What do you think? Is the situation different in different cultures? Is the situation different depending on the financial situation of a given country?

Post your comments at http://www.liblink.co.uk/discussion.html

Back to Electronic Resources Viewpoints