Situation
Analysis
The
The campus offers nine Foreign Languages
and has an ESL program of over one
thousand students. There is also an active Honors Program on campus.
The campus has grown from
one building constructed on a 22.5 acre site in 1969 to three buildings on 51.4
acres in 1980. A fourth building, the Rachel M. Schlesinger Concert
Hall and Arts Center, opened in Fall 2001.
The
The library holds
approximately 60,000 books and videos, as well as serials and microfilm, and
provides access to over 200 electronic databases. The library also provides computer access to
research-only stations and to full-service computers located in the Cyberspace. The campus wireless network is available on
both levels, as well as network ports for wired hook-up of laptops. Library users also have access to media
workstations with VHS, DVD, and CD facilities. The only photocopiers on campus are located
in the library, as well as one of the two NovaCard machines.
The Library records
gate-counts of over 160,000 per semester.
Circulation statistics are steady (Alexandria Campus library
consistently circulates more items than any other campus library), use of
electronic resources is rapidly increasing, and seat-counts in the library
indicate periods of as much as 80% seat-occupancy, indicating a consistent and
significant use of library services and resources.
Product Analysis
The library provides
high-quality, curriculum-centered, free information and resources in a pleasant
and attractive full-service research and study environment, with professional,
responsive and pro-active service from library staff.
Following the motto “make
it easier to say yes”, the library strives to provide courteous, responsive,
pro-active, quality service to students.
Library staff provide research assistance and instruction, offer
research consultation service, and respond to remote requests for
assistance. Library staff also provide
occasional college application and registration assistance, technical help, and
assistance with computer applications.
The library strives to provide a “one-stop” research center where
students, faculty and staff can seek professional research assistance, conduct
self-guided research, access high-quality print and electronic material for
free, make use of electronic applications like Microsoft Office, email, and
Blackboard, and gain access to reduced-price printing and photo-copying. The library also serves members of the
community conducting research or seeking print resources or computer
services.
The library actively
collects print and electronic material in direct support to the campus
curriculum, and also collects and provides access to material of current and
general interest.
Competitor (SWOT: Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats).
Although some NOVA students
may make recourse to their local public libraries, the library’s main
competitor is free online sources of information and search engines like
Google.
·
The strength of these free search engines
is their ability to provide, freely and quickly, a vast quantity of information
with relatively easy, unmediated use.
Students perceive search engines (Google especially) to have access to
“everything”; they find Google easy and fun to use, are impressed by the
value-added features (such as spell-check) and seemingly relevant results.
·
The weaknesses of such online search
engines are both the sheer, unmanageable quantity of information they provide
and the uncertain quality or authority of the information retrieved. These weaknesses are compounded by a
wide-spread perception by students that information retrieved on the internet
is reliable, relevant and authoritative (often accepted unquestioningly) and a
failure to distinguish between free websites accessed on the internet, and
proprietary information accessed through the library’s databases.
·
Even as academic
libraries frequently view public libraries as partners in a collaborative project,
so the prevalence of Google-based research presents opportunities to the librarian.
Library instruction and research consultation at the reference desk can
stress the benefits as well as the pitfalls of Google-searching and can suggest
skills and techniques to evaluate and discriminate when searching in online
search engines.
·
The primary threat to the library from online
search engines like Google is the perception of ease of use and reliability,
and the danger that students will eschew not only library resources but the
library itself in favor of unmediated Google searching from home.
Marketing Campaign Objectives
Although Library use at the
Our long-term goal is to
establish the library at the very center of the campus’s research and community
life. Although the library enjoys
goodwill and a positive image on campus, it is our goal to so position the
library that it is perceived by administrators, faculty, and students as
integral and central to the community college experience as undertaken at
Target Audiences
We identify three target
audiences:
1. Students who currently use the library but do so
ineffectively. These may be students who
use the library primarily as a social venue (to meet friends) or as a computer
lab (to check email or type papers) or who are unsuccessful in fulfilling their
research needs but do not seek assistance.
2. Faculty across all disciplines who are unaware of the
library’s services and collections, who fail to adequately encourage or require
their students to make use of the library, or whose professional perceptions of
the library are out-dated or incomplete.
3. Current students who do not currently make use of the
library’s collections, services, or physical space. Defining the students who do not currently use the library is a
difficult project. These may be
·
commuter-students
who are not willing or able to spend time on campus
·
older students
who are intimidated by returning to school and are unsure of themselves in an
academic environment (and seek assistance at public libraries or from other
sources)
·
any student who
feels that their own research abilities on the Internet (with such search tools
as Google) are sufficient to meet their
needs
·
students who did
not gain adequate research skills in high school and are unaware of the library’s
services and collections
·
students whose
perception of the library is unfavorable for one reason or another (they
perceive the library as out-dated or confusing or unfriendly or uncool or
time-consuming, &tc).
Market Position (our internal statement. What we
want to be)
The
Campaign Focus, Theme, and Timing (our external statement. How others should perceive us)
The library needs to be
perceived as
·
Reliable
·
Relevant
·
Friendly
·
Easy-to-use
·
Free
·
Accommodating
·
Proactive
·
Modern
·
Sufficient to
meet users’ needs
FIND us, FIND it, FIND out!
Something here from the
Campus Graphic Design group/ develop a logo?
We also need to express an
Outreach aspect (we come to you: Library without walls/ roving reference/ etc);
an enticement (come INTO the library); and an internal aspect (we’re here to
HELP you once you’re in here).]
Key Messages
1. message for students who use the library: we can help
you.
2. message for faculty: we can help you help your
students (the library possesses curriculum-specific materials and research
assistance for your students)
3. message for students who don’t use the library: use
the library. It’s fast, free, and easy!
These may (maybe should be)
addressed with the same slogan/ tag-line
Marketing Strategies
·
Direct campaigns
(email/ blog/ fliers in boxes)
·
Community outreach:
taking our message/ services out of the library
·
Advertising and
merchandizing inside the library
Marketing Tactics (some of this we do already)
To library users:
·
New Books
Display highlighting quality additions to the collection
·
Gather email
addresses from library instruction sessions for follow-up
·
Gather email
addresses at service points for direct email marketing
·
Hot Topics
display of timely or general interest items in our collection
·
Face-out display
at the circulation desk highlighting materials of immediate concern to students
(writing manuals, study guides, etc)
·
“Mini-Tours” or
library overviews at the beginning of the semester
·
Focused,
temporary signage near the front door (“Visit our new Feature Film Section)
·
Provide research
guides, or do a better job highlighting the ones we have
·
Change the sign
at “Reference” to “Research Assistance” or “Ask Me”
·
“Libraries for
Dummies” handout? Simple over-view (in
conjunction with
·
Map/ floorplan
of the library
·
“FIND” campaign:
blog, pencils, cards (http://findnova.blogspot.com)
To Faculty:
·
Compose an email
(once per SEMESTER) to all-faculty reminding them of library instruction and
new services
·
Compose an email
to all faculty highlighting new collections or acquisitions
·
Set up a blog so
that interested faculty can get regular updates from library: http://alexandrialibrary.blogspot.com/
·
Post new
acquisitions on the campus library home-page (can this be linked from the
Library home-page?)
·
Attend Division
meetings (distribute promotional literature?)
·
LRS
newsletter. Is there a way to make this
more compelling?
·
In house events,
e.g. “Come to Tea with the OED”
To non-users:
·
Continue to
establish library presence outside the library at appropriate occasions:
library table at the “Y” for campus events, library table at campus speakers or
seminars, library table in the cafeteria
·
What materials
are new students given? Include library
material?
·
Can we send email
to AL-students? Is there a list?
·
Library
“commercial” on the hall monitors
·
Streaming video
introduction to the library on our home-page?
·
Buy ads in the
Student Voice?
·
Outreach to the
·
Outreach to
·
Outreach to
student clubs? Contact Pat Gordon.
·
Fliers on the
backs of the stall doors in bathrooms (a la W&M, GW, UofR)
·
Bulletin Board
on the first floor near the cafeteria
·
Library info to
the OCC?
APPENDIX I
Library Focus Group -- Results
On Friday, April 8th
the
Although the focus group was
conceived as a more free-flowing conversation between and among librarians and
students, a few talking points were decided upon in advance to move conversation
along. These included
Responses
First impressions of the library
·
“If it had been bad
I would have remembered”;
·
“The book
displays are incredible: they grab my interest;”
·
“I often check
books out from the new book truck;”
·
“the themed
displays really show off the diversity of the collection;”
·
“I like how the
book displays at the reference desk are always topical – I was especially drawn
to the Kinsey Report being displayed when the movie was out”;
·
“I appreciate
that the library doesn’t shy away from potentially controversial or edgy
topics.”
What about the library do you like or appreciate?
How would you rate the appearance of the library
·
“I’m a
visual person, I like the displays, books selected for the ref desk,”
·
“That’s the sign
of a good librarian, putting things out that attract attention and challenge
me;”
·
“I always notice
the when there are flowers in the library – the amaryllis is particularly
attractive;”
What about the library do you dislike or would
change?
·
Cell phones.
·
Having to swipe
card for each copy.
·
Paper fliers
stuck on walls and poles.
·
Crumbs on
keyboards, grease on mice or keyboards.
·
“It’s NOISY in
the library”
·
“Cell phone use
by other students is intrusive and rude”
·
“1-swipe per
copy is absurd. You can fly to the moon but not overcome one
swipe per copy?!”
·
There’s no quiet
study space”
How might the Library respond to some of these
challenges?
What could the library do that we don’t? (or could do
better)
How could the library improve its space:
What do I want the library to be?
You have that? (some things our regular library users didn’t know
about the library)
What did we learn?
The focus group taught us
that our regular library users are actively engaged in thinking about the
library’s collection and services. On
the whole, regular users were extremely positive and enthusiastic about the
service they’ve received in the library and the sources they were able to
find. Criticisms were often related to
issues arising from the physical layout of the library (crowded conditions, no
provision for group study, space-sharing with the counseling office). Additional critical comments were directed at
the behavior of other library patrons (inconsiderate cell phone use,
noise). Some criticisms were directed at
technology (such as the one-swipe per copy).
We learned that our patrons use the library for a variety of purposes,
including study, pleasure reading, research, internet use, email, and word
processing. However, the activity that
users seemed to privilege the most was study.
While some users are sympathetic to the multiple-use character of the
library space (combining individual and group study space, research, computer
use, research assistance, leisure reading, etc) others thought that the library
should do more to enforce a quiet atmosphere that favored individual
study. Opinion also varied on the degree
to which library staff should actively become involved in policing and
discipline, some users expecting a high degree of active policing by the staff,
and others wanting the staff to maintain a friendly and helpful demeanor and
avoid rigorous policing. The most
positive comments and reactions consistently had to do with the staff and the
teamwork that was visible to and valued by users. The most negative comments had to do with
noise and disruption, from cell phones, group study, the counseling waiting
area, and people socializing in the library.
Users take a very personal
view of the library. One of the
interesting things the focus group addressed was the desirability of certain
seating areas in the library (best seating is in the windows, worst seating is
in the carrels behind the stairs).
The focus group confirmed
feelings among the staff that there is a widespread dissatisfaction among library
users with noise and disruption in the library.
It also underscored the need for a strategic approach to accommodating
multiple library uses.
Results
As a result of the focus
group, several changes have been implemented in the library.
·
Call number
guides have been posted in the reference collection
·
New, current
science books, aimed at the informed lay reader, have been ordered
·
Plans are
underway for 15-minute walk-in Introductory sessions for Fall ‘05
·
New shelving has
been added to the library to allow expansion of the collection
·
Taller shelving
has been relocated to the “group study” area to promote additional
sound-dampening and further define the space as a special use area
·
Plants have been
relocated, and identifying tags will be placed on individual plants
Goals for the future
Most interesting
observation
Modern society suffers from a “privatization of personal space”. People
just don’t care if they are bothering their neighbor or acting
inappropriately. If we could create a campus culture that made disruptive
talking, inappropriate cell-phone use, and inconsiderate use of space socially
unacceptable, things would be a lot easier for students as well as faculty and
staff
APPENDIX II
Statistics:
Gate Count for Spring Semester ’05: 166,005
Circulation:
1998: 29,049
1999: 27,305
2000: 27,083
2001: 26,366
2002: 28,207
2003: 26,066
2004: 24,494
2005: 22,970
APENDIX III
Library Use Survey February 2006
In spring term 2006 the
library staff conducted a survey of library use among students taking classes
in the Tyler (AT) and Engineering (AE) buildings. Following the theory that students taking
classes that met outside the Bisdorf building (where the library is located)
were less likely to use the library, we attempted to determine the extent of
library use through a random survey of students. Results of the survey indicate that a
majority of students do use the library, and that students fell positively
about the library collections and services.
Methodology
On February 22nd
and February 28th library staff set up a “Welcome table” in the
Results
27 surveys were filled in at
the
In the Tyler Building 25
respondents said they used the library and 2 reported that they did not. In the Engineering Building 19 respondents
were library users and 16 were not. In
total, 44 respondents indicated that they used the library, and 18 that they
did not:
AT: Use the Library: 25
Do not use the Library: 2
Subtotal: 27
AE: Use the Library: 19
Do not Use the Library: 16
Subtotal: 35
Total Library Users: 44
Total Non Users: 18
Total respondents: 62
In other words, 70% of
respondents reported that they were
library users. Only 30% reported that
they were not.
Non Users
Students who did not use the
library were asked to indicate why they did not. Non users were asked to indicate from a list
why they did not use the library, and answer brief follow-up questions where
appropriate, selecting as many that applied from the following options:
Of the 18 non-users, 12
indicated that they did not have assignments requiring research. 13 reported doing their research on the World
Wide Web, with the majority indicating Google as their search-engine of
preference. 3 claimed to use NOVA
databases from off-campus (specifically mentioning Issues & Controversies Online and JSTOR as favorites). 6 used other
libraries, the majority using George Mason University Library (where NOVA
students have borrowing privileges). 3
indicated the hours were inconvenient (although none took the opportunity to
suggest better hours):
Library Users
Although not specifically
asked to do so, many self-identified library users also provided additional
comments. The survey results indicated
that many library users also relied on World Wide Web search engines like Google,
that many used databases such as ProQuest,
JSTOR, and Opposing Viewpoints
from off-campus, and some used other libraries in addition to the
Some users made suggestions,
such as adopting longer weekend hours, more computers in Cyber Space, and that
more teachers make assignments requiring library research!
Other comments included:
“It’s
the only library I use!”
“Are
you kidding?! Tons of people use the
library!”
Conclusions
Survey results clearly
indicate that, contrary to prediction, a majority of students across campus
locations and curriculums self-identify as library users. The library enjoys great good-will on campus,
a good reputation and a high profile.
Users know where we are and make use of us, and report success and
satisfaction in doing so. The library
“brand” (see the Library Marketing Plan*) is healthy and stable.
Non-users, although a
minority, present a more challenging problem.
The majority of non-users cited two major reasons for non-use: no need
to use the library because their courses of study did not require research, or
reliance on non-library resources like Google.
Penetrating this group of potential users presents a challenge.
One startling outcome was
the success of the library outreach effort.
Although the library has recently expanded its outreach in the Bisdorf
Building (with book sales, “roving reference” in the Cafeteria, providing
man-power for the Welcome Tables, establishing a presence at Scholarship Day
and other similar events), little has been done to establish a presence in the
AE or AT buildings. Reaction to the
library welcome tables was overwhelmingly positive from faculty and students. Comments from faculty and students stopping
by the library tables in the AT and AE buildings included:
Clearly further effort to
reach out to the AE and AT buildings would be beneficial. Increased visibility to and contact with the
faculty who teach in those buildings and the students who learn there may help
to increase library use and encourage students to exploit the library’s
resources (on- or off-campus) and encourage the faculty to make better use of
the library’s instructional and research services. There is obviously a need to educate students
who rely on such World Wide Web tools as Google and Wikipedia about the
reliable, authoritative sources they can access for free, from on or off
campus, through the library homepage.
Even faculty expressed surprise that the library homepage and all its
resources could be accessed from the labs in the AE building. Outreach to those labs and faculty could also
prove fruitful.
Follow Up
Non-users were asked if they
would be willing to participate in a focus group to learn more about their
reasons and the alternative resources they use.
Thirteen students indicated a willingness to do so
and provided contact information. We
plan to schedule a focus group with them later this semester.
Also, the comments from
faculty and students in
* The library brand: “The library provides
reliable, professional, helpful, instructive, efficient, easy, and free access
to authoritative, relevant, and useful information. The library is the very first resource that
any member of the campus community thinks to go to fill an information need.”
Bibliography
Identity Solutions: How to Create Effective Brands
with Letterheads, Logos, and
Business
Cards. HD69 B7 C85 2003
Marketing Library Services and Materials on a Budget
(Mainly for Free!):
presentation delivered at the 2004 VLA conference:
http://www.NOVA.edu/home/mtodd/Marketing%20Library%20Services%20and%20Materials.htm
Musings, Meanderings, and Monsters, Too: Essays on
Academic Librarianship.
Z&65
U5 M875 2003
Outreach Services in the Academic and Special Library. Z711.7 O88
2003
The Visible Librarian: Asserting Your Value with
Marketing and Advocacy.
Z716.3 S54 2003
Your Marketing Sucks. HF5415 S786
2003