 |
 |
We're updating our in-house reference database so that we can get useful statistics about communication means. For example, it's no longer useful to lump all questions that come via "the internet" together (years ago it was useful for demonstrating the need to have more computers, but that battle has been won). Does anyone have advice on what categories to use? I'm sure I'm re-inventing the wheel here, but I don't have access to the librarian-y journals that would talk about it. I can see three main ways the statistics would be used: 1. To demonstrate to funding agencies et al. that we have a wide reach 2. As a way to track changing popularity of communication means in order to better allocate resources (e.g. ten years ago, it was a disaster if the fax machine broke, so we had a spare; now no one would notice) 3. As a way of gauging the relative success (or failure) of a change (e.g. if we get the same number of reference questions after a website re-design, but a higher percentage are coming the "wrong" way -- e.g. to webmaster@library rather than reference@library -- we know the re-design made it harder to find the "right" way) Here's my draft list: * In person * Telephone * Ask a Librarian (i.e., our web form) * reference@library * manuscripts@library * [each of the other "correct" noun@library e-mail addresses] * "Inappropriate" e-mail addresses, e.g. webmaster@library, reservations@library * Our library's social network (currently, just a facebook page) * Our library's blog (should questions in comment threads on our YouTube channel be counted under "blogs"? Seems conceptually the same: institutionally-created content followed by comments, or not, as the case may be; is there a word other than "blog" that would cover this?) * Our library's microblog (currently, two Twitter accounts) * Social network that isn't ours (includes questions from listservs) * Blog that isn't ours * Microblog that isn't ours (not sure what this would be... questions that aren't replies to our tweets and that don't tag us, even though I'd reply as "@Library" rather than as "@me-personally"?) * Other Too fine-grained? Should all non-Library electronic media be one category? Should social media be divided differently (e.g. into two: content-rich "publications" like blog posts, educational videos, etc. versus content-light "communications" like facebook and twitter)? Thanks for letting me at least talk this through "out loud" as it were. Best wishes, Erin. ---------------- Erin C. Blake, Ph.D. | Curator of Art & Special Collections | Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 E. Capitol St. SE, Washington, DC, 20009 | [log in to unmask] | office tel. 202-675-0323 | fax 202-675-0328 | www.folger.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining ARLIS/NA see: http://www.arlisna.org/join.html Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc) to [log in to unmask] ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance: http://lsv.arlisna.org Questions may be addressed to list owner (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~