Adoption of online databases in public libraries: An Australian case study

The project on which this article is based set out to evaluate —using an interpretivist/ constructivist framework—the content, usability, and use of the four online databases that were introduced into Victorian public libraries under the Gulliver Program. The grounded nature of the method enabled the discovery of key issues that were not always related to the quality of the databases themselves. Since Everett Rogers’ famous analysis of the diffusion of innovations appeared to have explanatory value in this context, his theory was used to illuminate the findings. This was despite the fact that an individual was not involved in this case but rather the State Library of Victoria making a decision to adopt an innovation on behalf of the public libraries of Victoria. The researchers believed that Rogers’ framework could be used to shed light on why both staff and library patrons were slow in accepting or adopting online databases for their information seeking. The conclusion is that training is the principal way in which this situation could be changed. Librarians and information professionals are involved in diffusion activity . The concepts of diffusion, change agency, and critical mass provide . a structure and criteria to analyse how effective [librarians] are, and reasons why some projects succeed and others fail. (Holland 1997, p.394) Librarians are playing a key role in the diffusion of new online technologies, not just in public library settings. As Holland says, it is through persuading patrons to adopt information/networked technology that librarians act as change agents in the wider diffusion process. Within all library sectors, there is an “increasing emphasis on networked access to information resources, within the broader context of the emerging virtual library” (Martin 2001, p.1). It is through libraries that many people use technologies such as CD-ROMs, online databases, or the Internet for the first time. The attitudes of librarians regarding new technologies are, therefore, very important. For example, in the early stages of the introduction of a set of online databases at a public library, the extent to which librarians understand and promote the databases will be crucial to their acceptance by library patrons. The degree of assistance provided to patrons will also be important at this stage. Australia is in a similar position to the United Kingdom where, according to Eve and Brophy (2000, p.2), “In order to support the demand for continued investment, libraries will have to be able to prove that ICT [information and communication technology] services are valued by the public and that the impact of these services justifies the cost. ” It is, therefore, important to understand the extent to which both librarians and library users are adopting the new technologies as well as the barriers to adoption. In 2000, the authors embarked on a project, reported in this article, that set out to evaluate the content, usability, and use of four online databases —World Magazine Bank (Ebsco Host); two Gale products, Health Reference Library (now Health and Wellness Resources Center) and Custom Database; and Electric Library (at that stage an Infosentials product). 1 These four online databases were placed on a trial basis in the public libraries of Victoria by the State Library of Victoria (SLV) under the auspices of the Gulliver Program (Whitehead and Toohey 2001), so termed because of the opportunities for exploration and discovery the databases offered. There were two groups of participants in the project—staff and patrons—both of which provided interesting and rich data. Although an important focus of the project was the evaluation of the databases themselves from a user perspective,2 the use of the interpretivist/constructivist framework (discussed below) enabled unexpected key issues to emerge. These turned out not to concern the standard and performance of the databases themselves but, rather, a less than optimal use of the databases for other reasons. With hindsight, the project became an examination of characteristics of online databases that were encouraging adoption as well as perceived barriers to use. Because Everett Rogers’ famous analysis of the diffusion of innovations appeared to have explanatory value in this context, his theory was used to illuminate the findings. Conceptual Framework and Method The two strands to the conceptual framework were the interpretivist/constructivist component, underpinning the method used, and “the diffusion of innovations” theory of Rogers (1995). These are discussed below, with the method being presented as part of the discussion of the interpretivist framework. The interpretivist/constructivist framework This was an interpretivist study, which was concerned with understanding the meanings of the various participants within the context in which the online databases were placed. Interpretivist research is based on the idea that “there is no unique ‘real world’ that pre-exists and is independent of human mental activity and human symbolic language” (Bruner, 1986, p.95; cited by Schwandt, 1998). Knowledge and truth are, therefore, created rather than discovered, and there are often multiple, conflicting constructions of reality. Rather than attempting to ascertain general laws by which humans are said to exist, interpretivist researchers are more concerned with focusing on the “processes by which meanings are created, negotiated, sustained, and modified within a specific human context” (p.225). The contructivist paradigm comes under the interpretivist umbrella and is widely used in social sciences research. In the information and communications fields, Brenda Dervin has received extensive recognition for her use of a constructivist approach that she calls “sense making” (Dervin 1992; Dervin and Nilan 1986). According to Dervin and Nilan, by 1986 there had developed an alternative paradigm to the “systems-centred” approach of the past. This alternative posits information as something constructed by human beings. It sees users as beings who are constantly constructing, as beings who are free (within system constraints) to create from systems and situations whatever they choose . It focuses on understanding information use in particular situations . It focuses on the user. (p.16) In contrast to the positivist approach to research, where the initial question can effectively limit what can be learned from a process of enquiry, an interpretivist/constructivist framework allows the participants in the research to exert a considerable influence on the important questions and findings. From framework to method In the case of the project discussed in this paper, the views or perceptions of the key users were sought. They included not only librarians in various roles but also library patrons. The researchers attempted to relate as closely as possible to individuals’ experiences in the context of a particular setting—the public library. This was done through the collection of qualitative data in four Victorian Public Library Services in the first half of 2000. Two of the library services are in metropolitan areas (Bayside and Port Phillip), one is a regional library service (Corangamite), and one is in a semi-rural area (Casey-Cardinia). The research in each case began with a focus group of six-eight library staff in order to explore their perceptions of content and usability of each of two databases as well as general access issues. A representative of SLV was included in each of the focus groups. These representatives were from VISioN, a Department of the State Library that answers reference queries from the Victorian public library service. Attempts were made to include library staff working in various roles in each of the focus groups, e.g., a library manager and a library technician. Although it would have been useful for librarians to compare the four databases offered through the Gulliver program, for practical reasons it was necessary to allocate two of the four online databases to each of the library services. This was because it would have been too time consuming for each librarian to test all four and impossible to discuss them adequately in a hundred-minute focus group session. The setting of “homework,” requiring staff to follow a topic of their choice in their two databases and to answer questions related to content and usability prior to their involvement in their focus group, resulted in data of high quality from these focus groups. The focus groups were followed by a trial of the databases involving ten library patrons, varying in age and gender, from each of the library services. The databases were evaluated with ten additional library patrons at SLV in the first half of 2001. In the case of the SLV component of the research, an attempt was made to locate patrons who were already using one of the four databases. The difference between these patrons and those recruited in the four public libraries is that none of the latter group was discovered using a database and none had used one previously. This reflects the difference between the public library clientele and that of SLV where there were 33 terminals available at one time from which users could access the databases. “The diffusion of innovations” component The other strand of the conceptual framework involves “diffusion of innovation” theory, especially as expounded by Rogers (1962; 1995). Everett Rogers, famous in the literature about the diffusion of innovations, published a landmark study in 1962, The Diffusion of Innovations, now in its fourth edition. In the latest edition he analyses and critiques the 4,000 publications available at that time—compared with the 405 publications that provided the supporting evidence for the 1962 edition. The theoretical framework he began to develop in the original edition has been revised and updated in each subsequent edition. According to Rogers