Uppsökande verksamhet 2.0: Hur två folkbibliotek och två skolbibliotek ser på sina webbplatser

### Tysklind, Josefine 

Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Department of ALM.

2009 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years)), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis

##### Abstract [en] 

Swedish libraries started their outreach work in the 1950s by travelling to the countryside with books for those who were unable to make their way to the library, or those who were not familiar with books and libraries. The times have changed since the 1950s, but the outreach work libraries do is still, to a large extent, the same. This thesis will suggest that libraries should start thinking of their web sites as outreach work, and invest more in developing them. It is especially important since the group most libraries try to reach is the youth, who spend much of their time on the Internet. The purpose of this thesis is to study how Swedish school- and public libraries perceive their web sites, and also investigate the user perspective. I have interviewed webmasters from two school libraries and two public libraries in two different municipalities - Bollnäs and Uppsala - to find out their views of their web sites. I also distributed questionnaires to 15 users in each library. The thesis is grounded in three theoretical areas; usability theories, theories about Web 2.0 and Library 2.0, and marketing theories. Previous research within these three areas is also discussed. The usability theories and research comes mainly from Jakob Nielsen. He coined the term “usability”, which means that a web site should be designed and maintained so that it is both usable and of use to the user. The only way to know if your web site is usable is to communicate with the users and let them be a part of the process of developing the web site. The term Web 2.0 was coined by Tim O’Reilly, and refers to the new interactive functions - for example blogs and communities. Michael Casey transferred the theory to the library community, and coined the term Library 2.0, which for him and Laura Savastinuk is about the whole library and all services offered. That is to say, it is not just about the web but about reaching out to your users in new ways also in the physical library. Jack M. Maness objects to this broad interpretation of the term, and claims Library 2.0 should be solely about the web and the social software libraries can use to improve their web sites and their communication with users online. The main name within marketing is Philip Kotler, and he has developed many marketing theories and models for both businesses and for nonprofit organizations such as libraries. Such organizations do not sell products, but can instead market their services. Many services can be offered on the web, and services can also be marketed on library web sites. Marketing on the Internet is about communication with your users and maintaining a relationship with them, to know what they want from the web site and the library services. In my study I found that the public libraries for the moment have rather simple web pages with basic information about the library - they are electronic brochures of the physical libraries. However, both of them are part of collaborations with other libraries in their counties. Both collaborations plan to start new 2.0 web sites with interactive functions, which will hopefully be more like virtual communities where users can interact. The two school libraries both have their own pages on the school web sites, but they are very different. In Bollnäs the school web site is run by one from the administrative staff, but the library’s page is run by the librarian. The library’s page is not updated and has very little information. In the school in Uppsala, the library has several updated pages, and a librarian runs the school web site. The schools have no plans for developing 2.0 web sites, but the school libraries hope that they can join the public library collaborations and be a part of their new 2.0 web sites. Perhaps these collaborations can open up for a new type of outreach work on library web sites.