Review of User collaboration in websites

Judith Pearce's paper (originally presented with images not present in the online form) discusses Web 2.0 where the Internet is a platform for the delivery of library services by the NLA, with a focus on how the NLA is using Web 2.0 in two projects, PictureAustralia and Australia Dancing.

There are huge amounts of information available in Web 2.0 environments such as flickr and Wikipedia but traditionally libraries have not been interactive or inclusive. Pearce sees this as needing to be addressed by libraries such as NLA as “People of all ages are now coming to expect a degree of inclusiveness, interactivity and access from websites that they use on a daily basis that is not yet reflected in our service.” Pearce’s article presents in glowing terms how the NLA is obtaining photographs via flickr and biographical information via Australia Dancing in a “Wikipedia style approach”. Unfortunately Pearce’s article with its emphasis on NLA schemes does not address fully how those schemes are or are not the most appropriate use of Web 2.0 technology.

The main issue, for Pearce, is that technology is driving user expectations, and libraries have to respond to those expectations. The shortcoming with this view is that Pearce:
(1) never asks the question of why libraries should change their roles and their methods of delivery of services to their users every time their users change their expectations – it just seems to be assumed that the response is somehow necessary. Pearce probably is correct, but provides no theoretical or evidential reason for this reader to know she is correct
(2) does not consider how this response to changing expectations places the library into a difficult position – every time user expectations change the library will need to respond, but as the expectations are being driven by rapid technological change the rate of change in users expectations may exceed the ability of the library to respond
(3) does not consider the cost of implementing newer technologies and how this cost is drawing resources from pre-existing library services to users
(4) does not consider how this expectations-response relationship impacts on already existing library services apart from allocation of resources
(5) does not consider how technological change is fragmenting the library users into those who can use the newer technologies and those who cannot

Pearce’s perspective is too perspective – she looks to new technology to address new user expectations, but she does not consider how new technology can be used to address existing user expectations, nor does she consider how the implementation of new technologies can be counter-productive to the needs of users. For example, flickr may add an abundance of photographs, but without the appropriate and consistent use of metadata users may face the problem of too many hits when searching. Many libraries are assuming that a few keywords will be sufficient to locate a photograph on a topic, but are not considering how lack of quality metadata hinders users in finding specific photographs in an ever growing number of irrelevant photographs.

From this librarian’s experience, sometime more choice made available by poorly implemented schemes based on technology is of no use to the user who is confused by an abundance that cannot be grasped. Technology should
(1) make it easier for users to locate and access the specific information they need,
(2) and this information must be accurately described with descriptions that unfortunately usually takes expertise to create.

This is more important than NLA schemes to enhance inclusiveness and interactivity.

References

Pearce, J. (2006). User collaboration in websites. Paper presented at the ARLIS/ANZ Conference, 21-23 September 2006. Retrieved August 25, 2009 from http://www.nla.gov.au/nla/staffpaper/2006/jpearce1.html .