Using Evidence in Practice
Reading Ghosts: Monitoring
In-Library Usage of ‘Unpopular’ Resources
Stacey Astill
Senior Library Assistant
Keyll Darree Library
Learning Education and Development (LEaD) Cabinet Office, Isle of Man Government
Braddan, Isle of Man
Email: Stacey.Astill@gov.im
Jessica Webb
Library Assistant
Keyll Darree Library
Learning Education and Development (LEaD) Cabinet Office, Isle of Man Government
Braddan, Isle of Man
Email: Jessica.Webb@gov.im
Received: 15 July 2017 Accepted: 31 Oct. 2017
2017 Astill and
Webb. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share
Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
Setting
Keyll Darree Library is situated
opposite Noble’s Hospital in Braddan, on the Isle of
Man. It is the only health and social care library on the island. Keyll Darree Library is
responsible for supporting the entire Department of Health and Social Care,
nursing and medical education departments, health and social care related
charities, private care facilities, and any other groups with a need for these
services.
Not all library users
are library members (with some using the facilities for reference purposes
only, or mainly accessing the computers), and they vary widely in age and
discipline. Many of the most regular users are students actively engaged in a
degree or other qualification, although this is often seasonal with peak usage
around January, April, and November – tying in with exams, and essay deadlines.
Problem
In 2010 library staff
started to realise that they were removing items from the collection which
library users would then claim they had regularly engaged with. This made no
sense, as the record in Heritage (our library management software) was always
checked for loan statistics prior to the removal of any resources. It then came
to light that some library members, especially students, had been using the
books in the library to allow them to share more effectively, and thus there
were no loan statistics.
When this was combined
with the fact that not all library users were actually members, so were unable
to physically borrow books (even if they were reading them in the library), and
the issue of swiftly reducing budgets it was decided that we needed to capture
these statistics. At this time, our
Heritage library management software did not include a function for recording
this data, thus, the team devised a method of creating a ‘dummy account’ for
our ghosting procedure in order to work around this system limitation. This has
now been rectified in the latest software update and the system now has a
specific function for recording in-library usage. Once we knew what was being
used, we would be able to make more effective choices, and not have to replace
books we had removed from the collection. These objectives have been met over
the six years since implementation.
Evidence
Effectively, the aim
of our procedure was to keep track of all resources being used, not just those
on loan. This would mean that all relevant well used resources would be kept,
ultimately ensuring our user needs were engaged, and our collection was
relevant for them. We have termed this procedure ‘ghosting’. All library users
(members and non-members) are asked to leave items they have used but are not
borrowing on the tables. A member of staff collects these items twice daily and
issues them to our dummy “Writer Ghost” account in Heritage and returns them to
the library. This ensures that we gather statistics for items used within the library
as well as those borrowed by users.
The statistic
gathering ghosting process was implemented in a variety of ways, as this was a
big change for a lot of people. Initially, staff put out signs asking library
users to leave their books on the tables once they had finished using them, and
highlighted the new policy during orientations. Luckily natural instinct also
played to our favour as many of our users were pleased at not having to tidy
up.
Staff also had to
consider stealth ghosting. Some users who felt untidy leaving books out (but
weren’t dedicated enough to re-shelve) would leave piles of books on trolleys,
shelves, and under cubbies in an effort to be tidier. We still find piles like
this to this day, and now ghost these too.
Initially we compiled the
data collected from our ghosting procedure into yearly amounts; we then
compared this to loan values for the comparative years. This general overview
of total resource (from both print and audio visual collections) usage and the
breakdown can be seen in Figure 1. The general trend across total usage is
quite interesting in itself, with the average usage remaining relatively
constant between current values and those from the start of the statistical
recording in 2010. Similarly, Figure 1 also demonstrates how significant the ghosted
resources are in the total library resource usage, making up 28% of the total
resources used in the most current years data, 2016/2017, a significant amount
of our yearly loans, a similar trend to a study by Rose-Wiles & Irwin
(2016) which also found that nearly 30% of their circulation transactions were
used ‘in house’, a significant amount of usage which potentially might have
been overlooked if not, for the implementation of ‘ghosting’.
Another trend we have
been able to use ghosting to identify is the shift away from the traditional
build up to April. Historically, there has been a dip in usage from the middle
to the end of the year, as shown in Figure 2 with January to March showing a
marked increase in usage before a high peak in April.
Figure 1
A breakdown of resource use at Keyll
Darree Library 2010 – 2017.
Figure 2
2010/11 and 2011/12 monthly
ghosting data.
Staff have traditionally assumed that as April is a
dissertation deadline it will be the busiest for ghosting, and the early
figures seemed to fit with this. However, by considering the ghosting
statistics in Figure 3 we have been able to see that this trend actually
changed in 2013 – yet this has still not filtered into staff consciousness. By
reviewing the statistics from Figure 3 we observe that from 2012 until 2016
this altering trend which has seen a second peak in October continues through
the later years (which has sometimes become the heaviest period of usage).
Implementation
Due to these observed
trends, we are able to plan the library’s summer tasks more effectively. In
previous years, we had budgeted time from May to November for large scale
projects such as stock taking, and collection weeding - these are obviously
processes which benefit from having a quiet library as they are disruptive to
users. Since 2013/14 we have seen a second yearly peak taking place in October,
and therefore we were able to schedule our project between the end of May and
mid-September. This transpired to be a beneficial course of action as the
October ghosting for 2016/17 transpired to be significantly higher than the
peak in “dissertation season” (February to April).
Outcome
Overall, the process
of ghosting is suited well to our service. This process was introduced to allow
monitoring of in-library resource usage, and does so.
Alongside the variety supportive
measures used to ensure that we are tracking resource usage within the library,
the library has a final fall back for the library users in the form of a
withdrawn book for sale shelf – if a book is somehow withdrawn despite regular
usage then it is possible for a library user to purchase it.
As a small library
with a strong core of regular users we are highly able to engage with them
regarding their reading habits, ask questions about the resources, and
understand what they want from our service. Because of the benefits we have
seen, such as a reduction in the removal of well used items; better tracking of
busy periods for study desk use (allowing us to plan staff projects); and a
fuller picture of resources usage as a whole, ghosting is a process which we
will continue.
Reflection
It is important to
note that ghosting is most effective because it is used in tandem with other
methods. The process itself is not without limitations and therefore other
safeguards must be in place. It is possible that users are leaving them because
the items are not useful and there are more relevant resources which they then
borrow from the library. Purely because an item has been taken off the shelf,
we cannot actually guarantee that it is being used on every occasion. However,
to combat this issue there is a suggestions box in the library where users can
mention limitations or benefits of certain resources. Staff are often
approached by users who want to provide feedback about the resources they have
been using. We also have a system of online reviews to support user feedback,
although this is underused at present. Staff are working to continually promote
it, and encourage users to provide feedback via a text review, or a star rating
system (1-5). When verbal reviews are given, staff (after gaining permission)
will write these up and add them to the catalogue.
References
Rose-Wiles, L. M., & Irwin, J. P. (2016).
An Old Horse Revived?: In-house Use of Print Books at
Seton Hall University. Journal of
Academic Librarianship, 42(3), 207-214. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.02.012
