Issues on Social Media : Professionally and Personally

Libraries play an important role not only as a building material storage, but as the process of delivery of various forms of information such as books, journals, electronic, microform, online learning, etc, to their community. In the modern and sophisticated era, particularly in the era of the Internet and Web 2.0, services and facilities are offered more widely, demanding and complicated. The development of Web 2.0 technology also requires libraries to make changes in the delivery of information in a more up to-date, reliable, and dynamic manner which can attract their users. Web 2.0 technology is now a popular trend  and become a phenomena used by all segments of society in the world to socialize. The term of web 2.0 was first defined by Tim O’Reilly and John Batelle that looked at the dot-com bubble survivors in 2004 and saw in them an evolutionary triumph that they identified as Web 2.0 (O’Reilly, 2005). The term implies that Web 2.0 differs from an earlier web by being participatory, interactive, instantaneous, and emphasizes online collaboration and sharing among users. It is often termed “Social Media” and is seen as a place where people can connect and share the personal and day-to-day details of their lives with old friends, new friends, and complete strangers (Nesta and Jia Mi, 2010). 2 years later, O’Reilly defined Web 2.0 as an emerging suite of applications that are interactive, context-rich, and easy to use (O’Reilly, 2007). In a library environment, this technology or application is termed Library 2.0. The term “Library 2.0” was believed to be defined by Michael Casey in 2005 on his LibrayCrunch blog. According to Chad and Miller (2005), Library 2.0 as a concept, very different from the service we know today, that operates according to the expectations of today’s users. They state that with this concept the library will make information available wherever and whenever the user requires it. In addition, based on report form Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL), Research Planning and Review Committee, “social networking sites (SNS) such as Facebook is one of the most important technological changes that are affecting academic libraries at present and in the near future”.

A recently published report about online usage in Malaysia has revealed that the top visited web sites in Malaysia are social networking sites (comScore, 2009). The report also shows that as at mid-2009, there were 9.3 million Malaysian (out of 25 million of population) age 15 and above who accessed the internet from various locations and consumed an average of 1,066 pages of content and spending nearly 14 hours online during the month (Mohd Hafiz, Watsons and Edwards, 2010). According to Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, in 2008, the penetration index of internet access among Malaysians has reached 62.8 per cent, a staggering 15 per cent of increase in 12 months while 50 per cent of broadband access will be achieved by 2010. Moreover, recent data from the Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit (MAMPU) from 1 to March 30, 2011, which monitors the network on ICT in Putrajaya Campus Network (PCN), found a total of 19.96 million transactions were performed on the access sites of social networking website. These monitoring found 3 access to the highest on the social networking website that were : profile.ak.fbcdn.net, www.facebook.com and static.ak.fbcdn.net. From this data and statistics showing that Malaysia people, amongst the fast developed Asian countries use the social networking as a medium of communication and sharing information.  

Therefore, libraries need to be more exposed to these developments and provide as many Web 2.0 applications to get closer to their users and improve the quality of online information delivery. But to successfull implemented this application in library not so easy and need carefully planning, design and the purpose of having this application. However, there are many big issues and difficulties might be faces by the librarian and libraries management. According to Dwivedi, Williams, Ramdani, Suraj Niranjan, Vishanth Weerakkody (2010), in their study of Understanding Factors for Success adoption of Web 2.0 application, they mentioned perceived usefulness and ease-of-use are significant predictors of behavioural intention to adopt Web 2.0 applications, users‟ behavioural intention influences the usage of these applications, and ease-of-use influence behavioural intention both directly and indirectly through influencing perceived usefulness. So this is by mean, the issues for the libraries and  librarian is how they want to adopt this technologies can be usefulness for their user, is it this application can be easy-of-use by both parties, user and also others librarian. And then, are the librarian are alert what are the user behaviour intention for use this application. There are 2 professional issues here that face by the librarian. The first one is the perceived  usefulness for the user. In my opinion, it means, what is the information, library resources or content  that could supply to these application that useful for user. Libraries and librarian must have a standard guidelines to input all of this into their social media website. They cannot put unusefull information or anything that not relate to their services or to their purpose of having the social media application. The second one is, ease-of-use. I think this have relation with the knowledge of the social media for those who create the social media. To be clear, the librarian must attend at least a basic training for the function of the social media. With the knowledge that their gain from the related training, it can easy to them to create social media application in easy way and also easy to use by the user. However, there are also issues form the personal site. The personally issues that face by librarian is, the motivation or self initiative to create this social media application. As we know, librarian have a lot of their core jobs or work. So they must have extra motivation or to self intiative among them to provide and maintain this services to their user. In addition,  most of them also are not so expert in IT.  Maybe for create an account for social media like facebook or youtube, or yahoo mesengger is easy. But not all the function in this social media are known by the librarian. So, sometimes it give difficulties to them to use all this function in the social media application.

On the other side,  there are study about the changing role of librarians in the Digital World by Muhammad Arif and Khalid Mahmood (2010). In their study, they recommended, the ICT infrastructure in the libraries should be upgraded and training programmes on technical aspects and implementation of Web 2.0 technologies should be arranged on regular basis. In my opinion, from the finding this is a profesionnaly issues that must be face by the libraries. The libraries should upgrade the ICT infrastucture especially their Internet bandwiths connection into the libraries. So, with the upgrading, the issues on the limitation of network capasity  or Internet speed to run this application will be overcome. Beside that, in my opinion also, an as my practicing in my library, if the server or network capacity not so enough, and then if we want to store let say video collection to be uploaded as a podcast/vodcast services, so the network will be slow and can interrupt for other services. In addition, i also had conducted some interview regarding this issue among public states libraries in Malaysia, most of them mention that ICT infratructure in their organization is not enough to support and running for all web 2.0 application. They mention that they have their current  services to be mainatin such as Library website, Online Catalog, Library Management System, etc. So, for the social media, most of the public libraries just can create or develop the Facebook account since the facebook is free, easy and also not used so much bandwith capacity. However, i found, in some of the publc library in Malaysia are block the use of facebook and also other social media like youtube, myspace and yahoo mesengger in the library, eventhough they provide this service to the user. This is  because, for them, if their user spent more time access the facebook or other social media  using the library network/wifi connection it can make their network become slow and can interrupt their regular services or their job.  This limitation and weaknesses  is also one of the biggest professionnaly issues that they face. In my opinion, the public libraries should not block the accessing to this social media web while they provide this service to their user. This issues can give a bad image to them.

  Another issues that raise by Muhammad Arif and Khalid Mahmood (2010), is training programmes on technical aspects and implementation of Web 2.0 technologies. I am aggree with their statement. Most of the librarian are aware about web 2.0 application. But how to implement or develop all of this web 2.0 application such as blog, podcast/vodcast, RSS, Wikis, social networking sites, Instant messaging, Mashup, etc, can be question. This is also can be a problem to the librarain. Not all of that application is easy to create or develop. Some of them, have too many technical part to be understand by the librarian. So, without a training programmes, the librarian cannot create or develop web 2.0 application in a good way. Library management should send their staf or professional staff (IT manager or Librarian) to a workshop and training of application web 2.0. In that training or workshop, they can get a valuable input or can increase their knowldge on how to develop the web 2.0 application sucessefully in the library. In my interview with Assistant Director (IT Department)  of National Library of Malaysia, Mr Mohd Ikmil Firdauz, he inform me, after attendant the Social Media Workshop organized by University Malaya Library, he and his staff get more clear and understanding of having this application to the Library. Before this, they just create  a social media website just follow the trend now, but after attend the workshop they have a proper guidelines, and objectives to provides the social media applications.

Another professional issues that face by the librarian is about the policy and guidelines of having this application in their organization. From my finding in interview with some of the librarian in Malaysian Public Libraries, non of them dont have a standard policy or refer  to other organization social media policy to develop this application. They mentioned , they just develop by their own initiative and follow the trend only. But some of them mention, in their management meeting, they have disscus about this application and they use the meeting minute as their guidelines for develop web 2.0 application. It also experience in my libraries. We just create facebook account without any policy and  guidelines. In my opinion, without at least a basic guidelines or policy, they dont know what is the purpose, objective or might be they can lost of control of provide a good online service to their user.

As a conclusion, social media or Web 2.0 tool, not just a trend common to the organization but also to every library in the world. Library racing providing or offering this services to their users. But without proper planning, clear objectives, policy, guidelines, training on social media and have a sufficient expertise in developing and maintaining these services, quality services of these application can be affected and the delivery of information to be executed can not be achieved.

References

Allard, S. (2009). Library managers and information in world 2.0. Library Management, 30(1), 57-68.

Allard, S. (2009). Library managers and information in world 2.0. Library Management, 30(1), 57-68.

Barker, P. (2008). Library 2.0 initiatives in academic libraries. Electronic Library, the, 26(5), 758-759.

Cardwell, P. (2009). The information society: A study in continuity and change (5th ed.). Library Management, 30(6), 495-496.

Chawner, B. (2008). How to use web 2.0 in your library. Electronic Library, the, 26(3), 427-428.

Cmor, D. (2010). Academic reference librarians: Getting by with a little help from our (special, public, school, law and medical librarian) friends. Library Management, 31(8), 610-620.

Haycock, K. (2011). Exemplary public library branch managers: Their characteristics and effectiveness. Library Management, 32(4), 266-278.

Holmberg, K., Huvila, I., Maria Kronqvist-Berg, & Gunilla Widén-Wulff. (2009). What is library 2.0? Journal of Documentation, 65(4), 668-681.

Judith Broady-Preston. (2010). The information professional of the future: Polymath or dinosaur? Library Management, 31(1), 66-78.

Kealy, K. (2009). Do library staff have what it takes to be a librarian of the future? Library Management, 30(8), 572-582.

Kent, P. G. (2008). Library 2.0: A guide to participatory library service. Library Management, 29(4), 447-448.

Lan, A. T. (2009). Information literacy meets library 2.0. Library Hi Tech, 27(2), 314-315.

Mahmood, K., & Richardson, J. V. (2011). Adoption of web 2.0 in US academic libraries: A survey of ARL library websites. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 45(4), 365-375.

N.S. Harinarayana, & Vasantha Raju, N. (2010). Web 2.0 features in university library web sites. Electronic Library, the, 28(1), 69-88.

Pennell, K. (2010). The role of flexible job descriptions in succession management. Library Management, 31(4), 279-290.

Peter, E. S., & Tina, T. Y. (2009). Refocusing for the future: Meeting user expectations in a digital age. Library Management, 30(1), 6-24.

Ram, S., John Paul Anbu, K., & Kataria, S. (2011). Responding to user's expectation in the library: Innovative web 2.0 applications at JUIT library: A case study. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, 45(4), 452-469.

Sarrafzadeh, M., Martin, B., & Hazeri, A. (2010). Knowledge management and its potential applicability for libraries. Library Management, 31(3), 198-212.

Scupola, A., & Hanne, W. N. (2010). Service innovation in academic libraries: Is there a place for the customers? Library Management, 31(4), 304-318.

Snowball, C. (2008). Enticing teenagers into the library. Library Review, 57(1), 25-35.