Getting on message

Do libraries risk getting “off message” when we focus on non-traditional services and community collaboration? 

I don't believe that libraries risk going off message when they provide the public with what the public seeks from the library as a place of life-long learning--regardless of whether or not the services are traditional. In Nina Simon's The Participatory Museum, she acknowledges that including participatory activities in a museum may cause those who prefer a more traditional experience to feel like the museum is going off message. She emphasizes that these non-traditional modes of museum-going cannot be the only option for visitors and should not take away from the experience of visitors who do not wish to participate. This should be the same case in libraries that decide to provide non-traditional services such as makerspaces. An article titled "The Library of the Future is Here" published by Business Insider, demonstrates that people still understand that libraries need to offer traditional services: "The library of the 21st century still has books, but it also has 3-D printers, laser cutters, sewing machines, and spaces for conducting business meetings. It offers computer coding classes."  "

I would argue that the addition of non-traditional services redirects libraries to be on message as "forums for information and ideas" (as so described in ALA's Library Bill of Rights) in the 21st century. Simon says that participatory involvement in museums is necessary because people are now used to being able to create, share, remix, comment on, and critique the content that they consume on the internet. When a museum or library can mimic this, they are attracting an audience that would otherwise feel more fulfilled in the digital world. When traditional services are still maintained and unaffected by new services, patrons with all needs will benefit. In providing non-traditional services and community collaboration, libraries expand the audience that they can reach because they tap into different modes of learning beyond what traditional services account for. 

Having libraries promote non-traditional surveys can also help them promote the ones that are considered "traditional" by creating an opportunity to inform a new crowd. OCLC's 2010 Library User Perceptions survey is rather telling. In the survey, we find out that most users still think that libraries are all about books. The survey explains: "As new consumer devices and online services have captured the information consumer’s time and mindshare, his perception of libraries as books has solidified." Even without the addition of more non-traditional services, I think many librarians would take issue with this opinion. What about electronic databases? Reference services? Or even onsite book clubs and story time? Users still just see books. Adding non-traditional programming can bring in new users who will see that libraries are not simply about books and remind them that the library has a place in the 21st century. 

"The Library of the Future is Here" describes the efforts of Chattanooga Public Library in Tennessee, and countless other articles have documented libraries that have done the same. As more libraries shift to these types of services and the public becomes aware, the more the public will realize that the library's message is still the same as it always has been, but that the addition of services to take care of patrons who prefer a different learning environment does not change the mission, but maximizes it. 

Libraries should make sure that non-traditional services or participatory projects reflect their mission statement. Simon points out that participatory activities are not for having fun, but for providing information in a new way. Serious evaluation of programs is necessary, as is commitment from the library staff. If library staff are conscious of their non-traditional services and willing to be flexible and change the services as needed, they will be able to stay on message.