AN ANALYSIS OF EMAIL REFERENCE SERVICES

AVAILABLE IN FEBRUARY 2003

With In-depth Commentary On Services of Two Academic and One Public Library

 

     Examining a large number of the email services linked from http://alexia.lis.uiuc.edu/~b-sloan/e-mail.html as suggested in Donnelyn Curtis’s book Attracting, Educating, and Serving Remote Users Through the Web, one is struck by the huge range in complexity and quality.  Some simply provide an email address for questions and others merely initiate access to the user’s email account compose page with the proper address entered in the recipient box.  A great number provide extremely simple email forms with submit and clear buttons.  The more complex provide a web of linked pages and much of the following information was linked and/or briefly addressed right on the form or form page.  I found a link to Spanish language service one of the most exciting unique offering

·        a linked menu of aska choices including hours of service

·        information about how often email is checked

·        information about turnaround time

·        options for subject, age, or language specific services

·        information about the kind of questions answered

·        information about who may use the service

·        information about fees

·        links to frequently asked questions which is occasionally a searchable database

·        links to ready reference sources or library databases

·        links to privacy policies and/or rights

·        links to special accommodation information

·        suggestions for browsers that don’t handle forms

·        return e-mail address confirmation

·        explanations about why particular information is requested

·        distinctions between required and optional information

·        an option to attach documents to the question form

·        an option to e-mail a copy of the query to the user’s own e-mail account

·        a thank you

·        information about how to comment on the service

 

     The simplest forms just ask contact information, perhaps affiliation #, and provide a question box.  The next level is to add a deadline by which the information is needed, and in the case of public libraries, a request for school level.  The equivalent request on an academic form is for subject and/or specific course and instructor.  They may also ask the user to specify a destination library for the question. Many services use text to describe what kind of information will be helpful in the question box, but others provide additional optional check or text boxes asking for things like:

·        kind of response preferred? quick answer? resource suggestions?

·        method of delivery preferred

·        resources already consulted

·        how information will be used

·        how the subject of the question came to your attention

·        whether you have physical access to the library, and if not, others you can access

 

     Ease of use is a major consideration, and a big part of this is finding the e-mail form in the first place.  It is essential that a prominent link to the service appear on the library homepage.  In the case of an academic library, the best services also provide an Ask a Librarian link from the university homepage as well.  For public libraries, links should also exist on any general city services pages available.  I have chosen two academic services and one public library service for further analysis.  They were chosen because something particularly impressed me about the form or surrounding webpages.  You will note a bias for sites that provide extensive answers in anticipation of common questions.  If patrons use this content, the service will be relieved from answering the same questions over and over again.  My improvement suggestions include comments about content as well as some on ease of use, layout, and aesthetic appeal which are also extremely important.

 

     The library of the University of Texas at Arlington, http://www.uta.edu/library/askus.html, is most impressive in the area of anticipating questions.  Their Find Answers link takes the user to a searchable FAQ database.  The top of that page includes a search box and an alternative link for browsing.  The rest of the page is a linked subject classification.  These links take the user to appropriate pages in the library site.  The browse button actually takes the user to an intermediate page with a subject categorization of FAQ.  Choosing one of them takes the user to the appropriate place in a fully scrollable file.

 

     The UTA pages use several techniques to encourage patrons to use self-help methods first. I think these efforts may be transparent to users, which is hardly welcoming behavior.  For example, on the home page multiple categories of service are listed, with text explanation, but Ask Us is at the bottom and the only part that is visible without scrolling is the heading that is very small font.  If the user chooses that option they are delivered to a service menu that is topped with a link to a Quick Reference List.  This too is very impressive.  An intermediate page is a subject categorization, which then leads to extensive annotated links.  The A’s for example have 27 entries.  The second choice on the help menu is the FAQ described earlier.  Next is a suggestion to Call Us, with the phone number.  The fifth suggestion is to Email Us with the appropriate address.  Choosing the link just opens email.  The last choice on the numbered list is an offer of in-depth consultations.  The link offers a list of disciplines, a named specialist, a phone number, and an email address, also all linked.

 

     Some may feel that the actual email question form link has prominence in that it is outlined, as is the link to chat right next to it.  Experienced users will certainly have no trouble finding it, but I think its lower position means that it is not what the eye first focuses on.  Another tactic is a changing advertisement for library services, one of which is the coffee bar in the library.  Another is a notice that the library is soon to be open 24 hours and is wireless.  Clearly the message is that the user should just come on over.

 

     The email form itself is extremely simplistic and it is further complicated by the fact that the user is asked to use a separate form for website comments, but that form is almost exactly the same.  The email form opens with that request, followed by a suggestion that the user might want to call instead if the library is open (which it soon will be all the time) along with the phone number.  Then there is a highlighted text section about information the library may collect, which may act as a deterrent, along with a link to their privacy policy.  Only then does the form ask for name, email address, phone #, department/major, and school classification, the latter being a menu which includes student level.  Then there is a statement to the effect that providing personal information is optional, but that an email address is essential if an answer is wanted, and a phone number helps if the library needs more information.  The address part of the statement seems ridiculous on an email reference form.  The text box is labeled Comment rather than Question, and there is a box to include a URL if the question refers to one.  The Library Website comment form is only different in that the request for department/major and UTA classification are missing. 

 

     The first thing that is needed at UTA is a better library link on the university homepage.  There are multiple choices on the page in a tight list and they are all equally prominent.  It took me awhile to find it.  The choice is libraries, not Ask a Librarian.  If the library really does not want patrons to use the email service, then I suggest the appropriate thing to do is discontinue it, rather than be so obviously discouraging.  If that is not done, then it should be improved. 

 

     Improvements would include either truly combining the reference and web comment forms, or changing them so that they are markedly different.  In the latter case, the email form should certainly have a Question label.  The privacy information should be moved to the bottom of the form, and a simple link is probably better.  I would prefer a designation of Required (or the lack of it) by each information box, rather than the “Providing personal information is optional…” text.  Minimal additions would include information or links to tell the user what kind of questions can be asked and the turnaround time.  A deadline box is very helpful as well, and optionally UTA could add more of the features that I listed in the beginning of this paper.  Also essential I believe is a reorganization of the options on the main help page.  At the very least, I would remove the link on the simple email address.

 

     The University of South Florida library help, http://helpdesk.acomp.usf.edu/cgi-bin/library.cfg/php/enduser/home.php, also includes extensive FAQ.  In their case it is first on the menu of help choices.  The link takes the user to a page with a keyword(s) search box where you can also indicate a subject category, but the use of that menu is non-intuitive.  At the bottom are the reference category FAQ in times solved” order. (That terminology only becomes clear as you go deeper in the system.)  The user can browse the FAQ from this page, or they can choose a particular question that takes them to a “file card” on the question.  This includes suggestions of where to look on the site or off, or the exact answer in quotes taken from multiple sources, including their URLs. There are also suggestions for similar FAQ questions, although the connection is sometimes elusive. What is perhaps most impressive is that the user is asked to evaluate the quality of the help as a part of the process, and since it requires a simple click on a percentage bar, I would guess USF Library receives plenty of usable feedback.

 

     Back on the main help page Ask a Question is the second choice, followed by Live Assistance, which also enables the user to opt out of chat in favor of a phoned response.  Finally a choice invites providing feedback here as well.  The email form is fairly unique in design, but sparse in content, asking only ID, email address, subject and your question.  The user is asked to place their question within the pull-down menu of subject categories.  This allows the question to be filed in the FAQ database according to librarian categories, but user classification.  There is an option to attach documents, which I saw very few times in my overall review.

 

     The first thing that is needed at USF is a redesign of the Virtual Library homepage.  The content is fine, including a fairly prominent Ask a Librarian link, but it uses too many colors for no reason, and they clash making the page hard to focus on.  This seems odd in a website where the help pages are exceedingly clean, as is the university homepage, which could use something other than the very tiny Libraries link The help pages are just a little too clean in that they provide no information about the services.  I think that the clarity could be retained, but more information provided by providing links to information pages in various places.  An invitation to call the library is missing as well. The first place I would an information link is next to the email reference choice on the main help page.  Users need to know at least the kind of questions allowed and the turnaround time.  On the email form itself the user needs to be encouraged to provide a lot of information either textually or with a few more boxes.  A deadline box and a link to a privacy policy would be helpful as well.  A perusal of the lists provided at the beginning of this article provides ideas for additional features that could optionally be added, but with this web designers penchant for black spaces, I doubt that they would be.

 

     The most impressive things about the Kansas City Public Library website, http://www.kclibrary.org/about/ask/index.cfm, is the changing picture content on the homepage.  One of the things that is sometimes there is a large red graphic that says “Get the answers you need…when you need them…try out our new online chat service.  The changing content is probably the way of the future, but from the context of this assignment, I would prefer it stay on the Ask graphic.  I also think that the emphasis of the chat service should be reduced since I think it would scare some users away.  The entire home page is very well designed.

     If the user clicks on the graphic, the resulting page has links to live chat, phone reference and email help with textual information about chat.  If instead they chose the Ask a Librarian link, which is there even if the graphic is not, they are sent to the simple menu without the additional chat information.  I like the simple horizontal design of this menu and it’s inclusion of small linked graphics as well as text links.  The hours of chat and the phone number are also on the page, and there is a simple navigation menu for the whole site at the top.  If the user chooses chat they are sent to the link described above. If they choose phone they get the original menu with added information about the kind of questions answered and a note that during the night there is a voicemail.  It says a librarian will call you with an answer, but does not specify when.

 

     If they choose email they are sent to the form.  It asks name and email which are starred to indicate that they are required, and also asks phone address, city, state, zip, and library card #, with the explanation that this is only needed if the applicable or if you are requesting a PIN.  This would indicate that this library is willing to answer questions from all over the country, which is unusual.  The form then asks the user to use a menu to place their question in a subject category.  This allows easy placement into a FAQ file.  The text box is labeled Message and the button directly below is labeled submit query.  The email address is at the bottom.

 

      It seems odd that when information about the service and the kinds of questions is provided with phone or chat, they are missing with email.  That needs to be remedied.  I would also like to see the complete textual information supplied on a scrollable main page replacing multiple clicks, or perhaps it should be in both places for users who don’t scroll.  The email form itself, and the log-on for chat could still be links.  Though the multiple line location information could make for interesting statistics, it is clearly optional so I think the form could be improved by placing it, along with a few additional information requests in an optional section below the query box.  The kinds of things that I think should be added are the same as in my analyses of the academic libraries above.  As always there are other optional bells and whistles listed in the beginning part of this paper that could be optionally added as well.

Reference Services
Home