 |
| 'Reflection' photo taken by Kathryn Unsworth |
Reflective Statement
As the “introduction to the subject” (INF206) (Hay
& Wallis, 2007) states, “sharing content, collaborating with others and
creating community—are not new”. So what’s different or special about social
networking today, and why as information professionals should we care? According
to Casey and
Savastinuk (2006), “libraries are in the habit of providing the same
services and the same programs to the same groups”, consequently failing to
change. Conversely, Library 2.0 at its core is about change, where library
services go through “constant and purposeful change”, provide opportunities for
user participation in developing new library services, and successfully reach
existing and potential users (Casey and Savastinuk, 2006).
Now nearing completion of INF206 and having undertaken as
many of the course related activities as possible, I have come to appreciate that
merging Web 2.0 technologies with a Library 2.0 ethos can provide strategic
opportunities for libraries. The Social Networking Proposal (Assignment 2) was particularly
useful, providing a practical exercise for applying many of the concepts and
principles that underpin Social Networking, Web 2.0 and Library 2.0.
Yet, before signing on for INF206, I was a tentative user of
social media (for example YouTube, Flickr and Slideshare) as a consumer, not producer. I
had read and bookmarked blogs, but never made comments or added tags. As for
social networking, my feelings about Facebook, well let’s just not go there!
Twitter I considered was for people who needed a distraction from work. Second
Life, isn’t that just a virtual space for gamers, and young people to
‘hangout’? Even with accounts in Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and Yammer, I
hadn’t really committed. I believed social networking to be a trivial,
ego-centric and indulgent waste of time, which certainly had little or no place
in a work environment. From that starting point, if I had rated myself against Forrester’s (2012)
technographic’s profile, ‘spectator’ and ‘joiner’ would describe my level
of evolution in a socially networked society. As a social networking agnostic
the road was always going to be tough.
However, as journeys go, studying and participating in the
coursework for INF206 – the readings and links to resources, Facebook
interactions with other students, and the OLJ activities have been stimulating
and enlightening, albeit distracting and time consuming. Whilst the experiences
are not life-changing at this point, I have certainly discovered some
strengths, and also some glaring weaknesses in how I adopt, adapt and integrate new tools and practices (along
with associated principles, values and attitudes) into my workflows and work-related
beliefs. Today, a self-rating against Forrester’s behaviour ladder would place me
on the “collector”, “conversationalist” and “creator” rungs, but only at the
novice end of each rung.
I have found learning, evaluating and using new Web 2.0
tools generally enjoyable. The revelations have been: 1) the level of
involvement and work required in establishing, then maintaining connections; 2)
the intensity felt as a content creator (that sense of responsibility); 3) the
sheer number of tools available (to learn, use and evaluate); 4) the nuanced
differences between the networking platforms Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter,
Yammer, and their appropriateness to purpose for specific audiences; and, 5)
the volume of reading required to cover the subject comprehensively.
I still have a long way to go before I can consider myself a
professional or proficient user of social technologies, but I’m committed to
continuing my exposure. Much of the remaining reticence comes down to
confidence. How much value can I really add? My concerns about reputation and
the damage misinformation can cause, the public versus private issue (account
hacking, ensuring privacy and confidentiality around personal information) and
time management, are all yet to be overcome. Feeling overwhelmed by the
abundance of tools is another huge factor. Effectively managing workflows may
go some way to increasing confidence.
How does this awareness impact on my development as an
information professional? I believe I now understand the game plan and the key
elements required for the successful implementation of social networking
initiatives. The critical element is to understand user needs. Others include: providing opportunities for user
participation and feedback; a continuous improvement approach involving
iterative assessment; technology as a catalyst for change, but used only where
fit for purpose; and, a well-understood governance and policy framework.
What this subject has re-enforced in me, are the Web 2.0
values of community, content creation,
collaboration and harnessing collective intelligence, and how central they are
to Library 2.0 philosophy. A shining example of a participatory service is the
National Library of Australia’s Trove: Australia in Pictures (NLA, 2013) initiative, where
collections from Pictures Australia are
being moved into Trove. The initiative actively encourages people to contribute
their Flickr images depicting “social, political, contemporary, and/or
historical events of local or national significance”, drawing these contributions
from library members and non-members alike. What a wonderful, inclusive and
clever way to not only build a significant photographic collection, but also
contribute to documenting Australia’s visual record. Achieved through harnessing
collective intelligence and fostering a sense of community; Library 2.0 in
practice.
Given Web 3.0 is on the horizon, the future for libraries is
set to get interesting. Stuart
(2010) puts forward his predictions for Web 3.0 as Semantic Web, Web of Things,
3D Web or a ‘mashup’ of all three. How that translates into Library 3.0 will
rest on us to take the lead, as information professionals.
 |
| Excuse my poor attempt at humour! |
References
Bernoff, J. (2010, July 27). Social technographics defined 2010. [Presentation]. Retrieved from http://empowered.forrester.com/ladder2010/
Casey, M. E., & Savastinuk, L. C. (2006, January 09).
Library 2.0: Service for the next generation library. [Web log post]. Retrieved
from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6365200.html
Hay, L., & Wallis, J. (2007). INF206: Social networking for information professionals. Module 1 –
Introduction. Retrieved from http://interact.csu.edu.au/portal/site/INF206_201290_W_D/page/2b19a744-2d77-4152-80fd-749b1d3d4ce5
National Library of Australia. (n.d.). Trove: Australia in
pictures. Retrieved from http://trove.nla.gov.au/picture?q=
Stuart, D. (2010, February/March). Web 3.0 promises change
for libraries. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.researchinformation.info/features/feature.php?feature_id=253
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.