Simplifying the search experience – resisting the lure of shiny, new technology

Ronán KennedyMonica Crump

NUI Galway

School Institute Name to go here

• Why we did what we did• Some things we did, we shouldn’t have• Some things we didn’t do, we should have

• How we found what we should have done and what we shouldn’t have done

Early 2009• Primo Implementation Group

• Primo

Implementation

Group

• Interface Group• subject librarians; research librarians; e-resource librarian,

etc.

Early 2009• Web Group

• Primo to have prime real-estate space on the Library homepage

• ‘primo lite’

School Institute Name to go here

Initial Interface Work

• Demos of out-of-the-box version

• Examples of global sites – NYU, UAE, etc

• Interface Group members liaison role

Concerns – Radical Departure

• New interface could be radically different

• Big departure from Aleph (function & cosmetics)• Academic opposition• Possible training problems

School Institute Name to go here

School Institute Name to go here

Conclusion #1 – too conservative

• Concerns heavily shaped our vision- tried hard to integrate the past- fear of academics

• We tried to mould Primo into something it wasn’t

Concerns – Dumbing Down• One single simple interface = bad information literacy

• “Primo should be a flagship model of good pedagogical practise”

• Multiple tabs made sense to us

Lots of cooks in the kitchen

• Subjective opinions are always difficult

• “Is it exposing our resources appropriately?”

• Font sizes!

source

Mid 2009

• Interface group assembled the jigsaw pieces

• Model followed closely with NYU, Iowa, British Library, UEA

• Time to caress the divine details….

Error Checking

• Librarians love detail!

• A lot of librarians means lots of errors being found

• Sub-conscious opinions being formed?

School Institute Name to go here

Perfection at all costs?• Did we get bogged down in making sure it was perfect?

• Special CollectionsSpecial CollectionsSpecial Collections ReferenceStrong Room

• Librarians want perfection – users want good enough

• Risking not seeing the wood for the trees

Customisation – Tread Carefully

• Primo is *very* flexible – lots of options

School Institute Name to go here

Customisation – Tread Carefully• Primo is *very* flexible – lots of options

• Tempting to generate completely local feel- can be timely

Just because you can push a button, it doesn’t mean you have to

Customisation – Tread Carefully

• Beware of skills sabotage

Primo launched Sept 2009

New website officially launched Sept 2010

School Institute Name to go here

School Institute Name to go here

How was it used?• 80/20 Theory

• 1.5 million Basic Searches• 50,000 Advanced Searches• 14 reviews written• Several hundred items tagged

LibQual Survey• November 2010

• LibQUAL+® is a suite of services that libraries use to solicit, track, understand, and act upon users' opinions of service quality.

• Global; great for benchmarking

IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or officeIC-2 A library website enabling me to locate information on my ownIC-3 The printed library materials I need for my workIC-4 The electronic information resources I needIC-5 Modern equipment that lets me easily access needed informationIC-6 Easy-to-use access tools that allow me to find things on my ownIC-7 Making information easily accessible for independent useIC-8 Print and/or electronic journal collections I require for my work

LibQual - Information Control Remit

minimum desired perceived adequacy superiority

IC-1 Making electronic resources accessible from my home or office Overall 6.42 7.84 6.49 0.07 -1.35

IC-2 A library website enabling me to locate information on my own Overall 6.53 8.00 6.49 -0.03 -1.51

LibQual - Information Control Remit

Let’s form a committee!!!

School Institute Name to go here

LibQual - Information Control Remit

Polarised Feedback

There was clearly a problem

What LibQual told us:

• We weren’t meeting our users’ minimum expectations of:

“A Library website enabling me to locate information on my own”

Comments Analysis

Navigation of the website is confusing

The website is difficult to use

The website is easy to use since the re-design

Access to e-resources needs to be more user-friendly

Online services are great!

Off-campus access works very well

VS

VS

More investigation was needed!

User Observation Study

• Real Users• Real Tasks• One user – One observer

We wanted to find out:

• where were users becoming confused• user interface features that users didn’t notice• whether and when users logged-in to enhance

search results• additional features/on-screen guidance that might

have benefitted users’ search experience• Any issues affecting the success of the users’ search

Structure of observation

• Pre-observation interview• Set list of tasks• Think aloud:

– Explain choices– Highlight anything that’s confusing– Express pleasure or frustration– Explain how you would carry out a similar task in real life

Key Findings

• Most of the problems, frustration and confusion seemed to arise from our links to our discovery tools and once they navigated into them.

• Some users went to our webpage about books to find the book they wanted rather than using the search box!

Users tended not to notice the ‘Get it’ and ‘Online Access’ links and there was some confusion about what the wording meant

Sources of Confusion

• FRBRisation posed great difficulties and caused confusion– Primo’s preferred record had only unavailable items –

short results showed only UNAVAILABLE– Available items on FRBRised records were hidden

• Journal article searching caused great confusion

Other findings

• Reliance on Google by all participants.• Prior attendance at library training hugely improved the

users’ success in completing the set tasks.• Several undergraduates were confused about references –

they were unsure what was a journal and what was a book

User Focus Groups

• Focus groups - for a wider perspective and to confirm findings

• Two groups – Undergrads; Postgrads & Staff• Caution – those willing to attend tend to be more library-

focussed, library-aware and therefore library-positive!

Primo-related findings

• Terminology used in online services is hard to understand – e.g. ‘currently unavailable’

• A simpler catalogue might be easier to use:

–“make it simple – more like Google”

• One user with experience of other libraries was emphatic that our online services were significantly easier to use than elsewhere.

Call to Action:

Simplify the Search Experience

Introduce a Single Search Box

Improve visibility of Login

What about the other options?

Find Databases

More Search Options

Journal Article Searching

Browse functionality

Other Improvements

• OPAC via Primo– Clearer

account information

– Clearer item/ holdings information

Not an easy journey!

• Planned for early summer go-live• Fixing minor bugs resulted in much bigger problems!• Upgrading to Aleph v.20 at the same time• Eventually went live on the very first day of Semester• Some ongoing issues

Feedback and Reaction

• Over-whelmingly positive:– “the new catalogue is amazing!”– “I like the new look - design and layout - it mirrors the

layout in many of our databases e.g., Ebsco, Proquest, Scopus.”

– “it looks very good – easy to search and smooth integration with SFX and OPAC”

– “an enjoyable and fruitful search experience”– “intuitive and intelligent layout and design”

Final Thoughts

• Very valuable to ask users what they think• Even more valuable to observe them using your discovery

tools• Primo v3 is a huge improvement on v2 and fulfills more of

the promise• Implementation can take a long time! Expect things to go

wrong!

School Institute Name to go here

Thank You!

• Ronán Kennedy ronan.kennedy@nuigalway.ie• Monica Crump monica.crump@nuigalway.ie

School Institute Name to go here