Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ualj20
ISSN: 0004-9670 (Print) 2201-4276 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ualj20
Using instant messaging for online reference
service
Shirley Forster
To cite this article: Shirley Forster (2006) Using instant messaging for online reference service, The Australian Library Journal, 55:2, 147-158, DOI: 10.1080/00049670.2006.10721833
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00049670.2006.10721833
Published online: 08 Jul 2013.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 55
Using instant messaging
for online reference service
Shirley Forster
Many libraries are using co-browsing chat products to provide reference services to their patrons, whilst their patrons are online and using the internet. The concept of such an online service is highly desirable, but many libraries are concerned that they will never be able to afford such a system. This may have changed: Instant Messaging (IM) can provide a very cost-effective way to offer an online reference service with an improved level of communications flexibility that can attract a new group of information seekers, especially those using mobile communications devices. How was this conclusion reached? How effective a solution can IM be, and what types of libraries can best utilise an IM-based solution?
The author notes: Regarding use of the word ‘client’: I have tried to be very careful to use ‘patron’ to refer to library customers throughout the article because ‘client’ is here used as a technical term. Instant Messaging software is client/server-based software. The MSN, AOL and Yahoo networks provide the server, and each user of the network must have an associated piece of ‘client’ software loaded on their PC. In the case of AIM, and Yahoo, the end-user must do a one-off download of the client software from the Internet. Although reliance on downloaded software has been regarded as undesirable for library services in the past, the lure of using IM is such that 867 million peo
-ple had downloaded this sort of software by 2005, meaning that a huge audience of internet users have the client software downloaded and so are already set up to communicate in this way. In Microsoft operating systems the Windows Messenger client is now delivered as a standard part of the XP operating system, so a download is no longer required for users of XP.
The importance of communication with patrons
O
NliNerefereNceservicescANActuAllyAssistthepAtroNiNtheActofseekiNginformation on the Internet now that so much information is available electronically. But the way patrons communicate, and the way they access the internet is changing. We cannot assume that information seekers are sitting at their computer when they need assistance. Take a lawyer who needs
last-minute information as she travels from her office to court. She might contact the library by mobile phone; the library might obtain some clarification from the lawyer by opening an online session with her as she sits in the courthouse; and when the answer is complete, the library might deliver a scanned copy of a document to the lawyer as an attachment to an e-mail. This is one example of how available com-munication flexibility can provide a better service for library patrons: it also marks a shift from the assumption that internet users can find for themselves everything they need to one of growing awareness that librarians may be a more efficient and effective conduit.
Traditionally libraries have communicated with patrons in person, by phone, fax and letter. More recently they have been quick to offer new technologies such as web forms, e-mail, and the commercial co-browsing chat products that provide solutions for information seekers working from their desks. Now there are new technologies such as Instant Messaging, VoIP, and mobile phone SMS to consider, many of which are available from handheld devices. There is also the ability to use older services like e-mail and web browsers from new devices such as General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) mobile phones. Our society’s new need for information ‘on the run’ means that libraries now need to consider how to facilitate contact with their patrons using whatever contact method the patron currently has at hand, as well as providing services for those sitting at a computer with no time pressure.
Instant Messaging provides a means of chatting with information seekers on the internet and so has already been considered and implemented by some libraries as a means of delivering an online reference service. In some cases this has been done to provide a supplementary service to an existing co-browsing service (Ohio University, http://www.library.ohiou.edu/libinfo/ask.htm), and in others it forms the only on-line reference service offered (SUNY Morrisville Library’s Talk to a Librarian service, http://library.morrisville.edu). Although both Instant Messaging and co-browsing products can be used to deliver an online reference service, they are different, and libraries should consider providing the best combination of services for their particular patron base, evaluating the different contact methods that their patrons may want to use and the type of equipment that they want to use them on.
Key features of co-browsing products
• The main features that distinguish co-browsing products from other chat products like Instant Messaging are:
~ The librarian and patron can share a browser window and chat box that do not intrude on each other, making the concurrent use of a browser and chat more effective.
~ The shared window allows the patron to see what the librarian is doing, and allows them to visit places such as authenticated databases that they would not otherwise have had access to. Serious researchers love the easy way in which this shared window feature works as it allows them to learn better information-seeking skills by working one-on-one with a librarian. ~ A transcript of the session is provided to the patron so that they can revisit
the URLs visited during the online session. ~ Patrons do not need to download any software.
~ Co-browsing products generally provide multiple queues and mechanisms for passing calls between staff – particularly helpful for very large organisa-tions and consortia.
• Many online reference service operators do not use the window-sharing features of co-browsing products, which make them so popular with patrons, because these features are not compatible with all computer systems of users of the service. When operators limit their usage to the basic-level page-pushing and file-sharing functions they are limiting their use to features that differ very little from those available in many other products (including Instant Messaging). • Co-browsing services are open for set hours: someone has to be available at the
computer where the service is delivered, whether questions are coming in or not. Yet for most individual libraries, the volume of online questions coming in is low in comparison to the total volume of reference questions being handled – 0.3 per cent, 2 per cent and 6 per cent of total question volume for the librar-ies reviewed in the 2004 article ‘To chat or not to chat’ by Coffman and Arret. [reference http://www.infotoday.com/searcher/jul04/arret_coffman.shtml] • The products generally being used for library co-browsing chat services today
– QuestionPoint, Virtual Reference ToolKit, VRLPlus and the like – are ex-pensive; some libraries are said to have paid a starting price of US$15 000 up front and US$6000 per annum.
But things have changed
Whether your library needs or uses co-browsing features, or has high or low volumes of online reference questions, online reference services are highly regarded by library patrons for their immediacy, and for the learning experience that their interactivity provides. They are especially popular with younger users, as evidenced by the National Library of Australia’s Ask Now! System. It has averaged more than 2800 questions per month over its three years of operation, with its average user less than 24 years old.
The popularity of online reference services will continue to grow – but times have changed since co-browsing products first became popular for providing online reference.
When online/chat reference was first introduced, the average computer user had to use their (single) phone line to access the internet, and so being able to provide support to them over the internet, because it was not possible to simultaneously speak to the patron by phone, was crucial. However, now, more than 20 per cent of Australian homes have broadband connections, and that number is increasing at 18 per cent per quarter. In the USA, where broadband has been available at a reason-able price for much longer, broadband penetration reached 62.46 per cent of homes in September 2005 (http://www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0510/). Even if they still use a dial-up connection, the patron probably now has a mobile phone that they can use to call the library whilst they use the internet. Others have VoIP products that they could use to call the library whilst online – VoIP is now built into some co-browsing and most Instant Messaging products. So increasingly computer users can simply pick up the phone to obtain assistance from their librarian, while they are using the internet, and the inability to speak to patrons whilst helping them on
the internet is no longer as important a reason to provide a full co-browsing solution. Of course being able to speak with patrons while online to them has never been a problem for users on business networks, or many special library patrons.
When co-browsing products emerged, the average computer user did not have a chat facility on their computer – which meant that the library had to provide a product that could be used by both the librarian and the patron (without a download). Now, every Windows XP machine is delivered with the Windows Messenger IM product already installed, and if it doesn’t already have an IM product, even children hap-pily download IM clients like MSN, AIM and Yahoo Messenger, so they can keep in contact with their friends. So the need to provide chat functionality for the patron is no longer so great, and is further reducing the need for a full co-browsing product. Businesses are even introducing IM clients as a tool for their staff to keep in contact – IDC Analyst Robert Mahowald says ‘more that 28 million business users worldwide used enterprise Instant Messaging products to send nearly 1 billion messages each day in 2005’. http://www.instantmessagingplanet.com/enterprise/article.php/3554611.
Initially the patron was often sitting at a computer when they needed assistance with finding information on the internet, and they had time to type out a conversation with a librarian. Now, patrons can be using a mobile phone or PDA to seek informa-tion and although some users still need to see how informainforma-tion is found, many (like our lawyer example) do not have the time to spend on a protracted online session. Many information seekers have access to e-mail, letter, fax, phone, mobile phone, SMS, and Instant Messaging and they use whichever communications medium is most appropriate or available for their current need. To be responsive libraries need to be able to work with all of the communications methods used by their patron base.
Instant Messaging key features
• It’s free if you are using a public system. That’s not the whole story, as there is evidence that at least some add-on services are now being charged for, and that charging may increase as new features are added, but basic public IM services are likely to remain free, and that’s a good reason to keep looking at IM. Business IM systems, however, are not free and it is possible that business systems, with their added virus protection, may prove good value for libraries to use in the future, despite the cost.
• There are a variety of IM products but they all provide the ability to instantly chat with another party, file share, and pass URLs. So all IM products provide the basic functionality for an online reference service.
• Most IM products are also now providing VoIP along side the chat function – being able to speak with the patron to supplement chat typing generally reduces the duration of a chat reference session by half, if the patron has the microphone and speakers required to use this feature. Being able to speak with the patron (whether via VoIP or a concurrent phone call) also reduces the need for the full screen-sharing features provided by co-browsing products, as fuller explanations can be provided.
• Both Windows Messenger and AIM Instant Messaging provide screen-sharing functionality. Screen sharing provides a co-browsing-like service that will meet the needs of many libraries (see below).
• IM is now available for use on many mobile phones and PDAs making it a product that can be used ‘on the run’.
• Many IM products also include easy access to other communications methods such as e-mails, SMS messages, participation in videoconferences, sharing a graphical whiteboard, as well as all the features mentioned above. By offering access to all of these communications options, Instant Messaging soon be-comes the central communications application for those who use it. Librarians using IM as their central communications application achieve a new level of flexibility in being able to move between all of the different communications methods accessible through IM.
• IM products generally use less bandwidth than co-browsing products and so are more effective for users of dial-up line.
• Instant Messaging products are generally client-based, which means that the patron must already have an IM product loaded on a computer, and have reg-istered with an IM service. This means that some patrons who are not already set up to use IM will be deterred from using the service, but those who are already connected will be familiar with the product and it will be installed correctly for that patron’s PC, PDA, or phone and there will be less need to coach the patron in how to use the library’s online reference service. • However, this does not mean that the incompatibility problems experienced by
co-browsing services are solved. IM systems have to deal with different clients with different features, different networks that don’t interconnect, and the same firewall and hardware incompatibility issues experienced by co-browsing systems. (See the next section for more detail). The Instant Messaging culture necessarily accepts incompatibility, and that users will not always be available via a common system: incompatibilities are tolerated in this environment, as is the fact that the service may not necessarily be available 24/7. This provides some room for libraries to manoeuvre.
• There is some concern about increased virus infection risks with the use of Instant Messaging: it is very important that a regularly updated virus protector is always installed on any machine running Instant Messaging. This is less of an issue for special libraries with secure patron bases: libraries which have an IM system rolled out by their IT department will generally be using a system with added virus protection. It will be necessary to check that patrons will be able to access services from outside their organisation, as some internal systems are insulated from outside access in order to reduce the virus risk.
Instant Messaging products and unconnected services
There are lots of different IM clients, and almost as many different Instant Messaging network providers: AIM Instant Messaging and Macintosh iChat work with the AOL network; Yahoo with the Yahoo network; MSN Messenger and Windows Messenger with the MSN network. In September 2005 Google announced a new one – GTalk, which works on the GMail network.
But none of these networks talk to each other and users can only talk to others on the same network as themselves – and even within the one network, different IM clients offer different features so that a feature can only be used if it is available in the
IM clients of both participants in a conversation. This incompatibility of features is well understood by the IM community and tolerated, which provides a new opportunity for libraries to offer a level of service to different groups of patrons according to the patron’s understanding of their individual IM client’s capabilities. This is not generally a problem, however, for special libraries where their patrons all have their IT provided by the one organisation, as only one network will usually need to be supported.
Lack of interconnectivity between networks may be a problem for public access libraries, which really need to offer access from ALL of the networks in common use in their patron community, but there are ways to solve interconnectivity – Al-tarama’s RefTracker facilitates intelligent use of multiple IM clients for multiple IM networks, and there are single IM client products like Trillian or Jabber or Fire (for Macintosh) that can be used with multiple networks. For those who have IT depart-ment-supplied and funded IM systems, some business systems like Microsoft’s Live Communications Server provide a gateway between the different IM networks, or you can wait until the IM networks have interoperability working – Microsoft and Yahoo recently announced near-term plans to develop interoperability and there is a quasi ‘standard’, but it is currently only used by Jabber and GTalk, neither of which have large market shares as yet.
Multi-network IM clients are attractive for services wanting to provide a service over multiple networks as staff only need to learn how to use one client, but the features offered by these products are often limited. It would be a shame to ignore features as valuable as VoIP and screen sharing because of a decision to train staff on only one IM client. It is an advantage for staff to use the highest featured, most common client for each network the library proposes to support, not only because it allows the library to be compatible with the maximum number of features that patrons might want to use, but because it means that the librarian will often be using the same client as the patron they are working with, and will therefore be able to provide assistance with using the client itself, should it be required.
Instant Messaging for online/chat reference
If your organisation offers a service to the public, you will need to decide which networks you will support. If you need to support multiple networks, then using the best IM client for each IM network you will support, together with a product like RefTracker that automatically brings up the right IM client for the patron, will provide the most flexible solution. Currently the Windows Messenger product is the highest featured product for the MSN network, and the AIM client is the highest featured product for the AOL network. Both these products provide screen-sharing functions (More/Application sharing in Windows Messenger, and People/Add ins/Net Meeting in AIM) so they are currently the most attractive products for staff to use to provide an online reference service.
The market shares for the different IM networks worldwide in 2005 according to the Radicati Group (http://www.radicati.com) were AOL 56 per cent, MSN 25 per cent, and Yahoo 19 percent. Market shares vary widely in different countries. In the USA the AOL dominance is even higher than in the worldwide figures quoted above, but in Australia MSN has almost complete market dominance – more than 4 million registered users! Almost one in five Australians has access to PCs already set up to use an MSN Network-based online reference service.
In markets where no single supplier dominates, it is possible to offer a service through a web-based IM client like AIM Express for the AOL network, MSN Web Messenger for the MSN network, and Meebo and e-Messenger that both work across multiple networks. Not only can these products be used without a download, and from devices like PDAs that can only run web browsers, or when ‘on the road’ and using a public computer, but they also provide some virus protection. They only provide basic IM functionality at this time, but for these reasons some libraries may decide that offering a web-based IM client service would be a good solution for them.
How do IM and co-browsing compare?
Instant Messaging and co-browsing products are different: co-browsing products provide a purpose-built product for serious researching and information-seeking instruction for users at a computer. IM products provide a multi-purpose environ-ment that is familiar to many users and can be used by patrons at their desk or on the road. IM provides links between many different communication methods and so facilitates a flexibility that the library needs in order to be able to swap between communication methods as freely as the modern day wired patron does.
Despite these clearly separate roles, the following comparison of features will be useful if you need to decide between the two types of service, or if you need to decide which service to recommend for specific purposes.
• Both IM and co-browsing offer chat, file transfer and the ability to recommend URLs for self-investigation.
• If your library supports a public patron base you may need to support mul-tiple networks and IM clients. Staff training may require more time than for a single-system co-browsing solution.
• The co-browsing-like features in IM are only available for patrons with IM clients that support application sharing (currently only Windows Messenger and AIM) so this may not be a universally available feature of an IM-based online reference service. In fact with an IM service patrons will receive differ-ent levels of service depending on the IM clidiffer-ent they use.
• When using the co-browsing-like functions in IM, the chat window is separate from the browser window. Even if you share the chat window, it can intrude on the other party’s ability to see the screen being shared. Although this would lead to the conclusion that co-browsing products are better in this regard, the issue can be effectively resolved if you can obtain a concurrent phone call or VoIP session: establish the patron’s needs using chat, and, if screen sharing is required, establish a side-by-side VoIP session or phone call with the patron at the same time as establishing the screen-sharing function.
• The co-browsing-like functions (screen sharing) provided by IM products are currently based on NetMeeting. NetMeeting allows the librarian to define the windows (applications) to be shared, and it allows the librarian to control whether the patron can control the shared window. There is some concern about NetMeeting being a security risk when dealing with clever and malicious patrons and you should seek the advice of your IT department on whether al-lowing patron control is wise in your particular circumstances. However, if you do allow patron control, you can perform librarian-led browsing, patron-led
browsing and even bilaterally controlled browsing (co-browsing). If you do not allow patron control then you can only perform librarian-led browsing, but with the concurrent VoIP session provided by NetMeeting, or a concurrent phone call, this can be very effective. However, for some organisations this could be an important enough reason to require a full co-browsing solution.
• Co-browsing products create transcripts automatically. Transcripts have to be saved explicitly in IM. Some patrons may not know that they can and should save the transcript, so having some standard text that you can use to encourage the patron to do a file/save at the end of each IM session is a good idea. The librarian should also save the IM conversation if that becomes your library policy.
• Co-browsing products provide the ability to maintain scripts of standard text that can be used with just a few clicks. The same concept can be used with IM products by the library creating a separate web page that staff can cut and paste the standard text from.
• Co-browsing products have functions that allow users to be queued and passed between operators. These functions are important for very large libraries and consortiums, but for most libraries, offering several different IM names (for example, by subject), and having staff log into the appropriate name for ros-tered shifts, provides a satisfactory solution to sharing the load when using IM. It is also possible to use the multi-way conversation function of some IM products to bring in additional librarians or other experts.
• Co-browsing products can only be used from PCs. IM products can be used from computers, PDAs and mobile phones, and so are more flexible in the age of ‘on the run’ information.
• Co-browsing products are a single-purpose product. IM products can provide a cornerstone application that links all of a user’s communications methods. IM is thus not only a product that can be used to switch between contact methods as fast as your patrons do, but provides a new way for librarians to communicate with each other.
Don’t forget the ‘support’ approach mentioned earlier – support organizations, Microsoft for example, do not try to provide a co-browsing service. They simply have patrons phone for support, and then bring up the same screens that the patron is seeing, and talk them through how to use them. Libraries can use this same ap-proach now that the average patron can use the phone at the same time as using the internet.
No matter what sort of online/chat reference service you are considering, you need to consider that chat services will take more staff time, so it’s a good idea to look at getting your current request-answering services in great shape first. Request Management Systems such as RefTracker can do that effectively for you.
Why your library might wish to offer an IM online/chat reference service
Attracting patrons to your library and holding them means making the library accessible
and easy to use. With the ‘communicate anywhere’ attitude that is now characteristic of mobile phone users, libraries now need to allow patrons to contact them by what-ever of their favourite communications methods they currently have at hand. The use
of Instant Messaging has increased dramatically in recent years and is predicted to continue growing. The Radicati Group predicts that worldwide there will be a total of 1.2 billion IM accounts in existence by 2009, compared to 867 in 2005. So there is already a huge audience of users out there who would be pleased to be able to contact their library using their favourite electronic communication method – IM. Patrons who use IM already have an IM client set up on their computer and so do not have any concerns about downloads. They are familiar with IM software and how to use it, which removes the fear of something new, and the learning curve associated with using co-browsing products. Their computer is already proven to work with IM software and communications bandwidth problems are less than with co-browsing products.
No matter what IM client/s you choose to use, it will be capable of chat, URL refer-ral and file transfer – not much less functionality than that provided by co-browsing products where the staff do not use the screen-sharing co-browsing function, and IM provides the same sort of immediacy of service that co-browsing products provide. There are already two IM products that can perform a screen-sharing co-browsing type function, and presumably there will soon be more. Although this feature may not be suitable for all libraries, and is best used in conjunction with a concurrent phone or VoIP session, it can provide very effective online information research and training opportunities similar to co-browsing products, especially for special libraries.
And best of all, you can usually add IM to your online reference services at almost no cost, with the added benefit of increasing staff communication and without hav-ing to formally staff an additional service over a specified period, because IM users expect other users to not always be available.
I conclude that IM can create an attractive additional service for your library, and that this is especially so if you have patrons on the road. If you already run a co-browsing service then you could attract additional users by providing in addition an IM-based service. IM is not a full replacement for the way in which co-browsing products are used in all libraries at this stage; however, this brings us to the need to look at short-term changes that might alter the balance between these two tools and services.
What can we expect in the future?
In addition to these good reasons to use IM now, there are some short-term changes will further improve the popularity of Instant Messaging products.
• The variety of functions that can be provided through Instant Messaging clients will continue to increase: chat, VOIP, e-mail, and in some IM clients co-browsing-like functions and even the ability to send SMS messages and run video conferencing sessions. As more communication methods become available their role as the cornerstone application that computer users rely on for communications will solidify and the popularity of IM will continue to increase exponentially.
• The incidence of computers being fitted with microphones and speakers, and even cameras, is increasing rapidly as users recognise the cost benefits of using VoIP, and corporations recognise the potential for reduced travel budgets by facilitating face-to-face meetings via IM. Combined with the comfort of being able to use things like VoIP and video conferencing directly through a product the patron and librarian are already familiar with, the increasing employment
of these components combined with application sharing, will bring enormous efficiency improvements to chat sessions further reducing the need for full co-browsing services.
• While there are moves to provide interconnectivity between the IM networks, there is no need to wait for this as there are IM clients that can be used with multiple IM networks, and there are products like RefTracker that facilitate the use of multiple IM clients by ensuring the appropriate one is brought up at the right time.
• Microsoft has plans to introduce a new IM client that works seamlessly with Outlook and your other Microsoft Office applications. Google has recently announced GTalk, which incorporates Skype VoIP, as well as a major new alliance with Sun. Yahoo and Microsoft have recently announced an alliance that will result in interconnectivity between their networks. A quick swing of allegiance by IM users is possible, and could easily be precipitated by giant organisations like these making these sorts of major changes. Conformity of IM client or network usage could quickly result, making it easier to select a standard IM client for librarians to use, that could have custom features added to make use with other library products, like RefTracker, even easier.
• Internet users are becoming less wary of downloads – just look at how many users have downloaded free Instant Messaging clients! This may open the way for use of different types of products for specialised online sessions, for example hosted online meeting software like Webex and GotoMeeting. This is already happening with the link to Webex available from AIM.
• Co-browsing, online meeting and IM products are technologically demand-ing solutions and evolvdemand-ing rapidly: they will come from specialist vendors so the key to the future will be the ability to interoperate with other products as needed. Current IM products are already providing the ability to bring up the most appropriate contact method at the right time, and to allow products to be melded to provide the best online reference service.
Users like online reference for two reasons: its immediacy and interactivity. These are particularly attractive in to young people, and Instant Messaging can provide a better level of immediacy than a co-browsing product because it is available at ‘on the go’ devices like phones and PDAs, and because it is the central product they use to be able to move between all of their different communication methods. Most IM still has limited interactivity, but if you can use Windows Messenger, or AIM, with a concurrent phone call or VoIP session, IM can provide a very workable service. However, serious researchers like the ability to be online (co-browse) with a librarian, and librarians like the ability to teach via such a facility.
Conclusions
IM’s ability to facilitate access to a range of different communications methods makes it a sensible tool for libraries to introduce as the main communication tool for their librarians. It will moreover facilitate better communication between the librarians within your organisation. For libraries with ‘highly mobile’ patrons who want to be contacted when using their mobile phone or PDA, IM use by staff is particularly
beneficial as it provides better access to the communications methods used by these patrons.
For special libraries and others where there is only one IM network to support, where patrons are trusted and the full NetMeeting capabilities can be used, IM cre-ates a service so close to that provided by full co-browsing products, and at such an affordable price, that co-browsing products can no longer be justified for these types of libraries.
For public libraries and universities and special libraries with open patron bases, IM will provide different levels of service according to the IM client features that your library chooses to support. For some of these libraries a co-browsing product may remain an option that adds important value to an online reference service, but for many others IM will provide an affordable and effective new service.
For all types of libraries, even those using co-browsing products, IM provides an alternative service that can attract additional users because of the vast audience of potential patrons for whom IM is the communication tool they are most familiar with.
Postscript
On 12 October 2005, Microsoft and Yahoo announced an agreement to work together to provide complete interconnectivity between the MSN and Yahoo IM networks. Libraries will find it easier to provide IM-based online reference services for the wider community, and the popularity of Instant Messaging will further increase. On 1 November 2005 Microsoft announced the release of beta versions of Microsoft Live and Microsoft Office Live. These are the first of a range of new products from Microsoft that totally integrate Instant Messaging into the Microsoft Office tools, such as Outlook, that so many people use.
Integration of Instant Messaging into Microsoft’s Office products means use of IM will quickly be integrated into the everyday computer usage of an even wider range of computer users, especially as it means that for all Office users, an IM client will no longer need to be downloaded in order to participate. As a result, it is predicted that, just as the use of e-mail has become a standard way of communicating, Instant Messaging will also become a standard way of communicating. As a direct result, patrons will increasingly expect to be able to communicate with their local library by Instant Messaging, just as they expect to be able to communicate with the library by phone, fax and e-mail.
It also means that as libraries upgrade to the latest Microsoft Office products that include Instant Messaging, they will be set up to start communicating with patrons by Instant Messaging, with no extra cost or effort. In other words, it is now inevitable that libraries will begin to use Instant Messaging in their day-to-day operations. It is now inevitable that many more libraries will begin using Instant Messaging for the provision of an online reference service. Similarly the Windows Mobile 5.0 Operating system for mobile phones is now shipping with Pocket MSN as a standard feature, confirming that the day has already arrived where the sort of high-end mobile phone users that many special libraries support, can now use the internet and Instant Mes-saging ‘on the run’.
Shirley Forster holds a BSc in Computer Science and is managing director of Altarama Systems & Services, a company that specialises in providing computer-based products that improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the reference function of libraries. She has more than 20 years experience with designing and supporting computer systems for libraries. Altarama does not currently sell a co-browsing product. The development of communication products is moving very quickly and readers should obtain up-to-date information about products currently available and which might be offered shortly. Further information about Altarama and its products and services, including an ‘IM Quickstart’ package that contains web pages and instructions for how to set up an IM service, can be obtained at http://www. altarama.com.au or via info@altarama.com.au.
An invitation to contribute
The Australian Library Journal is ALIA’s journal of record. As such it reflects a cross-section of issues critical to the profession at any given time. Published continuously for over fifty years it now represents the most substantial and significant archive of thinking in the established and evolving professions which over time have comprised the membership of ALIA. Ground-break-ing discussion, controversial papers, the narrative of professional practice and the evolution of the Association itself are all reflected in its pages. The catalogue of authors whose work has appeared in it is an honour roll. Many whose first tentative reflections appeared there have gone on to become notable contributors to the literature which is the foundation of all mature professions.The Journal is open to contributions from students, interested lay people, practitioners, researchers, educators, whether in Australia or overseas. Its pages are not restricted to work by members of the Association. Publication in the Journal’s refereed pages is an asset in any cv or job application.
In its fifty-fifth year, the Australian Library Journal invites contribu-tions from the wide range of interests in the field. Previously unpublished writers and established authors are welcome to discuss possible contribu-tions with the editor, John Levett, PO Box 74, Middleton Tasmania 7163, ph or fx 03 6292 1699, e-mail jlevett@southcom.com.au
