The document discusses the importance for libraries and librarians to demonstrate their relevance to patrons and communities. It argues that libraries will remain supported only as long as they are seen as relevant to people's lives. To achieve individual relevance, librarians must go beyond superficial answers and show patrons how the library can truly help meet their needs. Institutionally, libraries must show how they benefit all segments of the community, not just specific groups, and statistics alone will not convince people of a library's relevance. Librarians must strive to personally help patrons in a genuine way through their skills and resources.

1. Chasing​ ​Relevance
LlBChat​ ​-​ ​OLC​ ​2017
Don​ ​Boozer
don@cpl.org
There​ ​is​ ​no​ ​guarantee​ ​that​ ​libraries​ ​will​ ​continue​ ​to​ ​exist​ ​in​ ​the​ ​future.​ ​Period.
Libraries​ ​will​ ​continue​ ​to​ ​exist​ ​as​ ​long​ ​as​ ​our​ ​communities​ ​continue​ ​to​ ​support​ ​us.
And​ ​when​ ​will​ ​they​ ​stop​ ​supporting​ ​us?
They​ ​will​ ​stop​ ​supporting​ ​us​ ​when​ ​we​ ​are​ ​seen​ ​as​ ​being​ ​no​ ​longer​ ​relevant​ ​to​ ​their​ ​lives.
But​ ​what​ ​does​ ​it​ ​really​ ​mean​ ​to​ ​be​ ​relevant?
In​ ​recent​ ​years,​ ​much​ ​ink​ ​has​ ​been​ ​spilled​ ​-​ ​both​ ​literally​ ​and​ ​virtually​ ​-​ ​on​ ​the​ ​question
of​ ​the​ ​relevance​ ​of​ ​libraries.
The​ ​question​ ​of​ ​relevance​ ​has​ ​two​ ​primary​ ​aspects:​ ​the​ ​individual​ ​and​ ​the​ ​institutional.
The​ ​individual​ ​aspect​ ​has​ ​to​ ​do​ ​with​ ​what​ ​we​ ​are​ ​doing​ ​as​ ​individuals​ ​and​ ​how​ ​we​ ​make
the​ ​library​ ​relevant​ ​to​ ​those​ ​individuals​ ​that​ ​come​ ​into​ ​our​ ​facilities,​ ​the​ ​patrons​ ​we​ ​serve
at​ ​the​ ​reference​ ​desk​ ​or​ ​the​ ​information​ ​desk​ ​or​ ​the​ ​concierge​ ​desk​ ​or​ ​whatever​ ​we’re
calling​ ​it​ ​these​ ​days.
What​ ​are​ ​​you​ ​​doing,​ ​personally,​ ​to​ ​demonstrate​ ​the​ ​relevance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​library​ ​to​ ​each
person​ ​you​ ​serve...
In-person
On​ ​the​ ​telephone
Through​ ​email
Are​ ​you​ ​pointing​ ​them​ ​to​ ​authoritative​ ​resources?
Are​ ​you​ ​showing​ ​them​ ​how​ ​to​ ​access​ ​your​ ​databases?

2. Are​ ​you​ ​conducting​ ​a​ ​solid​ ​reference​ ​interview​ ​with​ ​them​ ​to​ ​determine​ ​their​ ​real​ ​needs
and​ ​not​ ​just​ ​their​ ​superficial​ ​requests?
Are​ ​you​ ​working​ ​with​ ​them...​ ​to​ ​show​ ​them​ ​what​ ​the​ ​library​ ​truly​ ​has​ ​to​ ​offer​ ​them?
Or
Do​ ​you​ ​just​ ​point​ ​to​ ​the​ ​section​ ​where​ ​the​ ​books​ ​that​ ​they​ ​​probably​ ​​need​ ​​may​ ​​be?
Do​ ​you​ ​just​ ​do​ ​a​ ​basic​ ​Google​ ​search​ ​and​ ​choose​ ​from​ ​the​ ​first​ ​couple​ ​of​ ​hits?
Do​ ​you​ ​just​ ​take​ ​every​ ​question​ ​at​ ​face​ ​value​ ​and​ ​provide​ ​a​ ​good-enough​ ​answer?
The​ ​relevance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​library​ ​is​ ​demonstrated​ ​by​ ​surprising​ ​people​ ​with​ ​the​ ​expertise​ ​and
quality​ ​service​ ​that​ ​can​ ​only​ ​be​ ​found​ ​in​ ​a​ ​committed​ ​library​ ​staff​ ​member.
I’ve​ ​seen​ ​librarians​ ​do​ ​it.​ ​I’ve​ ​seen​ ​library​ ​assistants​ ​do​ ​it.​ ​I’ve​ ​seen​ ​clerks​ ​do​ ​it.
For​ ​my​ ​fellow​ ​librarians:​ ​Our​ ​Master’s​ ​degrees​ ​SHOULD​ ​provide​ ​us​ ​with​ ​a​ ​solid,
philosophical​ ​foundation​ ​for​ ​WHY​ ​we​ ​do​ ​what​ ​we​ ​do.​ ​WHY​ ​those​ ​essential​ ​values​ ​of
open​ ​access​ ​to​ ​information,​ ​intellectual​ ​freedom,​ ​patron​ ​confidentiality,​ ​and​ ​a
commitment​ ​to​ ​lifelong​ ​learning​ ​are​ ​of​ ​paramount​ ​importance.​ ​We​ ​all​ ​SHOULD​ ​know
why​ ​they’re​ ​still​ ​relevant​ ​and​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​demonstrate​ ​it.
But​ ​having​ ​librarians​ ​with​ ​Master’s​ ​degrees​ ​is​ ​not​ ​a​ ​sufficient​ ​condition​ ​to​ ​make​ ​our
institutions​ ​relevant.
A​ ​passion​ ​for​ ​public​ ​service​ ​-​ ​coupled​ ​with​ ​one’s​ ​own​ ​eagerness​ ​to​ ​learn​ ​and​ ​expand
one’s​ ​own​ ​skills​ ​and​ ​knowledge​ ​-​ ​is​ ​of​ ​paramount​ ​importance.​ ​Those​ ​of​ ​us​ ​with​ ​Masters’
degrees​ ​in​ ​library​ ​and​ ​information​ ​science​ ​SHOULD​ ​serve​ ​as​ ​role​ ​models.
We​ ​SHOULD​ ​be​ ​sharing​ ​our​ ​expertise​ ​our​ ​fellow​ ​staff​ ​members.
We​ ​SHOULD​ ​be​ ​sharing​ ​our​ ​own​ ​passion​ ​for​ ​our​ ​core​ ​values.​ ​It’s​ ​our​ ​professional
responsibility​ ​to​ ​set​ ​a​ ​standard​ ​of​ ​service.
If​ ​we​ ​don’t​ ​believe​ ​in​ ​our​ ​own​ ​relevancy,​ ​why​ ​should​ ​anyone​ ​else​ ​bother?

3. If​ ​we’re​ ​just​ ​relying​ ​on​ ​Google,​ ​why​ ​should​ ​we​ ​think​ ​we’re​ ​adding​ ​value​ ​to​ ​our​ ​patrons’
lives?
If​ ​we​ ​aren’t​ ​friendly​ ​and​ ​welcoming,​ ​why​ ​should​ ​patrons​ ​return​ ​to​ ​ask​ ​us​ ​for​ ​our​ ​help?
Don’t​ ​misunderstand​ ​me.
I​ ​know​ ​it’s​ ​rough​ ​on​ ​the​ ​frontlines.​ ​I​ ​know​ ​patrons​ ​can​ ​be​ ​…​ ​problematic.​ ​I​ ​know​ ​that
sometimes​ ​Google​​ ​is​​ ​the​ ​quickest​ ​route​ ​to​ ​an​ ​answer.​ ​But​ ​that’s​ ​not​ ​my​ ​point.
We​ ​are​ ​only​ ​as​ ​relevant​ ​as​ ​the​ ​last​ ​patron​ ​thinks​ ​we​ ​are.
If​ ​we​ ​truly​ ​help​ ​someone,​ ​even​ ​if​ ​we​ ​think​ ​what​ ​we​ ​did​ ​is​ ​no​ ​big​ ​deal,​ ​that​ ​person​ ​will​ ​be
grateful.​ ​That​ ​person​ ​will​ ​mention​ ​to​ ​their​ ​friends​ ​that​ ​they​ ​received​ ​great​ ​service​ ​at​ ​the
library.
A​ ​genuine​ ​smile,​ ​a​ ​patient​ ​ear,​ ​and​ ​a​ ​welcoming​ ​tone​ ​along​ ​with​ ​quality​ ​public​ ​service,
well-honed​ ​reference​ ​skills,​ ​high-quality​ ​resources,​ ​and​ ​an​ ​authentic​ ​curiosity​ ​about​ ​the
world​ ​will​ ​demonstrate​ ​relevance​ ​to​ ​each​ ​person​ ​you​ ​serve.
People​ ​crave​ ​personal​ ​service​ ​from​ ​someone​ ​genuinely​ ​interested​ ​in​ ​helping​ ​them.
If​ ​we​ ​just​ ​do​ ​Google​ ​searches​ ​and​ ​just​ ​point​ ​to​ ​the​ ​books​ ​they​ ​​might​ ​​need​ ​and​ ​just
expect​ ​people​ ​to​ ​keep​ ​using​ ​our​ ​institutions​ ​because​ ​they​ ​have​ ​in​ ​the​ ​past,​ ​we​ ​will​ ​be
sadly​ ​disappointed.
That’s​ ​what​ ​I​ ​mean​ ​by​ ​demonstrating​ ​individual​ ​relevance.
Institutional​ ​relevance​ ​is​ ​that​ ​same​ ​aspect​ ​writ​ ​large.​ ​Our​ ​institutions​ ​need​ ​to
demonstrate​ ​how​ ​we​ ​remain​ ​vitally​ ​relevant​ ​to​ ​our​ ​communities​ ​and​ ​our​ ​country.
But​ ​we​ ​have​ ​to​ ​do​ ​this​ ​realistically.
We​ ​can’t​ ​CONVINCE​ ​people​ ​that​ ​libraries​ ​are​ ​still​ ​relevant​ ​by​ ​creatively​ ​generating​ ​and
cherry-picking​ ​statistics.
IMLS​ ​reports​ ​that​ ​there​ ​were​ ​1.3​ ​billion​ ​in-person​ ​visits​ ​to​ ​public​ ​libraries​ ​across​ ​the
U.S.​ ​in​ ​2015.​ ​Okay?​ ​There​ ​are​ ​1.3​ ​billion​ ​searches​ ​on​ ​Google​ ​in​ ​less​ ​time​ ​than​ ​your

4. regular​ ​shift​ ​at​ ​work​ ​in​ ​a​ ​day.​ ​Does​ ​that​ ​necessarily​ ​mean​ ​Google​ ​is​ ​more​ ​relevant​ ​than
libraries?
ALA​ ​touts​ ​that​ ​there​ ​were​ ​more​ ​attendees​ ​at​ ​library​ ​programs​ ​across​ ​the​ ​country​ ​in​ ​a
year​ ​than​ ​at​ ​Major​ ​League​ ​Baseball​ ​and​ ​NBA​ ​games​ ​combined!​ ​Wow.​ ​96.5​ ​million!
Okay?​ ​But​ ​166​ ​million​ ​people​ ​are​ ​estimated​ ​to​ ​have​ ​attended​ ​just​ ​high​ ​school​ ​football
games​ ​in​ ​a​ ​single​ ​year.—over​ ​two-thirds​ ​more​ ​than​ ​attended​ ​the​ ​library​ ​programs.​ ​Does
that​ ​mean​ ​we’re​ ​more​ ​relevant​ ​than​ ​professional​ ​baseball​ ​and​ ​basketball​ ​but​ ​not​ ​as
relevant​ ​as​ ​high​ ​school​ ​football?
I​ ​could​ ​go​ ​on,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​hope​ ​you​ ​get​ ​the​ ​idea.​ ​Numbers​ ​alone​ ​will​ ​not​ ​save​ ​us.​ ​Numbers
don’t​ ​demonstrate​ ​our​ ​relevance.
If​ ​we​ ​think​ ​we​ ​can​ ​dazzle​ ​people​ ​with​ ​selective​ ​statistics,​ ​that​ ​they’re​ ​going​ ​to​ ​suddenly
see​ ​the​ ​light,​ ​we’re​ ​sorely​ ​mistaken.
So​ ​then​ ​the​ ​question​ ​becomes:​ ​What​ ​are​ ​we​ ​doing​ ​right​ ​now​ ​to​ ​demonstrate​ ​our
relevance​ ​to​ ​your​ ​communities?​ ​What​ ​are​ ​we​ ​doing​ ​right​ ​now​ ​that​ ​demonstrates​ ​that​ ​we
ARE​ ​relevant?​ ​That​ ​we​ ​ARE​ ​indispensable​ ​to​ ​our​ ​whole​ ​community?
And​ ​by​ ​the​ ​whole​ ​community,​ ​I​ ​mean​ ​the​ ​​whole​ ​​community.​ ​Not​ ​every​ ​member.​ ​We’ve
NEVER​ ​reached​ ​every​ ​member,​ ​but​ ​we​ ​have​ ​to​ ​try​ ​to​ ​reach​ ​all​ ​segments​ ​of​ ​our
community.
If​ ​we​ ​primarily​ ​tout​ ​services​ ​like​ ​internet​ ​access​ ​and​ ​job​ ​services​ ​to​ ​the​ ​poor​ ​and​ ​the
homeless,​ ​we​ ​risk​ ​being​ ​stereotyped​ ​as​ ​having​ ​nothing​ ​to​ ​offer​ ​those​ ​who​ ​aren’t​ ​poor​ ​or
homeless.
If​ ​we​ ​primarily​ ​tout​ ​storytimes​ ​for​ ​children​ ​and​ ​programming​ ​for​ ​teens,​ ​we​ ​risk​ ​being
stereotyped​ ​as​ ​having​ ​nothing​ ​for​ ​adults.
Historically,​ ​and​ ​almost​ ​by​ ​definition,​ ​the​ ​poor,​ ​the​ ​disenfranchised,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​vulnerable
have​ ​always​ ​gotten​ ​a​ ​raw​ ​deal.​ ​And​ ​because​ ​of​ ​that,​ ​we​ ​MUST​ ​continue​ ​to​ ​advocate​ ​for
these​ ​members​ ​of​ ​the​ ​community.​ ​Public​ ​libraries​ ​were​ ​founded​ ​on​ ​the​ ​ideal​ ​of
providing​ ​information​ ​and​ ​learning​ ​opportunities​ ​to​ ​those​ ​in​ ​our​ ​communities​ ​who​ ​could
turn​ ​to​ ​no​ ​other​ ​institution.​ ​We​ ​began​ ​as​ ​a​ ​means​ ​for​ ​people​ ​to​ ​educate​ ​themselves.​ ​We
were​ ​created​ ​to​ ​be​ ​part​ ​of​ ​building​ ​a​ ​better​ ​world​ ​for​ ​everyone.
But​ ​that​ ​advocacy​ ​alone​ ​is​ ​not​ ​going​ ​to​ ​save​ ​us.

5. We​ ​can,​ ​it​ ​seems,​ ​no​ ​longer​ ​count​ ​on​ ​the​ ​wider​ ​community​ ​to​ ​support​ ​us​ ​just​ ​because
we​ ​provide​ ​these​ ​services​ ​for​ ​persons​ ​who​ ​are​ ​disadvantaged.​ ​I​ ​fear​ ​we​ ​also​ ​need​ ​to​ ​be
demonstrating​ ​what​ ​we​ ​have​ ​to​ ​offer​ ​other​ ​members​ ​of​ ​the​ ​community.
We​ ​CANNOT​ ​be​ ​all​ ​things​ ​to​ ​all​ ​people,​ ​but​ ​we​ ​can​ ​ask​ ​what​ ​resources​ ​do​ ​we​ ​have​ ​and
who​ ​would​ ​benefit​ ​from​ ​them.​ ​In​ ​many​ ​cases,​ ​we​ ​may​ ​find​ ​we​ ​have​ ​untapped​ ​resources
that​ ​could​ ​be​ ​of​ ​assistance​ ​to​ ​niches​ ​of​ ​our​ ​community​ ​we​ ​hadn’t​ ​considered.​ ​We​ ​are
guaranteed​ ​that​ ​people​ ​won’t​ ​use​ ​resources​ ​or​ ​services​ ​if​ ​they​ ​don’t​ ​know​ ​about​ ​them.
We’re​ ​also​ ​expanding​ ​the​ ​kinds​ ​of​ ​services​ ​people​ ​can​ ​access​ ​at​ ​our​ ​libraries,​ ​but​ ​are
we​ ​leaving​ ​behind​ ​what​ ​makes​ ​libraries​ ​unique​ ​cultural​ ​institutions?
What​ ​makes​ ​us​ ​unique?
In​ ​the​ ​past,​ ​it​ ​was​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​we​ ​served​ ​as​ ​gateways​ ​to​ ​knowledge.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​wanted​ ​to
find​ ​information​ ​on​ ​a​ ​subject​ ​that​ ​you​ ​or​ ​your​ ​family​ ​didn’t​ ​know​ ​about​ ​and​ ​you​ ​weren’t
in​ ​school,​ ​you​ ​had​ ​to​ ​go​ ​the​ ​library.
We​ ​know​ ​that’s​ ​not​ ​the​ ​case​ ​anymore.​ ​Anyone​ ​can​ ​find​ ​almost​ ​anything​ ​on​ ​the​ ​Internet.
Or​ ​I​ ​should​ ​say:
Anyone​ ​can​ ​find​ ​almost​ ​anything​ ​good​ ​enough​ ​to​ ​answer​ ​their​ ​question​ ​on​ ​the​ ​Internet.
But​ ​should​ ​we​ ​be​ ​satisfied​ ​with​ ​that.​ ​Should​ ​we​ ​be​ ​abdicating​ ​our​ ​responsibility​ ​to​ ​make
sure​ ​our​ ​fellow​ ​community​ ​members​ ​are​ ​getting​ ​authoritative​ ​information?​ ​Why​ ​do​ ​we
think​ ​this​ ​situation​ ​is​ ​good​ ​enough?
Pew​ ​Research​ ​recently​ ​did​ ​a​ ​study​ ​that​ ​found​ ​that​ ​78%​ ​of​ ​adults​ ​generally​ ​think​ ​that
public​ ​libraries​ ​are​ ​helpful​ ​in​ ​finding​ ​trustworthy​ ​and​ ​reliable​ ​information.​ ​Even​ ​better
news​ ​was​ ​that​ ​87%​ ​of​ ​Millennials,​ ​aged​ ​18-35,​ ​thought​ ​the​ ​SAME​ ​thing!
And​ ​those​ ​same​ ​Millennials,​ ​by​ ​wide​ ​margins,​ ​say​ ​they​ ​think​ ​the​ ​public​ ​library​ ​helps
them​ ​learn​ ​new​ ​things​ ​and​ ​get​ ​information​ ​that​ ​helps​ ​them​ ​with​ ​decisions​ ​they​ ​have​ ​to
make.
Those​ ​Millennials​ ​are​ ​our​ ​future!​ ​They​ ​think​ ​our​ ​traditional​ ​roles​ ​of​ ​guiding​ ​people​ ​to
reliable​ ​information​ ​and​ ​helping​ ​them​ ​learn​ ​new​ ​things​ ​are​ ​relevant!

6. We​ ​sometimes​ ​run​ ​away​ ​from​ ​our​ ​traditional​ ​roles​ ​in​ ​an​ ​effort​ ​to​ ​make​ ​our​ ​institutions
more​ ​exciting,​ ​more​ ​edgy,​ ​more​ ​techy,​ ​more​ ​…​ ​not-a-stereotypical​ ​library.
But​ ​guess​ ​what,​ ​we​ ​can​ ​be​ ​exciting,​ ​edgy,​ ​and​ ​techy,​ ​and​ ​still​ ​fulfill​ ​our​ ​unique​ ​role​ ​in
the​ ​community.
As​ ​libraries​ ​evolve,​ ​we​ ​have​ ​to​ ​be​ ​careful​ ​not​ ​to​ ​lose​ ​sight​ ​of​ ​our​ ​fundamental​ ​values
and​ ​principles.​ ​If​ ​at​ ​some​ ​point​ ​the​ ​unique​ ​cultural​ ​and​ ​educational​ ​institution​ ​we​ ​call​ ​a
“library”​ ​has​ ​evolved​ ​beyond​ ​recognition,​ ​if​ ​what​ ​we​ ​call​ ​a​ ​“library”​ ​has​ ​changed​ ​so
fundamentally​ ​that​ ​it​ ​is​ ​something​ ​else​ ​entirely,​ ​then​ ​the​ ​very​ ​question​ ​of​ ​“Are​ ​libraries
relevant?”​ ​will​ ​itself​ ​become​ ​irrelevant.