SCREENING@SUNSET LODGE RETIREMENT HOME
...and then, apparently, It just went beserk when someone CURIOUS tried a MASHUP of Gin Rummy and Scrabble!
Showing posts with label Customer feedback. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Customer feedback. Show all posts
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Eureka!
Wednesday a library customer asked if we "had a list" of volunteers to help catalogue a small collection. I was able to suggest LibraryThing to the customer. Knowledge is out most important product! Thanks to PlayAway
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Delicious Tags
Have added labels to previous posts; labels are the equivalent of tags. Editing the layout for the blog, I preferred to post the labels list below outside sources.
Libraries can use social tagging much as the example libraries given in the instructions for this week. For my particular niche, I have been thinking of the Madison Community Grant Foundation DVDs at Lakeview. This collection is for film studies; and film studies in the myriad senses that such studies can be conducted. Tagging/Labeling is a "prime suspect" for how to do such in the public sphere. Users of the collection could comment at a library blog or del.icio.us site and form a Tag Cloud that maps out the collection as conceived by the users. This is quite different from a strict, formalized structure (say only watching films in chronological order) that a syllabus might provide.
Concerns: Would customers respond to such a process; and if so, what is the meaning of their tags? As with WIKIs, must we beware the chronic overuser, who might load tags on the site (perhaps silly, or nonsense tags)? As with GOOGLE hits, which can be loaded with advertising vocabulary, how do we limit responses to the Tag Cloud?
Libraries can use social tagging much as the example libraries given in the instructions for this week. For my particular niche, I have been thinking of the Madison Community Grant Foundation DVDs at Lakeview. This collection is for film studies; and film studies in the myriad senses that such studies can be conducted. Tagging/Labeling is a "prime suspect" for how to do such in the public sphere. Users of the collection could comment at a library blog or del.icio.us site and form a Tag Cloud that maps out the collection as conceived by the users. This is quite different from a strict, formalized structure (say only watching films in chronological order) that a syllabus might provide.
Concerns: Would customers respond to such a process; and if so, what is the meaning of their tags? As with WIKIs, must we beware the chronic overuser, who might load tags on the site (perhaps silly, or nonsense tags)? As with GOOGLE hits, which can be loaded with advertising vocabulary, how do we limit responses to the Tag Cloud?
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Active v. Passive
It is important to note that passive responses from customers are welcome, and may often highlight an area for library action. However, it is also the case, that such responses are like the proverbial "Ann Landers Survey." This means that it is not statistically valid, for it is not a random sample. Yet, like a suggestion box, libraries should allow such feedback.
Active surveys, on the other hand, can be quite useful. Would it be possible to select samples from the registered library users? If so, a random sample of 400 would yield statistically significant responses. Also, good surveys are not easy to produce. It would be good to do such, but with care, and as part of a learning organization. Learning about valid survey techniques, therefore, is quite important. A cycle of plan (learn how to survey), do (post the survey), check (analyze the survey), and act ( respond to results) could be useful.
Active surveys, on the other hand, can be quite useful. Would it be possible to select samples from the registered library users? If so, a random sample of 400 would yield statistically significant responses. Also, good surveys are not easy to produce. It would be good to do such, but with care, and as part of a learning organization. Learning about valid survey techniques, therefore, is quite important. A cycle of plan (learn how to survey), do (post the survey), check (analyze the survey), and act ( respond to results) could be useful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)