Evolution of electronic resources support: is virtual reference the answer?

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to describe the further evolution of electronic resources access support at Texas A&M University Libraries with recommendations for incorporating ER support into a virtual reference (VR) service. In a previous article, the implementation of a two-tiered electronic resources (ER) HelpDesk service was discussed. While an improvement, that service existed in parallel with the library's VR service, requiring separate staff and expertise. After considerable discussion and exploration, it became apparent that the needs of ER support could be met, with some modification, within the VR service. Design/methodology/approach -A project at the Texas A&M University Libraries sought to utilize an existing VR service, staffed by reference librarians and staff, to expand and improve handling and resolving ER access problems. Findings -VR software is effective for managing an electronic access problem reporting system. Integrating ER support into VR more broadly and equitably distributes responsibility for access and supports improved service for patrons and increased transparency and functionality for staff who respond to electronic resources access problems. Practical implications -Virtual reference and electronic resources staff can merge similar responsibilities for better service to patrons. Originality/value -This article offers experience-based guidance on utilizing VR technology and staff to effectively address and resolve electronic resource access problems. Our research suggests that there has not been another report of the use of integrating electronic resource problem reporting into virtual reference services.

E‐resource helpdesk into virtual reference: identifying core competencies

“…The ability to explain various access barriers and solutions or workarounds to users clearly and succinctly is usually associated with reference/public services staff and was definitely the single most important component of effective service provision in both systems. These data further confirm the authors' earlier finding that a broader group of librarians and paraprofessionals whose traditional duties include supporting user access possess the expertise to be highly proficient at supplying valuable, authoritative assistance with access problems (Resnick et al, 2008;Resnick and Clark, 2009). At the TAMU Libraries, these two groups have been drawn from professional and classified staff with backgrounds in technology (information architecture, computer and web applications), collection development, technical services, interlibrary loan, acquisitions, licensing, reference, subscription maintenance, and vendor relations.…”

“…The authors have been key participants in the Texas A&M University (TAMU) Libraries ERs access problem-reporting and resolution service since May 2006. This experience resulted in three previous publications, which provided the foundation for this report (Resnick et al, 2008;Resnick and Clark, 2009;Resnick, 2009). The research presented here further explores many of the issues raised in these three earlier publications and builds upon, deepens, and expands this previous research, as detailed below.…”

“…The research presented here further explores many of the issues raised in these three earlier publications and builds upon, deepens, and expands this previous research, as detailed below. In prior publications, the authors described the ongoing development at the TAMU Libraries of a comprehensive and integrated ER access support service (Resnick et al, 2008;Resnick and Clark, 2009). To summarize, since 2006, the TAMU Libraries progressed from using a homegrown, online, asynchronous ER problem-reporting system (ER HelpDesk), supported by internally developed and maintained software and relying primarily on e-mail communication, to a system that integrates problem reporting into the libraries' existing virtual reference (VR) service.…”

Tools for troubleshooting: Which ones and what for

“…Rathmel et al (2015) found that technical services was the most likely organizational home for troubleshooting personnel, followed by public services and library IT (p. 98). Resnick and Clark (2009), in contrast, claim, "The traditional library divisions … are no longer helpful in enabling consistent and reliable access to electronic resources." Instead, "access [is] an integrated process that is part of everyone's job" (p. 370).…”

“…Their pricing, features, and ease of use vary. The literature suggests that many of these have made their way into library operations, including the specific tools ServiceNow (Carter & Traill, 2017), Trello, Zapier, IFTTT, Footprints (Finch, 2014), JIRA, Drupal, Basecamp (Wilson, 2011), BugZilla (Browning, 2015), LibGuides, IBM Business Process Manager (Rathmel, Mobley, Pennington, & Chandler, 2015), and Microsoft SharePoint (Ennis & Tims, 2012), as well as generic tool categories such as bug-reporting (Rupp & Mobley, 2007) and ticket-tracking tools (Borchert, 2006), virtual chat (Resnick & Clark, 2009), blogs (Pan, Bradbeer, & Jurries, 2011), shared documents (Carter & Traill, 2017), wikis, electronic resource management systems (ERMS), integrated library systems (ILS), intranets, spreadsheets, web forms, and shared email accounts (Rathmel et al, 2015). The abundance of software applications in use in libraries according to these publications confirms that libraries may benefit from sharing how they chose the tools that they use and whether they are happy with them.…”