Library stakeholder attitudes and new technology
| Date | 14 January 2019 |
| Pages | 128-140 |
| Published date | 14 January 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-02-2018-0012 |
| Author | Ronald Larson |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,HR in libraries,Library strategy,Library promotion |
Library stakeholder attitudes and
new technology
Ronald Larson
Mid-America Consultants International, Fargo, North Dakota, USA
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to provide advice for library managers on the collection of feedback
from stakeholders. An example of radio frequency identification (RFID) is used to illustrate what can be
learned and how decisions can be improved with this feedback.
Design/methodology/approach –The stakeholder, RFID and library literature are reviewed and lessons
for improving future technology decisions are developed. The results of a direct-mail survey of 394 members
of the general public in the Midwest illustrate the insights that can be gained with marketing research.
Findings –Many libraries appear to have neglected getting feedback from some stakeholders before
implementing RFID tagging of materials. Gathering specific information from local stakeholders (including
some that are only indirectly influenced by a decision) can help improve the odds of initiative success. Regular
dialogs with stakeholder groups can help librarians track progress of programs, identify issues and prepare
response strategies.
Practical implications –If librarians had conductedsurveys about RFIDor self-service checkouts when the
technologies were under consideration, they would have gained a greater appreciation of the concerns some
individuals had. Dialogs could have been started, educational events could have been planned and other
responses could have been developed. The stakeholders to be regularly consulted should include individuals who
are indirectly affected by thelibrary. These lessonscan be followed when librarians considerother initiatives.
Originality/value –This paper offers library leaders new insights into when and how to gather information
from stakeholders. Tips are offered to improve the effectiveness of surveys and focus groups.
Keywords Stakeholders, Surveys, Strategic planning, Focus groups, Self-checkout,
Radio frequency identification
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Librarians are generally regarded as early adopters of new service technologies (e.g. Singh
and Mahajan, 2014; Gupta and Margam, 2017). Sometimes early adopters find that the
technologies they chose may not become popular or may produce unexpected reactions from
stakeholders. One objective of library leaders is to make wise technology choices.
The management literature suggests that managers should anticipate the perceived
benefits and costs when they evaluate new technologies. Identification of benefits and costs
usually requires getting feedback from stakeholder groups. Unfortunately, prior research
suggests that many library administrators may not have reached out to some stakeholders
when they evaluated radio frequency identification (RFID) for book tagging and
self-checkout systems. This paper examines the stakeholder, RFID and library literature
and identifies lessons for future technology evaluations. A survey illustrates what can be
learned from stakeholders about technologies like RFID. Because stakeholder theory
recommends getting regular feedback from multiple stakeholder groups, some principles for
using the research tools of surveys and focus groups are also presented.
Stakeholder theory
There are hundreds of formal definitions of stakeholders (Miles, 2017). Basically,
stakeholders are individuals or groups who can affect the outcome of a decision or who will
be affected by a decision. Companies have learned the importance of involving stakeholders
in their decision processes. Wheeler and Sillanpaa (1998, p. 201) concluded: “All the available
evidence suggests that companies which are run with a view to the long-term interests of
Library Management
Vol. 40 No. 1/2, 2019
pp. 128-140
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0143-5124
DOI 10.1108/LM-02-2018-0012
Received 28 February 2018
Revised 28 February 2018
Accepted 18 July 2018
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-5124.htm
128
LM
40,1/2
To continue reading
Request your trial