20 minute read
Inclusivity
Marketing Touchpoints — Segmenting User Groups for Greater Inclusivity
Column Editor: Jill Stover Heinze (Founder, Saddle-Stitch Marketing LLC, Charlottesville, VA 22902) <jill@SaddleStitchMarketing.com>
Over the years as I’ve given workshops and talks about marketing, I’ve found there are some marketing concepts that just don’t immediately resonate with my colleagues in libraries and related organizations. Rightfully, many library professionals are skeptical of applying for-profit ideas to non-profit goals that seek to advance the greater good. I applaud and encourage those folks for bringing a selective, critical perspective to borrowing from business theory and practice. I’m also of the belief that we should selectively adapt marketing methods as they make sense to benefit our users, rather than adopting marketing ideas wholesale for the sake of being more “business-like” (which isn’t inherently better). However, in some cases, valuable marketing ideas get sidelined not because they’re inappropriate, but because they’re misunderstood. One such marketing idea in particular never fails to stimulate debate and resistance among librarians — segmentation.
Segmentation is a widely-used marketing approach that involves analyzing and breaking up the group of all potential users an organization might serve into smaller groups based on how likely those users are to respond to particular offerings. The general idea is that you can’t serve everyone equally well with generic offerings, and by selectively targeting and tailoring products and services to distinct groups, you improve the chances that members of those groups will respond positively.
Intuitively, most of us recognize this principle as a fact of life in a commercial world. Our mobile devices and digital behaviors, for examples, give companies troves of information to present us with precisely personalized offers and ads based on profile data we provide, geographic location, social media likes, our purchase history, and so on. For many of us, customization — sometimes helpful, sometimes creepy, and often in-between — is a firmly entrenched expectation.
In general, this concept has great appeal to many businesses, and similarly great potential to benefit users. Businesses, for their part, can dedicate limited resources to focusing on understanding and serving the needs of customers they are best-equipped to help with products and services that provide a precise solution to customers’ problems. Ideally, in doing so they maximize their resources’ potential and end-user impact while avoiding the waste that results from targeting groups they can’t serve sufficiently. Customers too can benefit from segmented approaches, as the target customers should receive more relevant offerings and communications that are more likely than generic ones to offer meaningful solutions, while reducing the time it takes them to cut through clutter to find suitable marketplace options.
While librarians may concede these benefits in a commercial sense, it’s easy to see where the segmentation concept falls apart in an applied non-profit context. We librarians serve everyone, after all. It’s anathema to preferentially select one user group over another as it’s the antithesis of our core values of inclusion, diversity, and equity. If you believe this, how could segmentation ever be applied ethically and effectively in libraries? Should it even be considered?
My answer to those questions is an emphatic, “Yes!” It’s absolutely true that segmentation done poorly can alienate, exclude, and harm users. But done well, segmentation can be a go-to means of ensuring our institutions’ efforts make positive differences in people’s lives and actually further inclusiveness.
Accidental Segmentation Can Lead to Harm We librarians segment all the time. While mission statements typically assert that we serve all, our practices differ by necessity. If, for example, you work in an academic library, you welcome users from all over the world, but your day-to-day work is most likely devoted to the faculty, students, and administrators affiliated with your institution. You wouldn’t turn away the casual community researcher of course, and you may also create some services for these folks, but the bulk of your teaching, acquisitions, outreach, and collection management efforts almost certainly aim to advance the research and teaching activities of your college or university. Within those affiliated user bases, you also probably subdivide users by characteristics like discipline, rank, locality (on-campus vs. remote), etc.
Left unexamined, these organic segmentation activities can perpetuate inequalities and exclude underserved groups. Take for example the growing movement to apply a social justice lens to our services and acquisitions practices. As a Library Journal article on the topic states: Historically, libraries have shown a low tolerance for risk and a strong tendency to allocate limited resources of time, money, and energy in areas that yield the greatest results (or, at least, the highest numbers in areas that are easy to measure) and perhaps the least potential for problems. Some libraries of all types, however, are reevaluating the role they play in their community, questioning whether it is still good enough to provide equal access, or if it is time to pursue an active equitable access that focuses on empowering the less powerful and amplifying the voices of the unheard. 1 In other words, librarians’ relatively mass-market approach to serving users is being reassessed by some who find such an approach reaffirms endemic social power structures. The remedy proposed here is to selectively examine the perspectives of underprivileged groups to bring greater visibility to their voices and viewpoints via library collections and services. A segmentation approach, in this case, can be wielded to serve the underserved.
continued on page 62
Both Sides Now ... from page 60
and/or prospects and get those people to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of your company, then you’ve got the makings of building a strong relationship within your marketplace. Relationships between vendors and customers are built over many years. The rock group, Canned Heat accomplished a gold record award for their hit “Let’s Work Together” which is a fitting postscript to this article.
Mike is currently the Managing Partner of Gruenberg Consulting, LLC, a firm he founded in January 2012 after a successful career as a senior sales executive in the information industry. His firm is devoted to provide clients with sales staff analysis, market research, executive coaching, trade show preparedness, product placement and best practices advice for improving negotiation skills for librarians and salespeople. His book, “Buying and Selling Information: A Guide for Information Professionals and Salespeople to Build Mutual Success” has become the definitive book on negotiation skills and is available on Amazon, Information Today in print and eBook, Amazon Kindle, B&N Nook, Kobo, Apple iBooks, OverDrive, 3M Cloud Library, Gale (GVRL), MyiLibrary, ebrary, EBSCO, Blio, and Chegg. www.gruenbergconsulting.com
Knowing Users is a Prerequisite for Helping Them It shouldn’t be surprising that in order to segment a large user base into subgroups based on users’ behaviors, attitudes, and characteristics, you have to know something about those behaviors, attitudes, and characteristics. Successful segmentation is predicated on an in-depth understanding of users so that you can create truly relevant, effective services that sensitively address users’ needs. You can’t do that without expending some concerted effort learning about users’ perspectives, and in particular how their perspectives could influence how they respond to service offerings. An article in the Journal of Consumer Marketing underscores this imperative. In the article, author Edith F. Davidson explores the unintended consequences of race-based segmentation strategies, noting that perceived discrimination is a significant issue for minorities in business settings. Davidson states, “As the marketplace becomes increasingly more diverse, it becomes important for marketers to know and understand each customer group they serve. This includes knowing how groups differ in their perceptions, motivations, and interests.” 2 Given this, segmentation is essentially an opportunity to get to know your users better.
As you start to tackle user research, where should you begin? There’s more than one way to slice an onion, so to speak, and a rich array of segmentation variables to consider. Some common bases of segmentation include: • Demographics (geographic location, age, income, ethnicity, gender identity…) • Behaviors (frequency of visits/checkouts, in-person vs. online use…) • Benefits sought (help with assignments, quiet/productive place to work…) • Attitudes, interests, and opinions As you discover groups of folks with similar characteristics that you might serve collectively, you should consider which segments make sense for your organization to target and are likely to have the greatest positive impact. The characteristics of what makes one segment better than another are well-documented in marketing literature. Though you may not have the resources to do the data crunching to parse all of these possible segments the way large businesses might, the guidelines about viable segments are nevertheless useful guideposts as you explore where to focus. Good, viable user segments tend to be 3 : 1. Identifiable — You can figure out who they are. 2. Substantial — Segments don’t have to be small or niche. You should consider whether their size warrants the amount of effort you intend to spend tailoring offerings to them. 3. Accessible — You need to be able to communicate with members of the segment. 4. Stable — Choose user groups whose characteristics aren’t prone to change rapidly over short periods of time. This will give your efforts time to gain traction. 5. Differentiable — Segment members should have needs that are different from those in other segments. If you find multiple segments with similar needs, consider combining them. 6. Actionable — Don’t segment just for the sake of defining a segment. You should be able to act on the information you glean about the segment so that you can provide your services to them.
Achieve Greater Good with Smaller Focus As you may have gleaned, the term “segmentation” is a bit of a misnomer. To segment means to divide, and it’s true that segmentation requires one to examine a large user group in parts. Doing so, however, does not mean you should lose sight of the whole and sacrifice big-picture goals to satisfy a variety of subgroups.
Take for example the principle of universal design. As defined by the Centre for Excellence in Universal Design, it is “the design and composition of an environment so that it can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, ability or disability.” 4 For those interested in accessibility issues, we understand that by making an environment more usable for those with physical and intellectual challenges, we simultaneously make the environment more accessible for many other groups who may or may not have the same challenges. A classic example in this regard is the curb cutout. Designed so that people in wheelchairs can cross the street without being stymied by a raised curb, curb cutouts also help people pushing strollers or luggage, and generally mitigate an unnecessary barrier for all. However, creating this innovation demanded empathy and a focused understanding about the particular challenges physically disabled people encounter.
Similarly, we can view segmentation as a way to narrow our scope to elicit insights that can result in large-scale improvements. To use a library example, consider how you might target first-generation college students with services that bridge gaps in understanding academia for those whose are charting new territory within their families. You may devise specialized instruction for these students about the role of libraries and research in higher ed, which could easily translate to other groups such as international students, transfer students, and generally inexperienced academic researchers. By studying the scoped needs of first-generation students, you may uncover insights that help identify and serve a broader segment (those new to using academic libraries in the United States). Segmentation need not imply exclusiveness, but rather, an approach to greater understanding, and subsequently, inclusivity.
Concluding Thoughts In an article about the ethics of segmentation in health-related social marketing contexts (one that shares similar ethical concerns with library contexts), authors Newton, Turk, and Ewing examined pertinent ethical frameworks to determining whether segmentation is ethical. Among the frameworks examined, they found a promising one for moving these ethical considerations forward called Theory of Just Health Care (TJHC). Its proponent offered four conditions whereby healthcare segmentation could be applied justly 5 : 1. Segments and accompanying arguments underpinning segmentation decisions should be publicly disseminated. 2. Criteria used for segmentation should be deemed relevant by stakeholders. 3. An appeals process should be available to revise segments as needed. 4. These conditions should be regulated through voluntary agreements or legislation. While I’m not advocating we necessarily adopt these criteria, I agree in principle that segmentation can be an exceptional opportunity to openly and critically evaluate who your services are reaching and identify sources of potential bias or oversight. The very act of articulating the needs and people your services are supposed to serve and exposing those decisions to review and feedback can help us all do better for our users. Librarians are right to critically evaluate the intent and applicability of marketing concepts to library concerns. It is no doubt true that segmentation can be wielded for both good and ill. More questionable than applying segmentation is to continue doing so unconsciously.
Endnotes 1. https://www.libraryjournal.com/?detailStory=why-social-justice-in-the-library-outreach-inreach 2. Davidson, Edith F. “Misplaced Marketing: Unintended Consequences of Race-Based Segmentation Strategies.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 26, no. 3 (2009): 142. 3. https://hbr.org/2014/07/what-you-need-to-know-about-segmentation 4. http://universaldesign.ie/What-is-Universal-Design/ 5. Newton, Joshua D., Newton, Fiona J., Turk, Tahir and Ewing, Michael T. “Ethical Evaluation of Audience Segmentation in Social Marketing,” European Journal of Marketing 47, no. 9 (2013): 1427.
Optimizing Library Services — “…To Talk of Many Things!”
IGI Global’s Annual Academic Librarian Sponsorship Program Winner Shares Insights on Open Access, ROI, and the 2019 Charleston Conference
by Ms. Brittany Haynes (Editorial Assistant, IGI Global) <bhaynes@igi-global.com>
Column Editors: Ms. Caroline J. Campbell (Marketing Manager, IGI Global) <ccampbell@igi-global.com>
and Ms. Lindsay Wertman (Managing Director, IGI Global) <lwertman@igi-global.com> www.igi-global.com
Column Editors’ Note: This column features Ms. Elyssa M. Gould, Head of the Acquisitions and Continuing Resource Department at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA, who was the winner of IGI Global’s annual Librarian Sponsorship Pro gram, which provided a travel stipend for the 2019 Charleston Conference. To learn more about Ms. Gould’s experience at the 2019 Charleston Conference and her view on the trending topics of dis cussion at the conference, read the interview below. — CC & LW
What do you do in your current position at the University of Tennessee?
I currently coordinate and lead 16 staff who perform acquisitions, electronic resource management, licensing, binding, and interlibrary loan activities at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA. Additionally, I have previously served as Electronic Resources & Serials Librarian at the University of Michigan Law Library, USA, and Cataloging & Metadata Librarian at Northern Michigan University, USA.
Whatwas yourexperiencelikeatthe2019 Charleston Conference?
I had a good conference! It was my second time at the Charleston Conference, and it was my first as a presenter. I presented on two panels, “I Don’t Want to Go Among Made People: Adventures in Establishing Good Communication Between Subject Librarians and Technical Service Departments in a Large Academic Library” and “Begin at the Beginning: Revamping Collection Development Workflows,” in conjunction with my colleague Ms. Jennifer Mezick, Collections Strategist, from the University of Tennessee, USA. Both panels outlined practices, workflow enhancements, and lessons that we learned at the University of Tennessee when we were both put into leadership positions.
Additionally, during the conference, I felt like I got a good mix of vendor conversations, conversations with peers, and ideas from interesting presentations. I was honored to receive the IGI Global Librarian Sponsorship award, as the Charleston Conference is a wonderful conference that prioritizes librarians and vendors working together to achieve
mutual goals. Sharing in conversation with vendors is the first step towards a mutually beneficial partnership. In your opinion, what were the most relevant topics that were discussed during the conference?
I think the most relevant topics were around scholarly communications, publishing, and open access. I really appreciated presentations by practitioners showing what their institutions were doing to respond to both open access and budget constraints. What I saw was that no two institutions were alike; what one institution values most may be of lower value at another institution. It was encouraging that a response can look so different but still be working towards an overall goal of making research accessible to patrons.
What can librarians do to ensure that theyaremaximizingtheROIon theircontent investment?
Librarians should spend the time to go through data provided by the vendor, talk to the patrons who use the content, and incorporate other measures such as e-resource troubleshooting data. Through creating a holistic view of what content is being used, needed, as well as published, librarians can ensure that they are making the most informed decision, while even identifying areas of opportunity or improvement.
As the open access movement was a prominent topic discussed at the Charleston Conference, what are the benefits of open access, and how can publishers better support academic libraries and their patrons in OA? The open access movement provides a more transparent way for libraries and publishers to support research. The additional benefit — of being able to make more content open access — fulfills library missions. To improve their open access models, publishers should talk openly with libraries before making decisions on how to improve existing models to ensure that it is directly benefiting their customers and the academic community at large.
In relation to this question, I think IGI Global’s open access offset model, the Open Access Fee Waiver (Read and Publish) Initiative, 1 is a really good start and rightly acknowledges a library’s subscription or purchase as supporting research.
What challenges do librarians face in integrating these models and conforming to the OA movement?
Coming from a technical services background, the more slightly different models we have, the more difficult it is to keep track of them and fully maximize each model. If we cannot keep track of them, researchers definitely will not be able to keep track of them. I do not think one model will fit all, but I anticipate a wider adoption rate by researchers if there are only a few options to keep track of, instead of many. As a librarian, what are the things you most want publishers to understand about your acquisition needs?
We are being asked to do more with less funding, but the reality is really that we are doing less with less funding. It is time to stop squeezing libraries for funds. Instead, publishers need to look into new and additional partnerships that can offset publishing costs while still providing patrons with access to research needed for teaching and learning.
IGI Global would like to congratulate Ms. Gould on this award, as well as her work in advancing the state of knowledge resources. Additionally, as a diamond sponsor of this conference for over 11 years, IGI Global would like to thank everyone who was involved in this year’s successful conference.
continued on page 64 Column Editor’s End Note: To learn more about how librarians can maximize their ROI and about IGI Global’s transformative OA Fee Waiver Initiative noted in the above interview, watch the Charleston Conference panel, “Twelve Danishes for the Price of One: The Benefits of Bulk Acquisitions for Librar ies,” here: https://bit.ly/36snDZe. During this panel session, attendees heard viewpoints from a librarian, publisher, and
aggregators on the benefits of bulk acquisitions compared to the title-by-title approach and ways these parties can come together to create innovative solutions for achieving a maximized ROI for libraries while also catering to the academic community by providing access to trusted, peer-reviewed research. Speakers on this panel included: Moderator: Mr. Scott Ahlberg, Chief Operations Officer, Reprints Desk Mr. NickNewcomer, Senior Director of Sales and Marketing, IGIGlobal Mr. John Elwell, MLIS/MA, Director of Content Strategies at EBSCO Books Mr. Scott Pope, MLS, Continuing Resources Librarian at Texas State University Ms. Sara Tarpley, Director of Academic Product Sales at Gale-Cengage Learning Additionally, in order to stay abreast of the opportunity to apply to next year’s Academic Librarian Sponsorship Program, which provides a $500 travel stipend to attend the 2020 Charleston Conference, sign up to our mailing list at www.igi-global.com/newsletters/.
Recommended Readings Armbruster, C., and Romary, L. (2012). The Evolving Role of Commercial Publishers and the Future of Online Access Repositories. In C. Wei, Y. Li, & C. Gwo (Eds.), Multimedia Storage and Retrieval Innovations for Digital Library Systems (pp. 329-341). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0900-6. ch017
Bassuener, L. (2016). Knowledge in the Shrinking Commons: Libraries and Open Access in a Market-Driven World. In E. Railean, G. Walker, A. Elçi, and L. Jackson (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Applied Learning Theory and Design in Modern Education (pp. 358-379). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-9634-1.ch017 Belikov, O., and Kimmons, R. M. (2019). Scholarly Identity in an Increasingly Open and Digitally Connected World. In M. Khosrow-Pour, D.B.A. (Ed.), Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in Library Science, Information Management, and Scholarly Inquiry (pp. 579-588). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-7659-4.ch046 Fteimi, N., Basten, D., and Lehner, F. (2019). Advancing Automated Content Analysis in Knowledge Management Research: The Use of Compound Concepts. International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), 15(1), 53-68. doi:10.4018/IJKM.2019010104 Gaetz, I. (2016). Processes, Opportunities, and Challenges Creating and Managing a Scholarly Open Access Journal: An Investigation of “Collaborative Librarianship.” In B. Doherty (Ed.), Space and Organizational Considerations in Academic Library Partnerships and Collaborations (pp. 205-229). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1- 5225-0326-2.ch010
González-Pérez, L. I., Ramírez-Montoya, M., and García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2018). User Experience in Institutional Repositories: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals (IJHCITP), 9(1), 70-86. doi:10.4018/IJHCITP.2018010105 Kisielnicki, J., and Sobolewska, O. (2019). Technical Infrastructure of Network Organizations. In Knowledge Management and Innovation in Network Organizations: Emerging Research and Opportunities (pp. 55-85). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1- 5225-5930-6.ch003 Koutras, N. (2020). The Evolving Role of Commercial Publishers and the Future of Online Access Repositories. In Building Equitable Access to Knowledge Through Open Access Repositories (pp. 216-259). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998- 1131-2.ch006
Twum-Darko, M., and Harker, L. L. (2017). Understanding Knowledge Sharing in an Organization: A Perspective of Actor-Network Theory. International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), 13(1), 53-74. doi:10.4018/IJKM.2017010104.
Endnotes 1. About IGI Global’s OA Fee Waiver (Read and Publish) Initiative: For any library that invests in IGI Global’s InfoSci-Books (5,300+ eBooks) and InfoSci-Journals (185+ e-journals) databases, IGI Global will match the library’s investment with a fund of equal value to go toward subsidizing the open access article processing charges (APCs) for their patrons when their work is submitted and accepted (following the peer review) into an IGI Global journal.
Rumors from page 59
Dec19-Jan 2020 (p. 53) is her last one. But in typical organized fashion, Lolly has recruited her replacement, Will Cross from NC State <wmcross@ncsu.edu> who was one of Lolly’s favorite students! And Will has already turned in his February 2020 column. We will miss you, Lolly! Please keep in touch! xoxo
January is almost over! Happy New Year! We continue to clear things up after the 2019 Charleston Conference as we prepare for 2020. Just got a slew of pictures from Reese Moore who took fabulous pictures during the 2019 Charleston Conference! I first met Reese when she was taking pictures for College of
Charleston publications. She has branched out on her own! Browse through these and see some familiar faces! https://www.reesemoorephotography.com/blog/charleston-library-conference-photography
I have been reading Peter Brantley’s (UC Davis) read20-l-owner@mailman.panix.com as much as I can. Whew! A lot to take in! And a lot of “must see.”
The he’s here/he’s there/he’s everywhere! Gary Price posted news of a new Issue Brief by OhioLink and Ithaka S+R: “It’s N o t W h a t L i b r a r i e s Hold; It’s
Who Libraries Serve: Seeking a User-Centered Future for Academic Libraries.” https://www.infodocket. com/2020/01/23/new-issuebrief-its-not-what-librarieshold-its-who-libraries-serveseeking-a-user-centered-future-for-academic-libraries/ Hard to believe another year has passed! May it be the best ever! Love, Yr. Ed.
