Wykłady gościnne w Instytucie Informacji Naukowej i Bibliotekoznawstwa UJ

Holly Murten:

Description & Context of ALA Dana Award

 Introduction

1. My background & experience
2. (Libraries and PR)
• Libraries changing but still a need for marketing and PR in all library types, not just public libraries.
• Specific examples of marketing vary but principles remain the same.  The Dana award focuses on the principles and can therefore be applied in all library & information resource settings.

 Description & Context of ALA Dana Award

          The John Cotton Dana Award honors outstanding library public relations, such as fundraising for a new college library, promotion of a summer reading program, a year-long centennial celebration, a user awareness campaign, or partnership-building in a community.  These are only a few examples from the recent winners.

It is one of the most coveted, prestigious awards given by the American Library Association.  The award is the responsibility of the Library & Management Association, or LAMA, which is the division of ALA that includes all types of libraries and resource centers. LAMA selects institutions that have distinguished themselves by their public education and public relations efforts.  The contest is open to all libraries, agencies and associations that promote library and information services.

The HW Wilson Company sponsors the award.  Wilson is a well-known periodicals abstracter, indexer and database vendor in America.  Examples of their products include the Readers Guide to Periodical Literature, Cumulative Book Index and more.  

The award has been given out yearly at the annual ALA conference since 1946.  In 2003, there were nine winners, including two from Canada.  Some examples are:

The Genesee District Library, (Flint, Mich.) for opening a 3,800 square foot demonstration location inside a busy shopping center to take their services directly to the people. Since their initial opening, this new location has averaged over 7,000 visitors per month and registered over 2,000 new cardholders.

Halifax Regional Library (Nova Scotia, Canada), for its re-designed Summer Reading Program.  The program creatively used a consistent graphic identity, a dynamic Web site and targeted marketing to reach its intended audience.

Julia Rogers Library, Goucher College (Baltimore, Md.), for the public relations program "25 Years of Jane Austen," which was designed to bring increased attention to this unique collection. The identification of strategies for the campaign, along with target audiences, was precise and comprehensive, ranging from a resident scholarship to digitizing the collection for access by a worldwide audience.

Sarasota County Library System (Sarasota, Fla.), for its successful program "Celebrate Freedom @ your library™" which refocused public attention on how libraries contribute to a free society. This program, developed in answer to the challenges posed by 9/11, helped to resolve the doubts and controversies raised by that event, which were aimed at the very core of what libraries stand for – freedom of information and access for all.

These are just a few examples, but they show us that good library public relations goes beyond a newsletter or a web page.  Newsletters and web pages are great, but they are individual elements of a larger concept.  In order to be truly successful and win support from our communities – or target audiences – we need to identify that larger concept, which will be unique to each library or resource center.  

These examples also demonstrate that good library public relations can range from the small and relatively cheap (a children’s summer reading program), to the expensive (digitizing the collection of Jane Austen), to the large-scale (opening a new location in a shopping center).  

My guess is that each of projects started with a short conversation – perhaps in the hallway, over coffee, or perhaps while attending the annual library association conference.

That was how it happened at the Coronado Public Library in California, where I worked for 10 years.  We wanted to plan some programs for our centennial, or 100th birthday.  (In California, 100 years is a big deal!)  One conversation led to another, people started to get enthusiastic and imagine the possibilities, and one person remembered hearing that the ALA offices in Chicago would interlibrary loan entries from last year’s Dana award winners.  We looked them over and thought, “we can do that” – and we did, winning a John Cotton Dana special award for our year-long 100th birthday celebration in 1991.  

We used the structure of the Dana award requirements to plan the elements of our centennial programs.  It was a lot of work but it was also one of the most rewarding experiences in my professional career.  It resulted in media coverage beyond our wildest dreams, brought in lots more money for the Friends of the Library (who funded most of the program), more visitors, and most important – more support from local government, whom we were careful to involve from the very beginning.  There were also spin-offs around the greater San Diego area, with the local library consortium winning two separate Dana awards in the 1990s.  

The Dana award itself didn’t win us any cash – but going through the application process did win us the kind of fame, glory, and respect that money can’t buy.   This year, when government cutbacks in California put Arnold Schwarzenegger in the governor’s mansion, the Coronado Library is building a new wing to the building, renovating its old program room to modern specifications, and adding much-needed office space.  I believe that the Dana award helped us win the needed political clout and recognition to get the funds for the building project, in spite of the current economic situation.  So:  the award opens up long-term opportunities and benefits.

John Cotton Dana himself understood this potential over 100 years ago.  A librarian who began his career in Denver, Colorado, in 1889 and closed it in Newark, NJ, in 1929, Dana was one of the key figures in an era where progressive politics was expressed through progressive librarianship.  Dana believed, along with others in the period that is now known as the Progressive Era in American history, that libraries could and should play a leading role in bringing about a democratic culture.  Dana recognized that especially public libraries had to identify themselves with common citizens and become a cultural center in the community.  Libraries were obligated to attract citizens interested in educating themselves to become decision-makers in a democratic society.

While Dana’s contributions focused on the public library, I believe that the same principles apply for documentation & information centers – what we refer to in America as “special libraries” – as well as school and university resource centers.

At the time, his views were revolutionary in the world of librarianship.  He believed that the 19th century library was merely a warehouse; an elitist, ornamental building that hoarded books and kept them from the general public.  Books in the 19th century library were guarded almost jealously, and used carefully by only a selected few.  The 20th century library, the progressive library, would open its doors to all and encourage them to come in to the library and join in the building of a democracy.  He set out to make the library into the democratic institution that it is today, and is responsible for many innovations that are now considered standard library services throughout the world.  

He ended the closed stack system where librarians monitored which books the user requested.  Instead, citizens could go right to the open book and periodicals stacks and select their own reading, independently, and privately.  To increase readership, he made it easier to get a library card and lengthened the hours the library was open to meet the needs of working-class citizens.  He increased the number of books in the Denver Public Library from 2,000 to 23,000 in only four years! – and widely publicized their arrival.  A library newsletter not only informed citizens of books, maps, pamphlets and magazines that came into the library, but also of other useful community information that Dana felt had to be available to all citizens.  

Most librarians saw children as too noisy and exuberant, but Dana saw children as full-fledged members of the community and welcomed them with open arms.  He created the first children’s room in a public library in the country, complete with appropriately-sized furniture and children’s art.  

Dana believed that the main challenge for libraries was to educate the public about citizenship and their participation in the democratic process.  This was expressed in public affairs programs energetically developed by libraries to inform the public and increase the quality of the relationship between the two.  Local debates between political candidates held in the library are a good example of this, as is the carefully balanced approach to acquisitions, exhibits and programs in modern American libraries.

Dana democratized the library by getting rid of barriers, both physical and mental.  Obstacles like gates, fences, closed and locked doors came down.  So did unnecessary rules and unfriendly staff.  He advocated a management style that fostered experimentation and a constant testing of assumptions.  

But he was also a pioneer in what we now call public relations and marketing.  He was an early practitioner of needs assessment, target audiences, goal setting, planning and evaluation that could be quantified.  If readers liked a new experimental service, he made sure others knew about it.  He used newsletters, pamphlets, posters, signs, exhibits, newspaper announcements and speeches to groups, as well as special events held outside library walls.  

He urged librarians to better understand their institutions from the user’s perspective – to put themselves in the worlds of their actual and potential users.  He was enthusiastic.  John Cotton Dana revolutionized the American library.

When ALA and the Wilson Publishing Company inaugurated the first Dana award in 1946, they named it after the first citizen to make use of public relations to publicize their activities.  From the beginning, the Dana award contest has observed strict standards for selecting winners.  The type of awards has changed little over the years, although the criteria have been frequently expanded to accommodate new public relations techniques – particularly technology.  

The award honors libraries that have produced a public relations program through a series of integrated activities throughout an academic or calendar year.  The term “library” is flexible.  Awards are given for activities sponsored by libraries, but also for fundraising efforts by citizen groups on behalf of libraries.

Judges evaluate the success of the public relations campaigns based on the following four criteria:

1. Needs assessment (15%):  The judges look for an organized focus on which an effective public relations program can be built.  
• What process or method was used to determine the need for the PR program in the first place?  
• Who is the community served, and why are they important to you?  
• What is the relationship of the public relations goals and objectives to the library’s – or to the university’s or company’s, – long-term goals and mission?  
2. Planning (15%):  In this category, the judges look for careful planning and organization with a focus on outcomes – in other words, achieving the measurable objectives specified.  They also look for how the planning involved other parts of the library and other segments of the organization or community.  Elements of planning include identifying the target audience and community partners, the goals and quantifiable objectives, PR strategies and communication tools, and the budget.
3. Implementation (35%):  The judges correlate the implementation to the planning phase.  They look for levels of participation, unified and consistent graphics (or “branding”), and effective use of media.  Questions addressed include:  
• How exactly was the plan implemented, or carried out?  
• What techniques, activities, materials and resources were used to meet the goals and objectives?  
• What print and electronic media were used?  What graphics were used?  Entries are expected to contain representative photographs, newspaper clippings, web pages, radio and television announcements and programs (if applicable), and other relevant materials to support what the entrant said they did.  
• How did outside organizations and individuals participate?  
4. Evaluation (15%):  The evaluation phase is the most overlooked element in any public relations program.  This is partly what it’s so important to have measurable objectives in the planning stage.  The judges consider the evaluation process very carefully.  They look for a purposeful review of the program through the following questions:
• Did the program meet its goals and measurable objectives?  (List the measurements.)
• What were the successful elements of the plan?  Identify the “so what” factor.
• What change, if any, took place in the target audience?
• What difficulties were encountered?  There are always difficulties and unforeseen circumstances in the best of plans.  How were they handled?
• Did the program point out any changes that could be made to improve the library’s public relations?

Additional judging criteria include overall creativity (15%) and presentation of the entry itself (5%).  If you’ve ever written or seen a fundraising proposal, these criteria should sound very familiar.  

But even if you never write a fundraising proposal or submit your PR program to LAMA for the Dana award, I believe that his vision of a democratic society and this modern award process should guide – or inform – everything we do as information providers / librarians / information scientists / documentationalists / knowledge workers – you get the idea.

I will end by giving you a specific example of a PR program.  As a speaker’s presentation, it would target an important audience for that institution, fall within the implementation phase of the project, include quantifiable objectives – and maybe even an evaluation mechanism.  Perhaps it would incorporate graphics to emphasize the message and attract attention, and use photographs to record & document the event for use in its publicity efforts.  As for the “so what?” factor:  if this little program ever helps guide any of you in a successful public relations efforts, please let us know!  

Thanks and questions.