Public libraries and non-users: A comparison between Manchester and Rome

Abstract

This paper presents the findings of a study conducted with library managers from two major metropolitan areas, Greater Manchester in England and Rome in Italy. The study aims to compare practices, activities and policies adopted in the two cities to attract non-users, with particular attention to the approach that librarians take to resolving the non-user issue. This research also revealed differences in the way public libraries are used in the two areas. In Manchester, libraries are predominantly task orientated, offering access points for community services, whereas in Rome the focus is more on entertainment, leisure, and social events. The non-user profiles differ between cities, with non-users being mostly older teenagers and young adults in Manchester and mostly younger teenagers and pensioners in Rome. Reading groups, a key service for encouraging reading and familiarising with library facilities, are well established in England, with 90% of the libraries in Manchester accommodating one or more groups, compared to only 50% of the libraries in Rome offering usually a single group. In addition, Manchester libraries often have a range of specialised reading groups to suit a large variety of reading tastes. Libraries in both cities are aware of the need for proactive marketing and management of their web presence but should look at other countries’ strategies to expand their range of activities and programmes to attract more public.

Keywords

Comparative study Manchester non-users public libraries Rome

Introduction

Whilst some policy makers and commentators appreciate the value and social significance of public libraries (Galluzzi, 2012; Galston et al., 2012; Norman, 2012), there is no doubt that their future is precarious in the wake of significant public expenditure cuts and the growing dominance of digital media. Not long ago, reading and learning, whether done for pleasure or study, used to be closely related to the attendance and use of public libraries. However, this is no longer the case as the widespread use of information technologies has eroded the centrality of libraries as providers of knowledge and culture (Ross et al., 2006). In addition, in today’s fast-moving world, convenience is a main criterion in people’s information-seeking choices (Connaway et al., 2011; Sin and Kim, 2008). Easy access to information through digital channels can prevent people from physically going to the library and can lead to the belief that traditional information skills have become irrelevant (Shenton, 2011). Recognising the challenges that these changes present, libraries have worked even harder at integrating themselves as a core community service and promoting community engagement (Goulding, 2009; MLA, 2008a, 2008b). Nevertheless, although regular users may be aware of such developments, too often non-users have a conservative and obsolete view of what a public library represents (Evjen and Audunson, 2009).

In the face of these changes, the role of public libraries has become less certain and there is a risk that the number of non-users will grow. Hence, it is important for libraries to concern themselves not only with users, but also with those non-users who could be potential users. Unfortunately, one of the difficulties associated with initiatives that seek to address the non-user issue is that library non-users are often hard to identify (Katsirikou and Matalliotakis, 2010). According to May (2009), they may be adult males who are too busy to visit the library, teenagers who think that libraries are not ‘cool’, mothers who take their toddlers to rhyme time but do not use any service for themselves, or people who believe that libraries are simply outdated.

The aim of this research is to compare the approaches that public libraries from two major metropolitan areas in England and Italy adopt to engage non-users through organising and supporting activities and events, with the intention of facilitating exchange of professional experiences and promoting best practices for attracting and engaging non-users. More specifically, this research intends:

to compare librarians’ perceptions of the characteristics of non-users;

to consider the nature of the activities proposed by libraries to attract the public and to better understand the library users’ demographics;

to offer suggestions for improving practices relating to the promotion of public libraries to non-users based on insights from senior librarians;

to compare marketing strategies, both traditional and digital, when it comes to publicising library’s events and activities.

This introduction is followed by a literature review that profiles and compares public library use in the UK and Italy, and summarises previous research on non-use and non-users. Next, the methodology section outlines the benefits of the mixed-methods approach adopted to capture public library managers’ view points and considerations on the present state of their libraries. The findings section makes comparisons between Manchester and Rome. It first summarises data on perceptions of the profiles of users and non-users and library use in general, and then discusses the approaches used by libraries to target non-users together with their promotion and marketing strategies. The discussion section compares findings from this study with findings from previous studies. Finally, the conclusion summarises the contribution of this research and makes recommendations for practice and further research.

Literature review

According to the latest statistics, there were 6045 public libraries and library services outlets (i.e. libraries controlled by local councils) in Italy in 2009 (ICCU, 2010) and 4517 public libraries in England at the same time (CIPFA, 2011). Studies demonstrate that libraries have changed dramatically over the last few years (IFLL, 2009) but are still seen as places for reading and studying where literacy is encouraged at all levels (Jaeger et al., 2012) and which support equality and racial integration (Picco, 2008). Every library provides for a specific group of users and the individual collections, services and practices are geared to satisfy the needs of that particular community (Ashcroft et al., 2007). Therefore, defining the identity of users and non-users is crucial for the libraries’ strategic planning.

Research aiming at understanding factors contributing to the non-use of libraries (e.g. demographic factors and distance-to-library factors) began in the 1940s as part of the US ‘public library enquiry’ (Berelson, 1949) and has been replicated in many different times and societies (e.g. Japzon and Gong, 2005; Sin and Kim, 2008; Smith, 1999; Zweizig and Dervin, 1977).

In the UK, among the first studies to focus on the investigation of strategies for attracting non-users, particularly with respect to social inclusion and social justice were those associated with the Open to All project (Dutch and Muddiman, 2001; Muddiman et al., 2000). More recent studies at national level in England and Italy offer various insights into levels of use and the characteristics of non-users. For example, Pateman (2011), using data from Fuegi and Jenning’s report (2004) suggests that, at present, 56% of the UK population are library members, compared to only 28% of Italians. However, when comparing the actual library visits per head of population, the number is very similar, being 5.28 for the UK and 5.27 for Italy. This implies that in the UK many library members are not library users and that, according to the same study, only 12.8% of the UK population attend libraries regularly, going at least once a month. The figures presented in Matty (2007) as part of Taking Part, the national household survey on participation in the cultural sector, which includes libraries, show that 46% of all adults in England visited the library at least once in 2006–2007; this corresponds to more than 18 million adults, with 60% of them visiting a library at least once a month. From the same study, it emerged that a very high 72% of 11–15 year olds visited the library during the same time compared to only 47% of 16–24 year olds. This negative trend is not reversed as people get older, as only 44% of 45–64 year olds went to a library that year and an even lower 37% of 75+ year olds did.

Italian studies reveal a similar distribution in terms of use and non-use (AIB, 2010), with the strongest users being children between 11 and 17 years of age, followed by adults with young children and with the highest levels of education (ISTAT, 2011). In general, in Italy there is a well-recognised trend of abandoning the library as age progresses. In a recent study, Parise (2011) pointed out that the Italians need to be made more aware of how public libraries have changed and modernised in recent times, as people are becoming numb to the benefits and services offered. This issue has attracted similar comment in the UK literature (CILIP, 2009; Kelly et al., 2009; Pulmann, 2012).

Various reasons have been identified as contributing to the non-use of public libraries. There is evidence that convenience is a critical factor and electronic resources are a popular alternative to physical libraries (Choy, 2011; Shenton, 2011; Sigler et al., 2011). In addition, distance from the library and the quiet and comfort of home can play a role in keeping potential users away from libraries (Vondracek, 2007). Further, a study conducted by Define Research & Insight (2006) showed that library non-users between the age of 14 and 35 viewed library users as the sort of people they did not want to associate with and, further, that the services offered by public libraries had either no advantages, or were worse than other ‘information’ resources (i.e. Internet and social networks). A survey conducted recently by Ipsos MORI for the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (2010) shows that the two main reasons for not using public libraries are ‘I prefer to buy books from a shop and/or online’ and ‘I’m too busy’ (respectively, 25% and 24% of interviewed people).

It is important to recognise the hazards of classifying people into users and non-users. Very few people make continuous use of the library throughout their lives, but most use libraries occasionally, depending on their needs and circumstances at a specific moment in time. In this respect, Hawkins et al. (2001) state that: ‘the purpose of library use varies throughout life. Use for recreational purposes increases with age, while information seeking is more important to younger people, and declines with age’ (p. 260).

In a study aimed at identifying library non-users, McCarthy (1994) indicates that: ‘non-users are not necessarily anti-library; they may just have different ways of getting hold of the information they need’ (p. 30).

Various commentators have suggested that, in order to limit the spread of disinterest in public libraries, librarians and information professionals in general must take measures to maintain a visible presence and role and constantly work towards customer satisfaction (Bowlby, 2012; Connaway et al., 2008). Marquez (2012) argues for the importance of marketing strategies that attract new users. Only by addressing why people do not use libraries, can library services be effectively promoted. In addition, public libraries need to ensure that their services are tailored to provide for different groups of users (Nagata and Klopfer, 2011).

In summary, whilst there is widespread recognition of the importance of cultivating a high level of use of public libraries, and understanding what drives use or non-use, no previous studies have compared librarians’ approaches in two different countries.

Methodology

Two major metropolitan areas were selected as the basis for this study. In England, the research concentrated on the area of Greater Manchester, while in Italy the area of Rome was selected. The two areas in question have been chosen for their similar populations, comparable area size and number of public libraries. Manchester has a total population of 2,682,500 people (Office of National Statistics, 2011), while Rome has a total population of 2,744,941 people (ISTAT, 2009). At the time of this research (July 2012) both cities had between 70 and 85 open public libraries.

Due to the limited previous comparative research on the issue of understanding and engaging non-users, this study adopted an exploratory approach. Further, a mixed-methods approach, using a questionnaire-based survey followed by semi-structured interviews, was chosen in order both to gather data for the development of descriptive profiles and to generate deeper insights (Sarantakos, 2007). Quantitative data collection alone would not have been able to fully outline the practitioners’ perspectives and reflections that are so crucial to this study. Moreover, Rowley et al. (2012) state that semi-structured interviews are ‘a particularly useful approach for encouraging well-informed managers, professionals and other practitioners to report on their attitudes, experiences, knowledge and understanding of work practice and processes’ (p. 93).

The population targeted in this research is represented by the library managers operating in the public libraries of Manchester and Rome. The reason for selecting senior library staff for this research stems from the belief that library managers, because of their experience and involvement in all aspects of the daily library life, can offer knowledge and insights that are relevant to the research objectives posed (Bryman, 2008). In addition, library managers represent a trustworthy and up-to-date source of information concerning the strategies in place at present in the public libraries to tackle the non-user issue. Consequently, understanding and outlining managers’ perceptions is important as this will affect their approach to designing services to entice non-users.

Quantitative data collection

A questionnaire containing 20 closed questions and one final open question inviting additional comments was distributed online. The data collection was carried out simultaneously in both cities. All the potential respondents to the questionnaire were contacted via email. Each email was personally addressed to the manager of the library in question to stimulate a higher response rate and many of the librarians contacted proved willing to participate in the research. The questionnaire, first composed in English and subsequently translated into Italian, was separated into four main sections, each focusing on a specific theme related to the research objectives, as follows:

Part 1. Profile of library users

Part 2. The non-users’ issue

Part 3. Activities and events at the library

Part 4. Promotion and marketing

At the end of this data collection exercise, 39 libraries from Manchester and 33 libraries from Rome had completed the online questionnaire.

Qualitative data collection

Among the responding library managers, four were selected for the interviews conducted in Manchester and three were selected for the interviews conducted in Rome. All interviews lasted between 35 and 45 minutes. To guarantee anonymity, the public libraries whose managers participated in the interviews are named M1, M2, M3 and M4 for Manchester and R1, R2 and R3 for Rome, throughout the paper.

The qualitative data gathered from the interviews and the open question in the questionnaire were subjected to content analysis. Current applications of content analysis show three distinct approaches: conventional, directed and summative (Hsieh and Shannon, 2005). Usually, all three approaches are used to interpret meaning from the content of text data. Content analysis was applied in two different stages: the identification of significant elements in the text and the division of these elements in main themes.

The quantitative data collected through the questionnaires were analysed through the application of the appropriate statistical tools (Healey, 2011) using Microsoft Excel.

Findings

Users and non-users

Figure 1 summarises the percentile distributions of library users and non-users in Manchester and Rome according to the librarians’ perceptions; the respondents were asked to identify the three most represented groups. The graph shows that children are very strong library users in both cities, as 73% (Manchester) and 67% (Rome) of librarians named them as the most numerous group of people attending libraries (Figure 1a), followed closely by mature adults (around 70% in both cities) and, to a lesser extent, adults between 26 and 45 years of age (respectively 43% for Manchester and 49% for Rome). An interesting discrepancy emerges in the percentages of young adults, who are poorly represented in Manchester (14%), but rather more numerous in Rome (52%). In Manchester, pensioners over 66 years of age are the third most numerous demographic group to attend libraries (68%), as opposed to Rome where this group is the least represented, only accounting for 9% of total library attendees. In both cities, the presence of teenagers in libraries is very low, although in Rome they appear to go more regularly than in Manchester, especially older teenagers (8% for Manchester and 24% for Rome). The challenge is to identify an approach to lure more teenagers into the library. The manager at library R1 suggested one way forward:

To engage with teenagers we need to have some kind of connection with the schools in the local area, especially secondary schools.

Figure 1.

Distribution of library users (a) and library non-users (b) in England and Italy in percentages. Numbers have been rounded to the nearest unit.

At library M4, which is taking a very active approach in trying to connect with local schools, the philosophy is as follows:

Some local schools used the library quite a lot but some didn’t. So we started visiting the schools to promote our services and now three of the schools come to the library, so that clearly worked!

As expected, the data about the age groups of the non-users complement the data about the library users (Figure 1b). For both cities, the librarians’ opinion is that people between 13 and 19 years of age are the main non-users. At library M3, the manager noted that:

Children stop coming to the library when they finish primary school; that is when parents stop taking them.

However, examining the data in more detail, significant differences in the non-user demographics of the two cities have emerged. The view that public libraries in Rome are lacking younger teens (70% of librarians named this category) more than older ones (67% of librarians named this category), is shared among the surveyed librarians; this is due to the common practice of using the library space as a study area during the later years of secondary school and throughout undergraduate studies. In Manchester, the absence of younger people is even more marked, particularly when considering older teens (81%) and young adults (68%). In Rome, libraries also suffer from the lack of pensioners, compared to Manchester (37% and 16% respectively).

In terms of gender distribution, the librarians believe that females are definitely more assiduous library users than males in both cities with values of 24% and 42% of female users against 8% and 3% of male users, respectively, in Manchester and Rome.

Further questions to the library managers on the use and non-use of the library helped to identify the types of library services most popular among customers. The results, summarised in Figure 2 and expressed according to the rating averages, show that the traditional action of taking out books is still seen as the main function of libraries in both cities (around the 3.8 for both Manchester and Rome), together with the practice of attending story time for pre-school children (3.8 for Manchester and 3.7 for Rome). Free magazines and newspapers are also a good incentive for library use (around 3.5 for both cities). The use of library computers is seen to be more extensive in Manchester (4.4 against 3.8 for Rome), compared with taking out DVDs, which is the most used service in Rome libraries (4.1 for Rome against 2.7 for Manchester). The use of the library as a place to carry out homework seems to be equally popular in both cities (2.8 for both Manchester and Rome). However, from the interviews it emerged that in Rome this is very common practice among older students (17 years of age and above) and undergraduate students, while in Manchester it is mostly younger pupils, up to 16 years of age, who tend to go to the library to work on projects and assignments. The manager of library R2 stated that:

In the afternoons and evenings the library is peacefully ‘assaulted’ by students. This has been happening since I can remember and I believe that this is common behaviour in most Italian libraries.

Figure 2.

Usage of library services in England and Italy expressed in terms of rating average.

Taking out music CDs and audiobooks appear to be the least used library services in both locations (between 1.8 and 2.8 for both cities). Council and community services are unique to the British public library system (3.3), and include benefits validation, job-seeking support and health information points. According to the Manchester library managers, such service is particularly used by communities with lower incomes and education levels, where people tend to use the library more as a community centre than a cultural hub. However, the manager at library M4 argued that:

Although it is true that many customers come in for the council services, some of them stay beyond their immediate needs and check out a book or use the free internet.

Activities targeting non-users

When asked to identify what kinds of activities were specifically being created at present to attract non-users to the libraries, librarians provided an interesting range of responses. Most of the activities are strategically centred on reader development programmes, especially in Manchester, where the target audiences are usually people with poor literacy levels. In Rome, the approach is different, as libraries tend to attract people through cultural events or hands-on activities, not necessarily related to the immediate action of reading. The common trend throughout all libraries is to offer a selection of activities that have the potential of attracting different groups of people, rather than focusing on one particular category. When faced with the question about why the events public libraries are proposing should attract non-users, librarians answered in a variety of ways, but library R1 proposed an interesting philosophy on this point:

All events have the potential to attract non-users, for the simple reason that there’s always something for everybody. Sometimes we are proposing unusual things that could interest people from outside the regular library’s community, so that we can increase our prospective market penetration.

Overall, libraries in Manchester seem more proactive in addressing the non-user issue, considering that all outlets have something on offer, while 17% of the respondents in Rome answered that there are no specific activities designed to attract non-users at their library (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Activities targeting non-users in England and Italy in percentages.

The surveyed librarians also listed a number of additional activities, more specific to the individual libraries. In Manchester, author visits are frequent and a few libraries offer coffee mornings once a month. Other libraries offer creative courses such as knitting, Tai Chi and rolling programmes of workshops, although not on a regular basis. Some of the libraries concentrate on social welfare. One of the libraries offers a course on English conversation and basic language skills for foreign people and another runs a Job Club for job seekers. Many libraries also offer their meeting rooms and interview rooms for hire to the public and this seems to attract many non-users, who then become familiar with the library environment and eventually turn into members.

In Rome, additional activities include language courses for foreigners and groups for conversation practice in Italian. Many libraries organise themed events such as ‘The Reading Boat’ in which book presentations are organised on short cruises on nearby canals, or ‘Fairytales in the Woods’ in which families are invited in local parks and green areas to listen to stories for all ages. Film groups and movie projections are very popular in most libraries, particularly during the summer months, together with art exhibitions and theatre workshops. To engage with teenagers, some libraries organise events such as author visits and book presentations at local schools. The manager at library R1 stated that:

We are trying to satisfy as many customers as possible; this is why we always come up with highly varied programmes every month.

The most widespread and successful initiative undertaken by the public libraries surveyed in the context of increasing the customer pool is that of reading groups. The majority of libraries in Manchester host a reading group (89%), against 44% of the libraries in Rome. All the libraries where interviews were conducted have at least one permanent reading group in place, which is run independently by the group members. In Rome, there is typically an underlying theme, as reading groups usually read books shortlisted for a major city prize (i.e. Premio Biblioteche di Roma) and this highlights the role played by public libraries in selecting and promoting quality new writers and their manuscripts.

The audience attending reading groups is homogeneous in both cities. In Rome, R2 library manager described the reading group at her library as follows:

We have one [reading] group associated with a prize [Premio Biblioteche di Roma]. It is all females, about 30 of them and all around 50 years of age or above.

This was similar to the description given by R1 library manager:

We host one [reading] group, mainly females, between 40 and 55 years old. It has about 18 to 20 people meeting twice a month, but this will soon be changed to once a month to avoid people getting bored.

Library R3 is also running a reading group, with exclusively older female members, but it is not as well attended as the others and has only six to eight members.

In Manchester, the reading group tradition is much more developed and deep-rooted. Nevertheless, members here mostly comprise older women. All the libraries investigated in Manchester already have more than one reading group established and some of them are in the process of organising more; for example, at library M1:

There are already three reading groups, one for fiction, one for plays and one for classics. We will soon be proposing another one on Shakespeare.

Computer-oriented activities are popular in Manchester libraries, particularly in areas with high immigration and low income levels. On the other hand, craft courses (Figure 3) are much more common in Rome (61%) than Manchester (29%). Most libraries offer rich entertainment programmes, such as movie nights, concerts and outdoors activities. Much public support also comes from the numerous workshops organised on different themes, from foreign languages to knitting and stitching. Family history and genealogy research is an activity particularly well appreciated in Manchester (34%) but absent in Rome. This could be due to the fact that in Italy these kinds of searches are usually conducted through the local registry rather than in public libraries, but the interest in the subject is just the same.

Marketing strategies

In terms of marketing strategies, libraries take advantage of all available digital forms of communication (Figure 4). The most popular mode of online promotion in both cities is the library website (100% for Manchester and 89% for Rome), followed by the Local Authority website and Facebook. In addition, most libraries in Rome have an online mailing list through which they:

Inform the members about forthcoming events, and blogs and [mailing lists] are becoming more popular everywhere and every day. Emails are also a powerful tool to simply remind people that we are here, all the time. (Library R2)

Figure 4.

Marketing strategies adopted by the surveyed libraries in England and Italy in percentages.

More traditional marketing strategies are still very much used by libraries and include leaflets (100% in Manchester and 90% in Rome), word-of-mouth, which is still widely used in both cities (77% in Manchester and 83% in Rome) and posters, which are much more common in Manchester (97%) than in Rome (41%). For many professionals the way forward is also through sponsorship and collaboration with local businesses, cultural centres, schools and people from the community. All libraries have engaged in some form of effective collaboration with other institutions. Library M4, for example, established a fruitful, long-term collaboration with the local art gallery, which has proven to be very well received by the public:

It’s very successful [the relationship with the gallery], they come in and offer the time and the resources, all we have to do is give the space and the opportunity to work with members of the community. So I see that as something that hopefully will continue in the future.

Also, libraries tend to organise events in collaboration with other local institutions, such as children’s centres, heritage groups and city councils.

Discussion

Not surprisingly, the non-user issue is relevant to all information professionals surveyed but it appears that non-users have different demographics in the two cities. In Manchester, there is a serious ‘users vacuum’ among young adults and older teenagers in particular, while in Rome the main non-users are identified as younger teenagers and retired people. The high percentage of young adults regularly attending libraries in Rome is explained by the use of the services that is made by this specific age group; they are mostly undergraduate students who attend the library to find an adequate space to study, either alone or together with their friends and other fellow students. This result is well in line with other findings from a study conducted by the Rome Council on public library customer satisfaction (Comune di Roma, 2009). Usually, students go to the library with their own books and laptops and sometimes make use of the library’s reference books and of the free Wi-Fi and Internet service; they may also use the paid printing services. All surveyed librarians agree that public libraries offer a quiet, welcoming setting as opposed to academic libraries, which are usually overcrowded and have less individual space.

A recent survey conducted by Clark and Hawkins (2011) for the National Literacy Trust on pupils aged eight to 16 shows that nearly half of young people surveyed (48%) do not use libraries at all and that pupils from a white background use them the least (41%). The same research also shows a steady decline in library usage with age, with 63% of KS2, 42% of KS3 and only 25% of KS4 students ever entering a library. The main two reasons listed for not going to the library were respectively that ‘their families did not go’ (52%) and that ‘their friends did not go’ (40%).

In Rome, secondary school pupils tend to use the library’s space to study, as already observed with young adults, and this habit becomes stronger with age; however, there is no such custom in Manchester. Research shows that older teenagers and young adults in England consider going to the library a choice that would make them unpopular among their peers (Define Research & Insight, 2006).

At the opposite end of the age spectrum, social inclusion drives pensioners in Manchester to attend libraries, following a trend typical of northern European countries (Aabø and Audunson, 2012), while in Rome the librarians interviewed confirmed that a pensioner’s life is mainly conducted within the family and the domestic walls. Again according to Comune di Roma (2009), the percentage of library attendees drops dramatically among pensioners (66 years and over). The findings from this research, although based on librarians’ perceptions, are in line with the low percentage (10.3%) of pensioner members found by Comune di Roma (2009).

The literature also shows that white, disadvantaged people with low levels of education are another prominent group of non-users that should be more engaged with the library activities (Matty, 2007; Stanziola, 2008). However, this trend has not been recognised in full in this research as, for example, at library R2 the main non-users are:

People with higher levels of education, usually people with degrees.

A similar picture emerges from library M4, where the non-users are:

People who have an affluent background. It’s easy to define the people who use the library and people who don’t. The people who tend to use the library are families, unemployed, students who really need those resources.

Most likely, the reason behind the lack of interest towards libraries shown by educated, affluent people is well summarised by the manager of library M4 in the following statement:

Because [well-off people] would probably buy a book or have their own computer. The sort of services we offer, computers, internet, benefit validation and books … people with affluence, who work, who have their own means do not tend to use the library, they manage all this on their own.

In terms of users by gender, this study has highlighted a higher occurrence of female users compared to male users. A similar conclusion was drawn by Clark and Hawkins (2011) in a study conducted on young people in secondary education, according to which 49.2% of UK girls use public libraries compared to only 38.7% of boys.

Although the library’s main traditional role of providing information is, without doubt, maintained in both cities, their secondary use appears to be profoundly different. In Manchester, according to the findings from this research, libraries are undertaking a very pragmatic role in the life of their customers, providing an ever increasing number of ‘social services’ such as job-seeking advice and social benefits validation and this is well in line with other research (Sung et al., 2011). In Rome, libraries have a less practical, but nevertheless important role in the life of the Italians; by proposing pleasurable activities and entertainment programmes, they are filling the much needed niche of affordable, quality fun for everybody. Public libraries are seen as ‘indoor public squares’ where people meet to read, talk discuss and, ultimately, get together (Agnoli, 2009; Revelli, 2009). The concept of public libraries as meeting places has been discussed in the literature only in the last decade. Aabø et al. (2010) argue that: ‘the library appears to be a place where, in a safe environment and in an unobtrusive way, people are exposed to the complexity of the digital and multicultural society and learn something about multiculturalism’ (p. 17). Only a few years earlier, Audunson (2005: 439) analysed the role of libraries as ‘a democratic instrument in a multicultural and digital context’.

Amongst the large variety of activities organised by public libraries to attract non-users and to keep users engaged, reading groups are the most popular solution in Manchester. Here libraries usually have several reading groups to cater for a range of tastes and groups including, for example, literature groups, play groups and writing groups. In Rome, although librarians have started only in recent years to propose reading groups, they are accomplishing very good attendance levels. In Italy, the onset of organised reading groups in libraries was as recent as 2003–2005 and in 2006 the first national gathering for all reading group members was organised at Arco di Trento (Gruppo di Lettura, 2006). Prior to this date, there were only pioneering attempts from isolated libraries, like that of Cologno Monzese which, in the ’90s, started to propose a number of reading groups, but still very much in the form of seminars and workshops. This late but steady diffusion of reading groups in Italy compared to the rest of Europe has been fuelled by the thriving reading groups in the UK and USA (Ferrieri, 2006). The ethos of reading groups in England is, first of all, that reading is a pleasurable activity, which, in addition, can provide opportunities for social interaction, cultural stimulation and literacy advancement (Long, 2004). Such an idea is slightly different from that of Latin American reading groups, the other major school of thought in reading groups, where the purpose is still mainly educational and is closely connected with cultural emancipation (Barnes-Karol, 2010). The Italian approach to reading groups is more similar to the Anglo-Saxon model, but while in Manchester reading groups are an integral part of the society and are now organised in all sorts of venues and settings, in Rome they are strictly dependent on public library support.

In terms of marketing and self-promotion, all libraries in Manchester and Rome are up to date with the latest technologies and connected to all major social networks, in particular Facebook and Twitter; they rely heavily on online facilities, in particular the library’s official website, to promote and advertise their products and events. Particularly in Rome, mailing lists are proving to be very effective and provide fast responses from customers, while online blogs are heavily used among information professionals to update and support each other. However, traditional marketing tools are still very much employed everywhere, particularly leaflets and word-of-mouth, which are still seen to be among the most effective means of communication. In Manchester, posters to advertise library activities in the local community are common. This choice is possibly due to the limited budgets available to small-medium sized libraries for which other ways of marketing could be out of reach (Townsend, 2012). It has been confirmed by the surveyed librarians that cost-effectiveness, coupled with large-scale distribution, is also behind the considerable use of digital marketing tools which, in addition, as suggested by Marquez (2012), present the bonus of being relatively easy to set up and implement.

Good marketing and self-promotion are crucial to the revitalisation process public libraries are going through and are, most significantly, an important component of their strategy to attract non-users (Goulding et al., 2012; Sin and Kim, 2008). A recent literature review conducted by Rooney-Browne (2011) indicates that there has been ‘a lack of progressive library evaluation studies carried out in the UK over the last few years’ (p. 28). This might account for the general sense of overlooking of both direct and indirect benefits that libraries produce for the community and the consequent weak ‘marketing campaigns’ libraries have adopted to advertise themselves. A targeted marketing campaign can effectively contribute to changing the image that stakeholders have of public libraries and increase the number of visits to a library (Hariff and Rowley, 2011: 357); in their article on ‘branding’ of UK libraries these authors recommend that libraries

develop an understanding of and a vision for the identity and position of their library, and the specific services within their portfolio. They need to articulate and communicate the benefits to users, rather than relying on statements of the service offered. Persistence is essential to shift entrenched images and refresh perceptions of what the library offers.

In this sense, a centralised effort should be made and a marketing campaign at national level should be created to maximise the impact.

Conclusion

Public libraries in Manchester and Rome recognise that the non-user issue is a significant problem and that teenagers and young people, in particular, need to be more engaged and targeted in both cities as they represent the new and future generation of potential library users. Librarians are already proposing programmes of activities directly to schools, which are proving to be effective in driving more students through library doors. However, this study has highlighted the role that different social settings can play in the perception that young people have of public libraries. Therefore, whilst in Rome libraries are well accepted among young people, who consider them hubs of social gathering, in Manchester they represent an estranged entity.

From this study, it also emerges that at the opposite end of the age scale the trend is completely reversed, with pensioners from Manchester regularly visiting public libraries, which they use as a form of social interaction and a pleasurable time-passing activity. This is in contrast with pensioners from Rome, who are seldom attracted by libraries and favour domestic (or other) settings.

Public libraries in Manchester and Rome have different roles in the communities they serve and therefore attract different publics. The main, traditional services of lending books and retrieving information are provided everywhere, but critical emphasis is given to additional, secondary aspects in each of the two cities. Libraries in Manchester are very functional and task orientated with a focus on the customer seen mainly as ‘citizen’. Their key purpose, once the traditional library services are guaranteed, is to facilitate the users’ daily life. Benefits validation, patient health information points and job-seeking advice are offered in almost all the public libraries surveyed. This is definitely a valuable service for the community, but the risk is that people will eventually start seeing the library as a one-stop shop where they can solve administrative matters rather than a cultural centre.

On the other hand, public libraries in Rome are more focused on fulfilling the ‘leisure’ function. In Rome, the fundamental purpose of a library is still that of delivering knowledge and information, but the social aspect is probably as important. The public library is conceived as a meeting point for people who want to read the newspaper for free, for students who use the facilities to conduct their studies but also to spend the day with friends and for all those customers who want quality, low-cost (or no cost at all) entertainment and cultural stimulation.

Recommendations

The two realities identified in Manchester and Rome are not necessarily incompatible; on the contrary, they could, and should, be integrated. Another country’s modus operandi must not be taken lightly, as profoundly different socio-economic aspects play major roles in defining a nation and what makes it more or less successful. However, looking at the experience of others, running pilot events, proposing new trial services or, in other words, being more innovative is important if public libraries are to revitalise themselves. Also, by gaining awareness of other countries’ policies and practices, libraries will reinforce their status as authoritative multimedia and multicultural sources of information and community support.

For both cities, expanding their offerings of ICT access would be a good way forward; the sophistication of ICT services offered by libraries varies between the two countries, but so do the users’ expectations and needs. Therefore, there is the need to develop further the libraries’ digital presence in ways that engage different target groups, for example by proposing introductory, easy-to-follow computer courses for elderly people in Rome and free computer games sessions and gadget trials for teenagers in Manchester.

For libraries to be successful, they need to actively market themselves. It is critical for librarians to raise the profile of their resources and services by communicating the values they add to the community life. A useful example would be to hand out leaflets to schools, shops and residents containing a straight-to-the-point, short list of things people should know about their local library. Financial pressure could be eased by strengthening the collaboration with local businesses and cultural centres or by letting for hire, where possible, part of the library’s premises.

Future research

The next step forward would demand a generalisation at national level of the present study, to highlight possible development strategies for libraries to carry forward in both countries. Additional studies on reading habits of non-users and digital proficiency of local communities could generate insights from which public libraries and information practitioners might benefit. It would also be of great interest to analyse further the link between the national cultures and the role of public libraries across Europe, including the nature of the relationship at present and how it might evolve in the future. Further to this, research should be conducted on how reading groups can be cultivated, managed and used for different age groups and gender.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author biographies

Laura Sbaffi works at the Department of Information and Communications at Manchester Metropolitan University, UK. She received her BSc and MSc degrees in Earth Sciences in 1996 with the highest-level First Class Honours from the University of Urbino, Italy, and her PhD degree in Palaeoceanography and Micropalaeontology in 2000 from the University of Trieste, Italy. Dr Sbaffi was a Visiting Scholar for her doctoral studies at the Department of Earth Science, University of Cambridge, UK, between 1996 and 2000. In the years following her PhD degree, Dr Sbaffi held research positions at the University of Urbino, Italy, and the University of East Anglia, UK. She then worked as a Research Scientist at the Australian Geological Survey Organisation (Geoscience Australia), Australia. Before joining the Department of Information and Communications in January 2013, Dr Sbaffi completed an MA degree in Library and Information Management at Manchester Metropolitan University, UK.

Jennifer Rowley is Professor in Information and Communications in the Department of Information and Communications, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK. She has previously held a number of other academic posts in the UK. Her research interest are wide ranging and embrace information and knowledge management, e-marketing, branding, and relationship marketing. She has published widely, including recent articles in Journal of Marketing Management, Marketing Theory, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Journal of Information Science, International Journal of Information Management, and Internet Research. Recent books include Being an information innovator, Facet, 2011 and Leadership: the challenge for the information profession (with S Roberts), Facet, 2008. She is Editor of the Journal of Further and Higher Education, and Associate Editor of the Journal of Marketing Management.

References

Aabø

Audunson

Varheim

(2010) How do public libraries function as meeting places? Library & Information Science Research 32(1): 16–26.

Aabø

Audunson

(2012) Use of library space and the library as place. Library & Information Science Research 34(2): 138–149.

Agnoli

(2009) Le Piazza del Sapere. Biblioteche e Liberta. Rome: Laterza.

AIB (2010) Rapporto sulle Biblioteche Italiane 2009–2010. Rome: Associazione Italiana Biblioteche.

Ashcroft

Farrow

Watts

(2007) Public libraries and adult learners. Library Management 28(3): 125–138.

Audunson

(2005) The public library as a meeting-place in a multicultural and digital context: The necessity of low-intensive meeting-places. Journal of Documentation 61(3): 429–441.

Barnes-Karol

(2010) Reading (literature) in, across, and beyond the undergraduate Spanish curriculum. Hispania 93(1): 90–95.

Berelson

(1949) The Library’s Public : A Report of the (US) Public Library Enquiry. University of Michigan Survey Research Center. New York: Columbia University Press.

Bowlby

(2012) Living the future: Organizational performance assessment. Journal of Library Administration 52(6/7): 626–652.

10.

Bryman

(2008) Social Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press, USA.

11.

Choy

(2011) From library stacks to library-in-a-pocket: Will users be around? Library Management 32(1/2): 62–72.

12.

CILIP (2009) What Makes a Good Library Service? Guidelines on Public Library Provision in England for Portfolio Holders in Local Councils. London: CILIP.

13.

CIPFA (2011) Public Library Statistics. 2009/10 Actuals. London: CIPFA.

14.

Clark

Hawkins

(2011) Public Libraries and Literacy: Young People’s Reading Habits and Attitudes to Public Libraries, and an Exploration of the Relationship between Public Library Use and School Attainment. London: National Literacy Trust.

15.

Comune di Roma (2009) Consumatori di Cultura: La Customer Satisfaction in Biblioteca. Biblioteche di Roma, Universita’ la Sapienza, 4. Available at: http://www.comune.roma.it/PCR/resources/cms/documents/ricerca_customer.pdf#?R;78419?# (accessed 28 December 2012).

16.

Connaway

Radford

Dickey

(2008) On the trail of the elusive non-user: What research in virtual reference environments reveals. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 34(2): 25–28.

17.

Connaway

Dickey

Radford

(2011) ‘If it is too inconvenient I’m not going after it’: Convenience as a critical factor in information-seeking behaviours. Library & Information Science Research 33(3): 179–190.

18.

Define Research & Insight (2006) A Research Study of 14–35 Year Olds for the Future Development of Public Libraries. London: MLA, DCMS and the Laser Foundation.

19.

Dutch

Muddiman

(2001) The public library, social exclusion and the information society in the United Kingdom. Libri 51(4): 183–194.

20.

Evjen

Audunson

(2009) The complex library: Do the public’s attitudes represent a barrier to institutional change in public libraries? New Library World 110(3/4): 161–174.

21.

Ferrieri

(2006) La lettura condivisa. Alcune ipotesi di lavoro. In: Primo incontro nazionale dei gruppi di lettura, Arco di Trento, Italy, 30 September 2006, pp. 1–12.

22.

Fuegi

Jenning

(2004) International Library Statistics: Trends and Commentary Based on the Libecon Data. Library Services in Europe and Beyond – LIBECON. Available at: http://www.libecon.org/pdf/InternationalLibraryStatistic.pdf (accessed 29 August 2013).

23.

Galluzzi

(2012) Italian librarians are questioning the role of librarians and librarians. Bulletin des Bibliothèques de France 57(4): 67–68.

24.

Galston

Huber

Johnson

. (2012) Community reference: Making libraries indispensable in a new way. American Libraries 43(5/6): 46–50.

25.

Goulding

(2009) Engaging with community engagement: Public libraries and citizen involvement. New Library World 110 (1/2): 37–51.

26.

Goulding

Walton

Stephens

(2012) The importance of political and strategic skills for UK library leaders. Australian Library Journal 61(2): 105–118.

27.

Gruppo di Lettura (2006) Homepage. Available at: http://gruppodilettura.wordpress.com/2006/10/12/raduno-dei-gruppi-di-lettura-ad-arco-di-trento-le-relazioni/ (accessed 30 December 2012).

28.

Hariff

Rowley

(2011) Branding of UK libraries. Library Management 32(4/5): 346–360.

29.

Hawkins

Morris

Sumsion

(2001) Socio-economic features of UK public library users. Library Management 22(6/7): 258–265.

30.

Healey

(2011) Statistics: A Tool for Social Research. Stamford, CT: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

31.

Hsieh

Shannon

(2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15(9): 1277–1288.

32.

ICCU (2010) Anagrafe Biblioteche Italiane. Available at: http://anagrafe.iccu.sbn.it/index.html (accessed 30 December 2012).

33.

IFLL (2009) How Museums, Libraries and Archives Contribute to Lifelong Learning. Sector Paper 10. Leicester: NIACE. Available at: http://shop.niace.org.uk/media/catalog/product/f/i/file_3_25.pdf (accessed 29 August 2013).

34.

Ipsos MORI (2010) What do the Public Want from Libraries? User and Non-user Research. Museums, Libraries and Archives Council. Available at: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/2697/What-do-the-public-want-from-libraries.aspx (accessed 29 August 2013).

35.

ISTAT (2009) Demography in Figures. August 2009. Rome: Istituto Nazionale di Statistica.

36.

ISTAT (2011) La Lettura di Libri in Italia – Anno 2010. Statistical Report. Rome: Istituto Nazionale di Statistica.

37.

Jaeger

Bertot

Thompson

. (2012) The intersection of public policy and public access: Digital divides, digital literacy, digital inclusion, and public libraries. Public Library Quarterly 31(1): 1–20.

38.

Japzon

Gong

(2005) A neighborhood analysis of public library use in New York City. Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy 75(4): 446–463.

39.

Katsirikou

Matalliotakis

(2010) Libraries and potential users: Methodological approach, the case of Greek libraries. In: Proceedings of the international conference on qualitative and quantitative methods in libraries: Theory and applications. (eds Katsirikou

Skiados

), Chania, Crete, Greece, 26–29 May 2010, pp. 47–53. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company.

40.

Kelly

Bevan

Akerman

. (2009) Library 2.0: Balancing the risks and benefits to maximise the dividends. Program 43: 311–327.

41.

Long

(2004) Literature as a spur to collective action: The diverse perspectives of nineteenth and twentieth-century reading groups. Poetics Today 25(2): 335–359.

42.

McCarthy

(1994) Getting to know your non-users. Library Management 15(4): 30–34.

43.

Marquez

(2012) Marketing in the library and beyond. PNLA Quarterly 76(1): 52–69.

44.

Matty

(2007) Libraries. In: Aust

Vine

(eds) Taking Part: The National Survey of Culture, Leisure and Sport: Annual Report 2005/2006 and 2006/2007. London: DCMS, pp. 39–47.

45.

May

(2009) In the words of the users: The role of the urban public library as place. In: Proceedings of libraries as space and place, a satellite meeting of the International Federations of Library Associations world library and information congress, Turin, Italy, 19–21 August 2009.

46.

MLA (2008a) Research Briefing 4 – Increasing Attendance and Participation. London: MLA.

47.

MLA (2008b) Research Briefing 6 – Participation in Libraries and Museums at the Local Level: Summary Findings from Active People Data. London: MLA.

48.

Muddiman

Durrani

Dutch

. (2000) Open to All? The Public Library and Social Exclusion. London: The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries.

49.

Nagata

Klopfer

(2011) Public library assessment in customer perspective: To which customer group should the library listen? Library Management 32(4): 336–345.

50.

Norman

(2012) Frail, fatal, fundamental: The future of public libraries. Australasian Public Libraries and Information Services (APLIS) 25(2): 94–100.

51.

Office of National Statistics (2011) Population Estimates for England and Wales, Mid 2011 (Census Based). London: ONS.

52.

Parise

(2011) Dieci Buoni Motivi per Andare in Biblioteca. Milan: Editrice Bibliografica.

53.

Pateman

(2011) Public libraries, social class and social justice. Information, Society and Justice 4(2): 57–70.

54.

Picco MAP (2008) Multicultural libraries’ services and social integration: The case of public libraries in Montreal Canada. Public Libraries Quarterly 27(1): 41–56.

55.

Pulmann

(2012) On the closure of public libraries of Oxfordshire. Prometheus 30(3): 341–345.

56.

Revelli

(2009) La biblioteca pubblica come luogo sociale. Biblioteche Oggi September: 7–11.

57.

Rooney-Browne

(2011) Methods for demonstrating the value of public libraries in the UK: A literature review. Library and Information Research 35(109): 3–39.

58.

Ross

McKechnie

Rothbauer

(2006) Reading Matters: What the Research Reveals about Reading, Libraries, and Community. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

59.

Rowley

Jones

Vassiliou

. (2012) Using card-based games to enhance the value of semi-structured interviews. International Journal of Market Research 54(1): 93–110.

60.

Sarantakos

(2007) A Toolkit for Quantitative Data Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

61.

Shenton

(2011) Do we need a more balanced attitude to the Internet? CILIP Update with Gazette: 32–33.

62.

Sigler

Jaeger

Bertot

. (2011) The role of public libraries, the Internet, and economic uncertainty. In: Woodsworth

(ed.) Librarianship in Times of Crisis. Advances in Librarianship 34. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 19–35.

63.

Sin

S-CJ

Kim

K-S

(2008) Use and non-use of public libraries in the information age: A logistic regression analysis of household characteristics and library services variables. Library & Information Science Research 30(3): 207–215.

64.

Smith

(1999) What do we know about public library use? Aslib Proceedings 51(9): 302–314.

65.

Stanziola

(2008) Attracting library non-users: What have we learned so far? Research Briefing 3. Available at: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/26397721/What-do-we-know-about-Library-Nonusers (accessed 29 August 2013).

66.

Sung

H-Y

Hepworth

Ragsdell

(2011) Community engagement in public libraries. In: Proceedings of iConference 2011, Seattle, WA, USA, 8–11 February 2011, pp. 823–824. New York: ACM.

67.

Townsend

(2012) Get the word out: Painless procedures for producing publicity. PNLA Quarterly 76(1): 86–99.

68.

Vondracek

(2007) Comfort and convenience? Why students choose alternatives to the library. Libraries and the Academy 7(3): 277–283.

69.

Zweizig

Dervin

(1977) Public library use, users, uses: Advances in knowledge of characteristics and needs of the adult clientele of American public libraries. Advances in Librarianship 7: 232–255.