Library Revolution

I came across an interesting site today via a BoingBoing mention. The Laws of Simplicity blog offers some interesting ideas centering around the idea (or the ideal?) of simplicity.

The post that caught my eye featured a picture of this light switch:

I took one look at this ultra complex interpretation of such a normally simple device, and I just had to laugh. I mean, come on. You shouldn’t need a users manual  to operate a light switch. There are many things in life that benefit from enhancement, improvement, the addition of features and all of the complexity that comes along with all of that. Light switches are not in this category.

For me, that is a basic problem I often see in LibraryWorld. Yes, there are many aspects of library service that can use enhancement these days. But there are many that just don’t. They are what they are and don’t need to be made any more complex than they are. Doing so would just screw them up and make them unusable. Or, like I suspect would happen with this light switch, virtually all users will skip all of the fancy features (those that took a lot of hard work to design!) and just go for plain old ON/OFF.

The trick is in determining which category your various projects/services/etc. fall - and in creating a balance between complexity and simplicity whenever “improvements” are made.

Those of us who tend to be overzealous about implementing change must constantly ask ourselves if change in this particular instance is the best thing - and be sure that we aren’t unnecessarily making things more complicated for ourselves and our users. Change shouldn’t be made for change’s sake alone - and complexity shouldn’t be introduced without a benefit resulting. Sure, it would be great if I could easily dim my lights, preset lighting levels, and so on… but is a complicated redesign of my switch really necessary? Is the end goal achieved by introducing change where it may not have been needed?

Those who tend to resist change should similarly assess the individual situation. I am often surprised at how often those who resist change make things way more complicated for themselves and their users by doing so. Just as we shouldn’t introduce unnecessary complexity in the name of moving forward, we should also avoid the trap of making things more complicated by clinging to “the way we do things here” or “the way it’s always been done.”

Balance.

I was working with someone the other day who has long kept “secret” paper files on all of  her library’s holds. As far as I was concerned, she could throw all of that paper in the trash and replace all of that work filing and keeping track of little slips of paper with some regular reports and some new procedures. As far as she was concerned, the paper file needed to be maintained… only it was getting to be so much work! Clinging to the “old, simple way” was just too complicated!

But it’s not always as easy as all that to just dump the old system. Once we talked it out a bit and went through a little of my way and a little of hers, I think we found some good solutions for her… taking a bit from each method. Big chunks of the “old way” are going to get dumped in favor of aspects of my “new way.” But not all of them. Frankly, some of the old procedures work just fine for them, and changing would just be introducing complexity where it isn’t needed. So why not keep them? This way, I think she can achieve a balance that will work for her and her library.

I’m interested in what John Maeda has to say on his blog - and I want to thumb through his book, too.

Of course, when I went to request the book from my local library system, I found that the only library in my area will not lend it to me. So now I have to jump through some hoops, call in some favors… no simplicity here.

 Share

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 28th, 2007 at 7:50 pm and is filed under Etc., Library Service, Library Technology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.