Welcome!
 Workshop objectives:
 WHAT is instant messaging?
 WHY are we using it in the library?
 HOW can your library get involved?
What is instant messaging?
 Main purpose: one-on-one, real-time
messaging over the Internet
 Ancillary functions: File transfers, chat rooms,
voice over IP
 Most commonly referred to as IM, which can
be a noun (“Are you logged into IM?”) or a
verb (“IM me!”)
 IM equivalent of an email address is your
screen name (or buddy name)
What is IM? (continued)
 Typically accomplished through a small, free
program you download and install on your
computer
 There are also web-based versions, notably AIM
Express, that can be used through a browser with
no additional software
 How are messages sent?
 Manually typing in another user’s screen name
 Clicking a name on your buddy list
Different kinds of IM
 IRC (Internet Relay Chat) is grandaddy of
IM—introduced in 1988
 AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) is, by far, the
most widely used IM service
 Yahoo and MSN also offer messaging services
(and will soon be interoperable)
 Google Talk is new player (and Google
recently integrated it into gmail)
So how to pick a service?
 Good news: you don’t have to choose just
one!
 IM aggregator programs like Trillian
and meebo
<http://www17.meebo.com/> allow you to sign in to multiple
services simultaneously
<http://www.ceruleanstudios.com/learn/>
 If using multiple services, try to get the same
screen name across services
Who is instant messaging
 Among undergrads, almost everybody
 July 2005 Pew Report (“Internet and
American Life Project”)
 42% of adults use IM
 75% of teens aged 12-17
 IM preferred to email
<http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Tech_July2005web.pdf>
 November 2005 cnet poll
 66% of 13- to 21-year-olds say they send more
IMs than emails
<http://news.com.com/Study+Teenagers+favor+IM+over+e-mail/2100-1032_3-5944265.html>
Going where our patrons are
 We’re at their fingertips—if they add us to
their buddy list, they can be talking to us in
one click
 Builds relationships with users
 IM is user-centered. “Users aren’t required to
enter into an alienating librarian-designed
environment to receive assistance.”
(“Web-Based Chat vs. Instant Messaging,” Sarah Houghton and
Aaron Schmidt, Online July/August 2005)
IM vs. Docutek Chat
 IM performance is superior in most cases:
 Initiating sessions
 Interaction with users
 Reliability
 Cost
 Docutek does offer workflow advantages
IM vs. Docutek (2)
Getting started
 Docutek: Have to log in, entering personal information

each time, and then wait for the sluggish interface to
load
IM: User simply opens IM program and types message
Messaging
 Docutek: There is a substantial and disorienting lag

between when message is sent and when it appears on
the other end. No feedback as to when other person is
typing.
IM: Message appears at the other end virtually
instantaneously, and you can see when the other
person is typing. End result: interactions are much
more fluid and feel more like a conversation.
IM vs. Docutek (3)
 Reliability
 Docutek: Periodically freezes, sometimes doesn’t
notify when a new patron is in queue, is picky
about certain browser configurations
 IM: Very stable, browser-independent
 Cost
 Docutek: Substantial yearly maintenance fee
 IM: Free! (nominal cost for Trillian Pro software)
IM vs. Docutek (4)
Workflow management
 Docutek: allows queuing of patrons when there

are multiple patrons
Docutek: allows multiple libraries/librarians to
monitor the same queue and answer incoming
calls
 These features distribute questions and decrease stress
at busy times
 IM: No queuing, no sharing of queues. One
login per buddy name = that call is for you!
So why are we still offering
Docutek chat at all?
 Allows for distributed pool of answerers for a
single queue of patrons (vs. IM, which only
allows you to be logged in under a particular
screen name on one machine at a time)
 For users who don’t have IM software and
don’t want to use web-based IM (which still
requires an account with an IM provider)
 Better info for librarians before initiating chat
IM as an office tool
 IM isn’t just useful for talking to patrons—
library staff can use it to talk to each other
 AOL Survey on AIM use in the workplace:
Screen name on your business card? Avoid
difficult in-person interactions?
<http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,123518,00.asp>
 As of September 2004, 21% of Americans
used IM at work (“How Americans Use
Instant Messaging,” Pew Report)
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Instantmessage_Report.pdf
Source: “Parents Fret
That Dialing Up
Interferes With Growing
Up,” New York Times,
October 23, 2005
Lingo
 Common fear is that IM-speak will be
indecipherable
 In our experience, users keep abbreviations
and slang to a minimum
 All-lowercase typing is typical, and allows for
a speedier conversation
Viruses and SPIM
 As with email, viruses and junkmail can be transmitted via IM.
 Also as with email, the antivirus software that is standard on
all library machines protects against most threats.
 To get infected while using IM, you typically need to either
click on a link or accept a file transfer. Neither of these things
should come up in the course of a normal library IM session.
 SPIM=IM spam. Nowhere near as bad as email, but
occasionally a commercial message will pop up. Just ignore
these, and don’t click any links.
Privacy: Yours and the patron’s
 When signing up for an IM account, avoid
providing unnecessary personal information
 Like email, regular IMing is about as secure
as sending a postcard through the mail, so
exercise common sense and don’t send
anything highly personal or confidential via
IM
 Transcripts of chats are stored on both your
local machine and, presumably, on the IM
service’s servers
Is instant messaging difficult?
 IM software is extremely easy to use
 If you can type and click a button, and
occasionally copy and paste a link, you can
IM
 Speed of transactions (“Will I be able to type
fast enough?”)
 One study found that IMers have an average of
2.7 conversations going at once—so don’t panic!
<http://www.livescience.com/technology/050301_internet_language.html>
Library: Is IM a library service?
Patrons: Yes!
IM and chat comparison 2005
450
400
350
300
250
Chat
200
150
100
IM
Au
gu
st
Se
pt
em
be
r
O
ct
ob
er
N
ov
em
be
D
r
ec
em
be
r
Ju
ly
Ju
ne
M
ay
Ap
ri l
Ja
nu
ar
y
Fe
br
ua
ry
M
ar
ch
50
0
 April 2005: IM volume was more than double Chat.
Overall virtual reference questions increased by 40%
over April 2004
Who is using IM at UIUC?
 85% of our IM questions come from UIUC



Undergrads
11% graduate students
1.5% faculty/staff
3% other (alumni, public, etc.)
What are they asking?
 Data analysis for IM is on-going
 For Chat the same questions as in-person
 35% research assistance
 30% finding known items
 Other categories of questions
 Online access troubleshooting
 Citation assistance/Refworks
 Different than questions we receive via email
 Preference for research assistance is “live”
When are we busy?
Chats by Time of Day
(Sept 2005)
60
40
IM
30
Docutek
20
10
Time
9p
m
7p
m
5p
m
3p
m
1p
m
11
am
0
9a
m
Number
50
Concerns with adding IM: Could
we do more?
YES
 We were (a little)
nervous
 Staff were (mostly)
willing
 Training was easy –
interface is easy
 Overall staff at all
levels like IM: easy to
use and grateful
patrons 
BUT 
 Volume of IM is high
 Some stress with
multiple IMs
 IM only logged in once
per library – can’t
share the work among
available staff or
between libraries
Why Chat and IM?
 36% of Chat users are UIUC graduate students (vs.
11% of IM users)
 10% of Chat users are UIUC faculty (vs. 1.5% of IM
users)
 Chat vastly preferred by unaffiliated users with
questions about UIUC’s library.
 During the summer, when campus has a smaller
number of undergrads, Chat volume surpassed IM
volume. (2:1 in July)
 Bottom-line: faculty and graduate students (not yet)
using IM. No one is likely to start using IM just to ask
us a question.
UIUC IM Service Model
 Staffed concurrently with other reference services
 Separate Accounts (“Buddy Names”) on central page
 User Selects “Buddy” they want to contact
 Trillian software (AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Google)
UIUC IM Service Model
 Role of Ask-A-Librarian page
 Referrals and Consultations
 No built-in referral mechanism (yet)
 Departmental Collections
 Often call other libraries
 Refer to email (central and departmental)
 Users expect full-text, but accept referrals
Other Possible Service Models
 On Desk (concurrent)
 Same hours as regular reference service
 Can be too busy
 In office (1)
 Select hours advertised on unit website
 Can share between units (divisional service)
 In office (2)
 “Office Hours”
 Advertise through BI sessions
Promoting IM
 Promote your screen name and service
 Admin should be messaging as well
 Train and encourage staff to communicate via IM

from their desks
Add your IM name to your business cards
from Aaron Schmidt presentation, “Having a telephone”
http://www.walkingpaper.org/presentation/havingaphone/
Other Possible Service Models
 Use us. Please.
 Include link to Ask-A-Librarian page with unit email

and telephone information
Central service will refer back to unit when applicable
(see: http://www.library.uiuc.edu/cpsdev/altnav/ask_mockup.htm )
 Main Ask A Librarian page can list all services
Recommended reading

Abram, Stephen. “Twenty Reasons to Love IM.” Information Outlook,
October 2004, 8(1), p. 40-42.

Houghton, Sarah and Aaron Schmidt. “Web-Based Chat vs. Instant
Messaging.” Online, July/Aug 2005, 29(4), p. 26-30.

“Online Safety/Security FAQ.” AOL Instant Messenger Help Page.

Spanbauer, Scott et al. “A Grown-Up’s Guide to Instant Messaging.” PC
World, March 2004, 22(3), p. 168-170.
http://www.aim.com/help_faq/security/faq.adp?aolp=